[13251] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Re: personalized library interfaces
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Lease Morgan)
Thu Apr 13 09:06:58 2000
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:23:48 -0400
From: Eric Lease Morgan <eric_morgan@NCSU.EDU>
To: PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU>
Message-Id: <B51B3493.1C6%eric_morgan@ncsu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Personalized library interfaces
This text summarizes a number of responses I recently received from a
posting about "personalized library interfaces."
On March 29 I asked a number of mailing lists the question, "What is the
goal of [library interface] personalization and ideally what functions would
it provide?" Being a good librarian I have been able to classify the
fourteen responses I received into categories/issues:
* reduction of information overload
* reduction of administrative overhead
* branding of library services
* more personalization
The balance of this text briefly elaborates on each of these issues.
Reduction of information overload
Reduction of information overload was seen as the biggest advantage for
providing a personalized library interface. Such a system should be able to
provide access to the totality of institution's information resource but
allow users to select only the items for display they need most often. Thus,
as Mr. R would say, saving the time of the reader.
For example, Norm Medeiros (medeiros@library.med.nyu.edu) assisted in the
development of a MySQL-based program "To help our users circumvent wading
through ever-growing lists of electronic resources." Amos Lakos
(aalakos@library.uwaterloo.ca) said "a well designed personal interface
keeps the main contact local but enables access to the whole - but mainly it
helps the student better and more useful use of time." Similar to a study
done here at the NCSU Libraries, Angela K. Horne (akh8@cornell.edu) was
reminded of their patrons' perceptions of information overload:
Cornell's MyLibrary project began partially in response
to a focus group study of Library Gateway use. It
became clear that certain patrons were becoming
overwhelmed by information excess, an understandable
reaction given that we have 19 libraries and thousands
of resources. The Executive Summary of the final
report noted that users desired "a more personal space
-- where they can dictate how important certain
resources are based on their own needs." This was a
motivational finding for us.
Dan Ream (dream@saturn.vcu.edu) says such a system "allows me to quickly
create a class-specific web page that my students can easily login to later
when they're trying to remember where those databases were that the
librarian showed them before." Again, saving the time of the reader.
Reduced administrative overhead
Each instance of "my library" is essentially a database application with a
web front end. Used effectively, this means an institution can describe an
information resource in one place and have it appear in many places via
different reports. Consequently, maintaining many web pages is reduced to
updating single records in databases and running the reports. As Anne
Gambles (A.Gambles@lse.ac.uk) says:
Many academic librarians are currently spending much
time maintaining resource information on typically
"flat" library web pages. ... The RDM is a relational
database which has enough complexity to cope with
multiple instances of the same resource (eg in the case
of a journal: hard copy, full text via an online
database, abstracts via a stand-alone cd-rom) each with
different levels of user access.
Norm Medeiros is feeling better because of the database approach:
Prior to creating the database, approximately 2,500
e-resources were maintained manually in title- and
subject-specific files. Every time we added, deleted,
or updated a link, at least 3 HTML pages were edited.
The database lets us make these changes easily and
create new pages automatically. My fingers are
grateful.
All of this begs the question about our online catalogs. Aren't they
databases? Why can't we create MyLibraries from that content? Part of the
problem may be our catalogs' definition. Are they primarily inventory lists
or finding aids? In the words of many a patron, "What is the OPAC?"
Branding of library services
The idea of a personalized/customized view of information is not unique to
libraries. My Yahoo, My Excite, and My Netscape are well known examples. In
fact, you can hardly throw a stick on the Internet without hitting yet
another "MyThis" or a "MyThat", terms coined by Horne. Thus, there is a lot
of competition for attention between customizable portal applications, and
while (most) people think a customized interface to a library's collection
of information resources, whether they be people or databases, is a good
thing, a few people wonder how customized library interfaces stand in
relation to other interfaces such as company intranets, university
interfaces, and/or "portal-in-a-box" applications sold commercially.
For example, through something like MyLibrary do we want to brand our
libraries? Debra Ketchell (ketchell@u.washington.edu) said, "I like
myLibrary and we are considering implementation as I have strong feelings
about branding the library, but I am concerned about creating separate
islands." Horne replies, "We aren't trying to push daily horoscopes at our
students and faculty, rather develop a research webspace that is theirs
alone and into which they can choose to add astrological information." Keith
Morgan (keith_morgan@ncsu.edu) echoes these sentiments, "I too want to brand
the library through both a well designed public web site and options like
MyLibrary but wonder if we will be overtaken by corporate forces. Or is the
library environment so specialized that this would never happen?"
I recently had the opportunity to demonstrate MyLibrary@NCState with some
people at OCLC. During that presentation Eric Miller (emiller@oclc.org) saw
the system as one that created content and provided an interface to that
content. He called the content "channels", the sorts of channels intended to
be created with the use of an XML standard, RDF
(http://www.w3.org/Metadata/RDF/), but we don't want to be providing too
many channels as described by Ketchell, "One question we are facing is how
many personal interfaces are too many? If your university offers a
'myUniversity' and there are a plethora of myYahoo public options, and we
creating more information overload with too many channels?"
Maybe the MyLibraries of the world could create these "channels" through RDF
and allow them to be inserted into the portals of the world much in the way
My Netscape allows you to added customized content. We would loose the
branding of our libraries, but we would be allow our patrons to gather
together content besides the content libraries provide. The kind of content
libraries provide does not satisfy all the information needs of all people.
More personalization
MyLibrary is nice, but not enough; it must be truly personalized, and more
information needs to be gathered. For example, a number of people like Ian
Whyte (iwhyte@lib.uwo.ca) expressed the need for usage statistics supporting
the need of MyLibrary. Others such as Art Rhyno (arhyno@server.uwindsor.ca)
believe MyLibrary could be used for purposes other than libraries; it could
be used for MyAssociation, MyLab, or MyCommunity. Therefore the system needs
to be more generic.
A couple of people suggested that MyLibrary was more of a customizable
interface and not a personalized interface. Keith Morgan alluded to Jakob
Neilsen and says that MyLibrary might benefit from a bit more computer
control. Steve Cavrak (sjc@lemming.uvm.edu) expressed the desire to have
MyLibrary turn more into a "digital companion." He describes many such
features, and some of the more interesting include:
* it would read my term paper and use that
to refine it's help
* it would help me find people with similar
or differing opinions (like Amazon.Com
reader reviews)
* it might decide that my paper was getting
out of hand and send a note to my professor
that she should chat with me to help me
focus my work before I turn in the paper
Summary
There seems to be a definite interest in services such a MyLibrary. With the
advent of globally networked computers and a growing service industry,
information is seen as an item of increasing value. While people seem to
desire to visit libraries less and less, people do seem to desire
information more and more. Services like MyLibrary demonstrate one way to
satisfy these desires for a larger and larger population. The key to
successfully creating a library-based MyLibrary service relies on the
abilities of libraries combine their tradition of service with the functions
of database technology. Are we up to the challenge? It is an exciting time
to be working Library Land.
Finally, if you've made it this far, then you might be interested in the
following URLs. The first one describes a mailing list, mylib-dev, created
for the purposes of discussing these issues. The second points to the
MyLibrary@NCState "sandbox", a place where you can download the source code
to MyLibrary@NCState and where you can "play" with the administrative back
end:
1) http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/lists/mylib-dev/about.html
2) http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/development/mylibrary/
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my appreciation to all the people who replied to my
posting. You have stimulated my thinking. "Thank you!"
--
Eric Lease Morgan
Digital Library Initiatives, NCSU Libraries
http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/staff/morgan/
