[WEB4LIB] Two steps forward, three steps back

[Ryan Eby]

If it makes you feel any better, Innovative Millenium OPAC has the
same issues (at least the version I've used with my library). Keyword
searches are actually phrase searches, Titles must have the first word
(Display of Quantitative Information returns nothing while Visual
Display of Quantitative Information returns the title) among other
problems. The majority of the students and researchers that I've
talked to hate the system, specifically for these problems. The others
I think just presume the item doesn't exist. It's gotten in my way
enough times that I've been tempted to scrape the system into my own
database and built an interface for myself.

I see that more and more vendors are building XML servers for their
systems. Hopefully this will allow libraries to bypass their WebOPAC's
because it really is a disservice for users. If it was the only search
interface I ever used then I probably wouldn't complain, but because
it goes against the norms of pretty much everything out there I get
extremely frustrated. I sometimes use Google Scholar to bypass it if I
can. My friends check one or two databases and try to get good
citations before they every touch the catalog.

I'm sure there are good WebOPAC's out there, but the version I have to
use is definitely not one of them. Hope you library reconsiders. I
think this really ties in with the recent discussion about Google and
the problems for libraries. I know many users that turn away from the
catalog because it's so terrible.

Ryan Eby


On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:36:27 -0800 (PST), Stacy Pober
<stacy.pober at manhattan.edu> wrote:
> 
> While PALS is still being used in some places, MSUS has been phasing out
> PALS and migrating to Aleph.  So our consortium also migrated, but they
> chose Endeavor Voyager (a/k/a WebVoyáge.)
> 
> I am not happy.  The patrons are not happy.  I feel like I've been
> sent back in time to those unhappy days when a librarian had to perch
> at the shoulder of every new patron to guide them step by step through the
> use of a computerized library catalog.
> 
> The searching peculiarities of the system are extremely frustratiog.
> And, since  my email address is on many of the library webpages, I'm
> fielding patron complaints as well.  I'm unclear what the right response
> is to someone who carps that the old system was much better than the new
> one, other than to say something honest like, "Yes, you're right. The new
> one stinks on ice."  (So far, I have restrained myself from responding
> so bluntly.)
> 
> I'm trying to figure out how a major library vendor can put out a product
> with such peculiar interpretations of user input.
> 
> Here are some search examples that fail and what Voyager wants to see:
> 
>   Failed basic "Find Keyword" search:  death of a salesman
>   Working version: death and of and a and salesman
>    (User MUST use boolean connectors even though it is explicitly a
>    keyword search)
> 
>   Failed advanced "Find in Keyword Anywhere" search: war and peace
>   Working version: war peace
>     (Using boolean connectors in this search ensures the search
>      will fail)
> 
>   Failed advanced "Find in Title" search: lion, the witch, and the wardrobe
>   Working version: lion, the witch, the wardrobe
>    (Again, system chokes when finding unexpected boolean "and")
> 
>   Failed advanced "Find in Title": kings and desperate men
>   and
>   Failed basic "Find in Title, Exact": kings and desperate men
>   Working version: kings & desperate men
>     (Users must use ampersand if it is part of the title. System does not
>     know how to alias "and" and "&".
> 
>   Phrase search: the pit and the pendulum
>   Working version is: "the pit and the pendulum"
>     (Users must use quote marks even though this is explicitly a phrase
>         search.)
> 
> In fairness, the system does warn about a few of these things, such as
> instructing users to use quotes when choosing the phrase search mode.
> But it is perceived by the user as being inconsistent - in basic search
> mode, a keyword search must include boolean connectors between every term,
> and in advanced search, a 'keyword anywhere' search *fails* if you use
> boolean connectors.
> 
> Aside from writing this to vent, I wanted to ask how other libraries are
> adapting to this system.  I don't expect us to do another system migration
> for a long time, and any changes to the interface requested through
> user's groups probably take a relatively long time.
> 
> I wonder if anyone has some sort of local interface that pre-processes
> the user's input so that this system works more like some other databases
> -- those which our patrons use easily.
> 
> Alternatively, can anyone share with me some online help pages or handouts
> designed specifically to help patrons understand and work with the quirks
> of the WebVoyáge system?
> 
> This is the first OPAC I've used that made me feel sentimental about card
> catalogs...
> 
> --
> Stacy Pober
> Information Alchemist
> Manhattan College Library
> http://www.manhattan.edu/library/
> stacy.pober at manhattan.edu
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using Manhattan College Webmail.  http://www.manhattan.edu
> 
>