[Web4lib] Getting catalog software vendors to make more useable
software choices
Isabel Danforth
idanforth at gmail.com
Fri Jul 15 15:27:44 EDT 2005
With all this talk of RFP's and large size systems, does anyone have
suggestions a web based system that is relatively in expensive and can
deal with LC call numbers for a small academic library? We have only
about 10,000 volumes.
Isabel
On 7/15/05, Bess Reynolds <Bess.Reynolds at cwt.com> wrote:
>
> The director of my library took an unusual approach to selecting a new
> integrated library system by the sound of this discussion. She said that
> she trusted my judgment about the back-end of the system, but she only
> cares about the patron's experience: how it looks and how it searches.
> I have to jump in with a plug for our new library vendor, SydneyPlus. They
> are primarily used in special libraries, so I can't point you to many web
> OPACS available outside of firewalls that are running the latest version. I
> do not think it is used by many public and academic libraries.
>
> Out of the dozen plus vendors I worked with, SydneyPlus took actual HTML
> pages that I mocked up for our "look" (to match the library's Web pages)
> and gave us a demo based on a sample of our data with our look.
> We are in the conversion process and I am working closely with the Web OPAC
> implementation specialist. We have gone over our options with a fine tooth
> comb. In addition to that, SydneyPlus has a module called kmBuilder that
> puts us in the driver's seat, that is, we can make many refinements after
> we sign off on the original modifications. I can edit any number of tables
> and create non-MARC information in auxiliary tables such as borrowers
> information, which we design.
>
> I have full control over MARC mapping, which fields and combinations of
> fields can be searched, search choices whether Boolean, left-justified,
> right-justified, greater-than etc.
> And *at any time* I can change the field selection for the Web OPAC search.
> If we decide no one has ever searched for an ISBN, the patron never sees
> it.
> They also have a quick and easy way to change some superficial aspects of
> the Web OPAC such as color, font, headings etc. Also by using security, I
> can let the staff users have a different view than the patrons.
>
> Of course we won't be live for a couple of months so I may have more to say
> on the overall system once we start doing the hard work like setting up
> serials. At least until them we are happy with our decision.
>
> Bess Reynolds
> Technical Services Librarian
> Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP
>
> Bess.Reynolds at cwt.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Karen Coyle"
> <kcoyle at kcoyle.net> To: "Jenne Heise" <jahb at Lehigh.EDU>
> cc: web4lib at webjunction.org
> Office: Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Getting catalog software vendors to make more useable software
> Sent by: choices
> web4lib-bounces at webj
> unction.org
>
>
> 07/15/2005 12:33 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> When the U of Calif was doing its RFP for a vendor system we looked at
> the RFPs that some other large libraries (including LC) had done. These
> documents were 50-100 pages in length and went into incredible detail
> about the workings of the modules for acquisitions, serials check-in,
> etc. They said shockingly little about the requirements for the user
> interface. When I talked to the vendors, they confirmed that libraries
> buy integrated library systems based on the library management
> functions, not the user interface. It is the library administration that
> buys the ILS, and their priority is running the library, not providing
> user service. In fact, this isn't unreasonable -- the library has to
> function well in toto so that there is something that you can provide
> user service to. But this means that the user interface gets short
> shrift in the purchasing decision, and therefore there is no incentive
> for vendors to spend their time and money improving that part of their
> system.
>
> It is for this reason that I feel that we should separate library
> management and user interface functions of our catalogs -- let the ILS
> integrate library management, and have the user interface be a
> collective effort by some smart, user-friendly, open source folks. All
> we would need from the ILS vendors is a decent API into the database
> (well, and good database design, but I'm assuming here that the problem
> is the public view, not the backend database). Note that in today's
> environment there is no reason why the user interface has to be run off
> the exact same database as the management systems -- it is possible to
> keep them in sync in other ways.
>
> As I've said before, it is time to dis-integrate the ILS, for the sake
> of our users.
>
> kc
>
> Jenne Heise wrote:
>
> > For years, my library has been struggling with some basic usability
> > flaws in our online catalog interface for the web, things that can't
> > apparently be done with the software as it stands and are apparently
> > low priority for the vendor.
> >
> > What are librarians doing to pressure catalog softwarevendors to
> > address usability issues?
> >
> > Are there any libraries/library systems that have used authority
> > control to provide suggestions of alternative terms for searching? Are
> > there ways to make the 'more like this' feature in catalogs work well?
> > What works? What doesn't work?
> >
> > -- Jenne Heise
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web4lib mailing list
> > Web4lib at webjunction.org
> > http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> >
> >
>
> --
> -----------------------------------
> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
> kcoyle at kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
> ph.: 510-540-7596
> fx.: 510-848-3913
> mo.: 510-435-8234
> ------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------
> IRS Circular 230 Legend: Any advice contained herein was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding U.S. federal, state, or local tax penalties. Unless otherwise specifically indicated above, you should assume that any statement in this email relating to any U.S. federal, state, or local tax matter was written in connection with the promotion or marketing by other parties of the transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed in this email. Each taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor.
>
>
> ==============================================================================
> NOTE: The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not read, use or disseminate the information; please advise the sender immediately by reply email and delete this message and any attachments without
> retaining a copy. Although this email and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that may affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.
>
> ==============================================================================
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
More information about the Web4lib
mailing list