[Web4lib] RE: library automation vendors

[David Walker]

>> Who does this?  

Who does usability testing?  A lot of libraries. Take a few moments to
peruse the library literature from the last five years, and you'll see
this is widely done.  I don't see how you can effectively address
end-user needs without doing it.


>> What systems do we have that use APIs?

SUNY is an Ex Libris customer.  Your Aleph, SFX, and Metalib systems
have XML-based APIs.  Some of your other systems may also, depending on
what you have.

You can also make APIs where they don't exist by programming against the
databases of a system directly.  We've done that here for some of our
smaller systems.


>> Where would the one person library IT 
>> (systems librarian) staff get such skills 
>> or even the time?  

By hiring someone with the skills.

Or, in the case of an academic library, you can hire someone with some
of the skills and pick up slave -- uh, er, student -- labor to fill in
the rest.  Morrisville even has a bachelor's degree program in Web
Development.  Or, in the case of a large academic system like SUNY, you
could pull your resources to hire people.

Libraries spend a lot of money on technology.  But if we don't devote
resources to hiring good, talented people to actually implement,
integrate, and improve on that technology, then we aren't really getting
the most out of our investment.

Having just one or two people who "install and maintain" the systems
while the rest of the personnel are in public services worked when the
ILS was it and the dumb terminal ruled the day.

But libraries in the 21st Century are technology-rich institutions, with
a half-dozen or more local systems, 100s of remote databases, and
end-users who expect far, far more than what the vast majority of
academic library web sites are offering them.

We need to reallocate our resources into making better use of our
technology.  It won't always be easy to do that.  But can we afford not
to?

--Dave

=================
David Walker
Web Development Librarian
Library
Cal State San Marcos
760-750-4379
=================


 

-----Original Message-----
From: Drew, Bill [mailto:drewwe at MORRISVILLE.EDU] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 5:48 AM
To: David Walker; Richard Wiggins; web4lib at webjunction.org
Subject: RE: [Web4lib] RE: library automation vendors

 
> We in libraries have four distinct advantages over vendors:
> 
> (1) Libraries can hire interaction designers and information 
> architects
> to do this task.  That's feasible even for mid-sized academic 
> libraries.

I disagree.  This costs big bucks!  Besides, most libraries are not
mid-sized academic libraries. Most are small.
> 
> (2) At the local library, we actually interact with end-users 
> on a daily
> basis.  We understand them, even if we don't always appreciate their
> point of view.  We can do regular usability tests with our users and
> make updates to our API-based systems whenever we see fit, instead of
> having to "lobby" vendors for years to "fix" problems.

Who does this?  What systems do we have that use APIs?  Where would the
one person library IT (systems librarian) staff get such skills or even
the time?  

> 
> (3) It's ultimately more economical and sustainable to design an
> interface against an XML-based API than to have to mess with
> vendor-supplied interfaces, in which even minor customizations are
> vulnerable to upgrade incompatibilities.  We're separating the
> presentation layer from the application layer.
> 
Again, where do you expect me to learn these skills?  I am learning XML
but am not a programmer.
This is a job for vendors based on our wants and wishes!!!

> (4) We can share our ideas and code with each other in open source
> communities, allowing even technology-poor libraries to benefit from
> those who have the ability to build these systems.

Maybe.  Most of us have no choice as to what LMS or ILS we use though.