[Web4lib] RE: [lita-l] Innovation: NYT article on Dewey-lessArizona public library

[Will Kurt]

While I'm the first to complain about bookstore 
classifications of books (How often have you seen 
Java and JavaScript intermixed?), I think Dewey 
certainly has its fair share of faults
 the first being usability.

I work in a small corporate library that uses 
Dewey, almost all of our users hold graduate 
degrees and have a large amount of experience 
doing research, and I still get a lot of 
quizzical looks when I ask them if they know how 
to find a book by its Dewey number.  The fact 
that you’re looking for a 6-9+ character number 
in tiny print using a classification system that 
is not intuitive requires the user to a.) learn 
the basics of the system first, and b.) spend a 
lot of time processing each number as they browse.

I think this is a great experiment and I'm glad 
that it’s working for them!  What’s even worse 
then the initial ‘It could never work!’ that 
Karen mentions, is that even now, after it 
actually is working many of the reactions here 
are still: “Well it’s only working because of X, 
Y, Z other wise it would fail.”

Innovation is trying different things, especially 
when the status quo says that such an idea is preposterous.

--Will

At 08:06 AM 7/16/2007, Robert L. Balliot wrote:

>I thought it was an intellectual system. I do not believe
>that cataloging is merely about the end product, the path
>and method of classification also have intrinsic benefits.
>
>When I cataloged, the process of organization allowed me
>to better understand the collections and to judge what
>would compliment the body of knowledge.  I think that you
>can use computerized interfaces to help enable the public
>to find material faster, but at the same time I think that
>you can also end up making the librarians less effective
>when they are distanced from the problem solving process.
>
>Nothing in the description of services in the article was
>innovative. It certainly may work to reach whatever goals
>that organization has, but it does not represent anything
>we are not already doing.   In the PLs a large part of the
>collections - fiction and biography are already organized
>by genre and author/title.
>
>*************************************************
>Robert L. Balliot
>1-401-421-5763
>Skype: RBalliot
>Bristol, Rhode Island
>http://oceanstatelibrarian.com/contact.htm
>*************************************************
>-----Original Message-----
>From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
>[mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of K.G. Schneider
>Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 11:26 PM
>To: lita-l at ala.org; web4lib at webjunction.org
>Subject: [Web4lib] RE: [lita-l] Innovation: NYT article on Dewey-lessArizona
>public library
>
>
>The reporter didn't make that stuff up, and you can peruse the PUBLIB
>archives for more examples of the same. (I can't seem to get access to
>AUTOCAT, no matter how many times I try to register, so I can't speak for
>that list.)
>
>It was disappointing to me that most of the reaction on the PUBLIB list was
>about how it was not going to work... before the project even launched. The
>general trend of most posts are now, "Well, it would work under very limited
>circumstances, BUHHHHHHHHHHT..."
>
>I didn't know we had so much invested in Dewey. Me, I thought it was an
>inventory system.
>
>Karen G. Schneider
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Web4lib mailing list
>Web4lib at webjunction.org
>http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/