Yahoo - What librarians CAN do

[Robert J Tiess]

"Karen G. Schneider" <kgs at bluehighways.com> writes:
>Many good projects start small and work their way up, 
>demonstrating their worth, competing with other, bigger projects,
>and so forth.  
[...]
>The idea of cataloging the Internet is only Herculean if you think of 
>the entire Internet.  It is not Herculean if you think of cataloging
those
>resources you want access through your OPAC today--and more 
>tomorrow--and more the following day.  It's not as if there aren't ANY
websites
>cataloged; there just aren't nearly ENOUGH.  And that's with very, 
>very little attention or resources directed toward Internet cataloging. 

I agree with Karen that the idea of cataloging the Internet need
not be cast in a Herculean light--although Atlas might be an equally
compelling mythological symbol here.  Number one, I'm not a librarian,
and, number two, I alone, since this January, have already collected
over 1,000 sites for a new guide to major and vital Internet resources.
One person can do wonders, and while my work is far from over and
it may be weeks before Vivid goes public, I can tell you I, and the
librarians I work with, have already used it to help answer a number
of patron queries.  One of the ideas behind Vivid is to be no more
than two to four clicks from the information you need.  The structure's
admittedly unique, although I am familiar with and have considered
applying classical cataloging practices, but it works.  When
complete, Vivid will have reviews for at least 1 - 3 sites in every
section, and it will grow as patrons and colleagues will be able to
recommend new sites and report dead links through the same page.

I think one thing any electronic resource development project can
consider is this:  The majority of patrons want the unmoderated
potential of the entire Internet without having to sort through it all,
the needle and the haystack, but usually the wild goose without
the chase.  They don't want to wait for data or have to do a lot of
scrolling and clicking.  They also want options, to be able to go
beyond what's there on a web page, to search on their own for
sites specific to their interests.  Often they'll ask, Where's the best
place to look for...?  We have bookmarks, and they do help, but
they're limited and lack the structure, look, and linkage a guide
can provide.  What I set out to do is sincerely attempt to collect
some of the "best" sites out there for a vareity of subject areas.
As new sites appear and supercede older sites, those will be
assimilated into the index and older URLs will be weeded,
just like our print collection.

There's no reason (or hope) every site should be accounted for;
there is a great deal of overlap, informational redundancy.  Some
sites simply do a better job of presenting information than others.
Finding them and letting colleagues and patrons know about
them in a timely manner is a challenge in itself.  Our director is
also actively involved in evaluating resources and recommending
links.  We will have soon a public "recommended links" binder in
which patrons and staff members will be able to pass "good" sites
on to each other.  These sites are not necessarily absorbed into
Vivid, but this will be one source.  It's one way for the patrons to
become part of the process.  In the last few months we've put out
a recommended books binder, for fiction and nonfiction titles.
Staff members and patrons have made use of it.  And there's
another key point:  Build something people will want to use.  We
want the patrons to be as much a part of this as our staff members;
in so doing we're assured to be addressing the needs of our
local community, which should never be forgotten in the most
global of our Internet resource conversations.  

I'm also working on a team with librarians to develop an annotated
guide to law resources on the Internet, one unique aspect of it being
it reports both what's "out there" *and* in our library, providing a
select list of our library resources (reference and circulating) for
each subject area.  We've extended this practice to other parts of
our site, and I hope to continue working with librarians to integrate
the library's unique resources with our Internet resources.  Patrons
should know there are print equivalents or superlative materials in
the library they can actually refer to or check out.  I'm not relying on
webpac for this, as this is still somewhat slow (even via T-1) and
encompasses all libraries in our ANSER network, where we simply
want a concise portrait of items you may find in our stacks and
reference areas.

This all goes toward example of various things you and your
colleagues can do to initiate, forward, and personalize any Internet
cataloging effort, starting out small-scale, microcosmic, while not
obcuring the Internet's resource macrocosm.  What it does take is
not so much time but energy, enthusiasm, and weekly dedication,
not a solitary, well-funded instance.  That's short-term, the primary
reason most on-line guides and search engines go stale and
evaporate after the first year or few months.  It takes a long-term
commitment.  Having a realistic goal in mind helps.  Then you
would be surprised what you could accomplish on your own or in
a small group working steadily for a few months.  With the right
mixture of will, desire, open-mindedness and realism, almost
anything is possible.


Robert J. Tiess
Middletown Thrall Library
http://www.thrall.org