[12934] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
MY LIBRARY
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (zendog)
Tue Jun 1 20:02:22 1999
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 13:35:34 -0600
From: zendog <zendog@incolsa.palni.edu>
To: PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU>
Message-Id: <001e01beac41$2972e580$70543ec6@palni.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
At a recent meeting of the OCLC Users Council, William Gary Potter gave a
paper urging libraries to develop a common web interface to library data.
He argued that library users are poorly served when they go from one library
to another and have to learn a new Web interface. He argued that users
would be best served if libraries would put aside their cosmetic differences
and agree upon a single interface.
My instinct was to disagree with this suggestion as premature. Technology
is still evolving. Years ago there was pressure to develop a common command
language for OPACs. This was finally agreed just as technology made
command language for OPACs virtually obsolete. Potter's paper was, however,
thought provoking.
It now occurs to me that effort ought to be made to develop a portable
programmable library web interface similar to the windows interface.
Consider Microsoft. Instead of developing a standard windows interface,
Microsoft had the foresight to develop a programmable interface so that each
Windows user creates an interface that is suited to his or her own needs and
preferences. The Windows interface I use may or may not be the best one for
me but it is probably better for me than the one that suites you. Could we
not extend this customizable interface model to the library interface? In
the programmable model, MY LIBRARY would be an amalgam of my windows
interface, the files on my personal computer and my companies LAN, the
resources of my academic, corporate, and public libraries, plus web URLs
that I regularly visit -- favorites. The whole business, of course, needs
to be seamlessly integrated and networked. The first task after getting
onto any computer on the Internet would be to identify myself. Then some
agent would identify the resources to which I have rights, assemble them and
arrange and prioritize them to my specifications - just like my Windows
interface does now, but across the network.
In this environment, MY LIBRARY has a special, individual meaning. The
"collection" is smaller than any of the libraries at which I have
privileges, but it is more comprehensive to my needs. Ideally, the system
would give immediate access to resources I have created or use regularly but
have easy drill-down capability to access resources most similar to mine,
and finally tools to find resources that have heretofore been of no interest
to me. It would be nice to think that Microsoft had this in mind when they
argue that IE is an integral part of Windows in their anti-trust suite.
In this model, one of the chief functions of the library is to collect and
distribute resources that I can incorporate into MY LIBRARY. And one of the
primary responsibilities of librarians is to help people create personal
libraries that are comprehensive and intuitive.
MJ
*********************************************************
Millard Johnson -- INCOLSA -- http://incolsa.palni.edu
Zendog@incolsa.palni.edu
I would rather risk failure than achieve it without risk.
*********************************************************
