[Web4lib] Federated searching-general question re sub groupings

Peter Noerr pnoerr at MuseGlobal.com
Mon May 14 13:42:24 EDT 2007


Aren't these all examples of "shouldn't" rather than "can't". Numeric DBs are just as useful as text ones if the data is properly fielded for display ("gold price=$700" vs. "price of gold is rising"). Any examples of pay-per-search? Number of concurrent licenses is a matter of session management, but I agree they should probably not be included, because of the prevalence of "just search everywhere" syndrome, unless the concurrent license issue is sorted out with the provider - which an increasing number are.

Peter

 
> Well, there could be a number of reasons why certain databases can't be included in a federated search, or probably shouldn't be. Numeric databases, pay-per-search databases, and databases with a small number of concurrent users are examples.
> 
> --Steve
> ___________________________________________________
> Steve Cramer
> Librarian for Accounting, Apparel, Business, & Economics
> University of North Carolina at Greensboro
> smcramer at uncg.edu, 336-256-0346, AIM: stevebizlib
> 
> 
> 
> "Peter Noerr" <pnoerr at MuseGlobal.com> 
> Sent by: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
> 05/10/2007 06:10 PM
> 
> To
> <web4lib at webjunction.org>
> cc
> 
> Subject
> RE: [Web4lib] Federated searching-general question re sub groupings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One question and one observation:
> 
> Question:
> 
> Kathryn (in her ACRL presentation) and one other poster on 
> this thread 
> have mentioned that certain databases "cannot be searched by 
> federated 
> search" (or similar, more succinct phrasing). I am intrigued 
> to know what 
> some examples of the databases are, or what the 
> characteristics are which 
> make them unsearchable by a federated search engine.
> 
> Observation:
> We have noticed a growing trend in both the corporate and 
> library use of 
> federated search towards the use of "subject verticals". The 
> reasons are 
> all over the place, but one major theme is that users want less, but 
> better 'quality' results. If the user is already in a subject 
> specialized 
> part of the web site, then the expectation seems to be that 
> they will get 
> only very relevant material. And the converse; if they are on 
> the front 
> page, they will get all sorts of stuff.
>  
> Also it is easier to consider moving a specialized search box 
> out to the 
> place where the users are likely to be (a course web site, or project 
> collaboration page, for example) thus getting them to use the library 
> without having to be there. (This mixes with another thread, 
> but it does 
> seem to be a trend to move specialist access out to where people are 
> working.)
> 
> 
> Disclaimer:
> In the interests of full disclosure; MuseGlobal is a major commercial 
> developer and OEM vendor of search management software, which 
> includes 
> federated search and results analysis components.
> 
> Peter
> 
> Dr Peter L Noerr
> CTO, MuseGlobal, Inc.
> 
> +1 801 208 1880
> www.museglobal.com 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org 
> > [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn 
> > Silberger
> > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 6:10 AM
> > To: web4lib at webjunction.org
> > Subject: Fw: [Web4lib] Federated searching-general question 
> > re sub groupings
> > 
> > Lisa:
> > 
> >       I think you have asked some good questions.  I am at 
> > Marist College
> > and we have been using federated search since fall of 2005. 
> > Our students
> > have been receptive and postive about it.  We have it front 
> > and center on
> > our home page and we have seen article usage sky rocket. 
> > When we set it up
> > we tried to look at searching from the student's perspective, 
> > and that led
> > us to use the terminology of the Registrar's office.  Each of 
> > our federated
> > groupings bear the name of a major awarded by the college. 
> > That is the
> > terminology that guides their overall academic experience and 
> > we have found
> > that it works well for grouping databases into federated 
> > searches.  I agree
> > with you that students don't want to have to consider lots 
> of choices
> > before searching.  They live with a fair number of web 
> > destinations for
> > broad life activities i.e. socializing, banking, travel, 
> > shopping  -- I
> > believe they would like the library to be a single destination.
> > 
> >       You are quite right about the clustering.  Students have been
> > conditioned by other web searching experience to using 
> > clusters to filter
> > search results.  (They want the movie, not the book at Amazon 
> > - they filter
> > via cluster.)  About 80% - 90%  of the time the clustering 
> > will create a
> > very relevant subset.   Those proposed sub-grouping would 
> > have some general
> > academic databases and they would need to use the clustering 
> > regardless.  I
> > have found that newspapers can present a problem in certain 
> > situations.  If
> > a technical topic has been in the news for whatever reason, 
> > you can get the
> > first page of results with too many newspaper articles.
> > 
> >              We gave a paper on federated searching at ACRL 
> > this year.  We
> > put up our paper, Powerpoint and a couple Flash demos at
> > http://library.marist.edu/ACRL/Foxhunt_demo.html  .  You can see the
> > clustering in each of the Flashes.
> > 
> >               Good luck.  I think you are on the right track.
> > 
> > 
> > Katy
> > 
> > Kathryn K. Silberger
> > Automation Resources Librarian
> > James A. Cannavino Library
> > Marist College
> > 3399 North Road
> > Poughkeepsie, NY  12601
> > Kathryn.Silberger at marist.edu
> > (845) 575-3000 x.2419
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >              "Pons, Lisa 
> > 
> >              (ponslm)" 
> > 
> >              <PONSLM at UCMAIL.UC 
> >           To 
> >              .EDU> 
> > <web4lib at webjunction.org> 
> >              Sent by: 
> >           cc 
> >              web4lib-bounces at w 
> > 
> >              ebjunction.org 
> >      Subject 
> >                                        [Web4lib] Federated 
> > 
> >                                        searching-general 
> > question re sub 
> >              05/09/2007 10:18          groupings 
> > 
> >              AM 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I have a general question- sorry this is so long!
> > 
> > We're a few steps away from implementing our new federated 
> > search tool.
> > It has been an interesting experience!
> > 
> > I have some questions regarding how this tool is seen across your
> > institutions- that is, what is the vision for it's use?
> > 
> > For example, we have created our tool with 21 subject 
> categories. Now,
> > some of  our subject specialists want to create sub categories, and
> > choose their own databases to be searched , and put a search box on
> > their subject guide pages that will only search within their sub
> > category.
> > 
> > For example, on our main federated page, we have Earth and 
> > Environmental
> > Sciences which includes 10 databases to be searched. Now, 
> the subject
> > specialist wants to create a sub-category for Geography and put the
> > search box on her subject guide page. The category may or 
> may not have
> > the same databases as the main earth and environmental sciences main
> > category.
> > 
> > My question is, won't this confuse users?  Does this 
> partially defeat
> > the purpose of a "federated search" by limiting the search to a very
> > slender set of resources? We are using Serials solutions 
> > central search,
> > which has Vivisimo to cluser results- shouldn't that be enough.
> > 
> > Isn't this kind of library 1.0 thinking- that every tool must be
> > separate, and to find this, you must go there, to find that, 
> > you must go
> > somewhere else.
> > 
> > I need help here- if I am wrong I need to shut up about it with my
> > colleagues, if I am write, I need help from all the experts 
> out there
> > explaining why it is wrong.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web4lib mailing list
> > Web4lib at webjunction.org
> > http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web4lib mailing list
> > Web4lib at webjunction.org
> > http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> 


More information about the Web4lib mailing list