[WEB4LIB] Usability in Libraries

[Julia Schult]

Note to those in a hurry:  my most important point is in my second paragraph
responding to Brian's #2.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Cockburn" <cockbuba at jmu.edu>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <web4lib at webjunction.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 3:09 PM
Subject: [WEB4LIB] Usability in Libraries


> In order to play devil's advocate to some extent and to learn more of the
> ideas swirling about, I would like to say.
>
> Some of you, in your replies to me regarding usability in library sites
> indicated a feeling that usability is more an art than a science.  That
what
> is usable in my library would unlikely be applicable in another.
>
> I would like to respectfully disagree.

Those are actually two separate concepts:  It is true that what is usable in
my small liberal-arts college library would not work at a large research
university.  Whatever basics are true for library research as a whole must
be modified to the needs of the audience.  (Undergrad-level teaching vs.
research needs, for instance.)

On the other assertion, I say the more an art than a science applies to the
management of the web design process, rather than to the web design itself,
which I agree can rely upon scientific methods to a certain extent.  This is
why I agree with Brian's points 3-6, suggesting we use objective measures
and experimentation to create library-specific design principles.

> 1. The "science" of usability has settled on some pretty objective
criteria,
> methods, and models.

But do they capture all of the essentials of good design?  Besides being
usable, my overseers want our page to be attractive and purple, feel
friendly, and to get people physically into the library.  Those
considerations are outside of usability.

> 2. E-commerce usability has become quite uniform.  That has happened
because
> a number of people have performed enough studies and tests that have been
> reproduced with similar results to become at least very strong principles.
> What are our library sites but e-commerce sites that offer products
> (information, resources, etc) for free.  Comparison shopping among
> resources, information and annotations about, and help all are part of
what
> we do.
Usability has become uniform in some ways, but not in others!  Even between
Amazon.com, BN.com, and half.com, there are differences that cause some
users to prefer one over the other.  And if appealing to the greatest number
were the only standard, disability access would not be the major issue that
it is.  OTOH, certain plug-ins become used a lot because they hit enough of
the desired demographic (witness the rise of Flash).

I strongly disagree, however, that library sites are e-commerce sites.  My
job is to get people off of my site, onto the site that will most meet their
needs, as quickly as possible.  The major goal of most e-commerce sites is
to keep your eyeballs.  If I could set up one web page from which I could
always take them to the best resource for their needs, I would do that.  In
fact, that is the librarian's dream!  However, because identifying the best
resource is a complex process, library sites are more complex, and the
challenge is to get the user as quickly as possible through your pages and
on to somebody else's page that has what they need.

---Julia E. Schult
Access/Electronic Services Librarian
Elmira College
Jschult at elmira.edu