[1481] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Catalog Incompatibility
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Public-Access Computer Systems For)
Wed Oct 14 10:15:58 1992
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 09:07:07 CDT
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu>
From: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <LIBPACS%UHUPVM1.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu>
2 Messages, 83 Lines
*-----
From: David Ives <ELDJIVES@MIZZOU1>
Subject: RE: Incompatibility among Library Catalogs on the Internet
On Tue, 13 Oct 1992 14:15:40 CDT <KINGH@SNYSYRV1> said:
>I cannot resist noting that this is one of the problems that I indicated in
>opening discussion on "Why should library patrons be urged to use OPACS over
>the Internet?" (Or something to that effect ...) As more and more non-
>librarians and non-techies (no put-down intended to either group) begin to
>act on the PR in which librarians enthuse over the wonders of access, and
>find that they are stuck with frozen keyboards, unable to print, trapped in
>a void with no way to exit, and spending precious time trying to unravel
>each OPACs search code, more and more will begin to doubt our PR, self-
>promotion, and possibly our trustworthiness.
>
If only more people - librarians and non- would realize that the above
statement is *full* of truth and reality. The great Second Coming of
Iinformation (all data for everyone simultaneously) hasn't arrived
yet (and and been delayed indefinitely!).
David J. Ives
Microcomputer Systems Group
U. of Missouri -- MU Libraries
ELDJIVES@MIZZOU1 or ELDJIVES@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU
Not affiliated with/profiting from this planet
*-----
From: jaffe@scilibx.ucsc.edu (Lee Jaffe, Microcomputer & Network Services)
Subject: More forest analogies (was "Incompatibility...)
Hannah King writes:
I cannot resist noting that this is one of the problems that I indicated in
opening discussion on "Why should library patrons be urged to use OPACS over
the Internet?" (Or something to that effect ...) As more and more non-
librarians and non-techies (no put-down intended to either group) begin to
act on the PR in which librarians enthuse over the wonders of access, and
find that they are stuck with frozen keyboards, unable to print, trapped in
a void with no way to exit, and spending precious time trying to unravel
each OPACs search code, more and more will begin to doubt our PR, self-
promotion, and possibly our trustworthiness.
I think that there are several good responses to this comment. First and
foremost, the users are already out there on the net. The net wouldn't
be very important, or perhaps there at all, if this was only about access
to online library catalogs. The backbone of the Internet in the U.S. is
the NSFNet, created to support the Supercomputer Center system. Other
significant research and governmental information utilities have been
active on the Internet (before that the ARPANet) for a long time. Faculty
at our university are already active net users. The technical hurdles
have become undaunting to the even the non-technical. Letting folks know
where library catalogs are out there and offering them support for using
those resources is, in my opinion, the minimum we can do. (As a side note,
when compared to the few commands one needs to master a telnet session,
OPACS are a far more daunting encounter for most net users and librarians
should be careful before complaining about how difficult using the net is.)
We're not evil stepparents sending babes into the woods looking for
non-existent goodies. We are more like foresters at an aid station providing
directions and support for those already out in the woods. We can close
up shop and refuse to answer questions -- an interesting position for
librarians -- or we can create those little guidebooks and make signposts
and interpretive trails that forest rangers are always making. OK, I'll
stop the cute stuff...)
I think that it is pointless, or worse, to constantly be reraising this
sort of question. The Internet is here to stay. If librarians could
choose to ignore it, it will still flourish, but people will have legi-
mate reason to question our commitment and mission. In fact, I question
the commitment of librarians that would refuse to use information re-
sources because they are unfamiliar and challenging.
-- Lee Jaffe, UC Santa Cruz
jaffe@scilibx.ucsc.edu
p.s. If this message seems to contradict my last diatribe, it may not be
entirely an illusion. I'm trying to strike some kind of balance that
acknowledges the importance and validity of both the new technology and
the traditional skills. I just haven't managed to do both in the same
message yet. -- Lee
