[WEB4LIB] Convenience vs complexity and Google Scholar

[george at library.caltech.edu]

Alane Wilson made an excellent point:

The three sterling databases named by the librarians Mr. Regazzi
surveyed are not convenient to use...they are probably several layers
deep in a library portal, and they no doubt require some kind of
authentication. The three resources named by the scientists are one
click.

Website design is a black art in many respects.  Getting enough of the
good stuff out in the open immediately [on your library's main entry
page(s)], while promising more context and more content deeper within
the site is a difficult balance.  Know your audience -- what they want,
what they'll tolerate, what will drive them away for keeps.

Way back in the early days of the web (MacWeb vs WinWeb browsers,
anyone?  Yes, Karen, many of us remember the triumphant Trumpet WinSock
moment), I had a manager extolling the virtues of designing a
"content-free" main page.  Virtually maintenance free!  The library's
main page is not a destination in itself, rather a jumping off point to
a few important links, which in turn might lead to a destination
(ejournal, database, etc).

Too many links on the entry page -- you may overwhelm your target
audience, perversely, satisfice them enough that they never venture
deeper into the website.

Too few links on the entry page -- you have nothing to offer; the
choices are too few (lack of context/contrast) to make good navigation
decisions.

Content-rich is the mantra we've adopted at Caltech
<http://library.caltech.edu>, but that decision was driven by knowing
our audience.  Your mileage may vary.

Convenience vs complexity.  Indeed!

George S. Porter
Sherman Fairchild Library of Engineering & Applied Science
California Institute of Technology
Mail Code 1-43, Pasadena, CA 91125-4300
Telephone (626) 395-3409 Fax (626) 431-2681
http://library.caltech.edu
contributor http://stlq.info |
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html