[554] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Third Generation OPAC
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Public-Access Computer Systems For)
Mon Jun 22 11:21:39 1992
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 10:11:03 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>
3 Messages, 200 Lines
*-----
From: johnsonm@ohsu.EDU (Millard Johnson)
Subject: next generation OPAC
Another design criteria for the next-generation OPAC: WIDER
INTEGRATION
(These comments refer to an OPAC of an academic institution
used by patrons for other than recreational reading)
The catalog should be well integrated with the other information
resources on a "wired" campus and it should be integrated with
the other information hunting habits of the user.
To begin with, the primary terminal of the OPAC is the work
station on the desk in the room or office of the user. Use of a
terminal in the library will be the exception, so lets not force the
user into making his whiz-bang computer work like a dumb
terminal. The OPAC should be just another window, and it
should exhibit consistent, predictable and civilized behavior.
Naturally the OPAC should conform to the users workstation
environment -- not the other way around.
When a person needs information he/she that person tends to
hunt in a hierarchy of sources. The OPAC should be well
integrated into that hierarchy. The hierarchy is probably
something like this:
1. Personal memory (Not much help there)
2. Friends and associates
3. Personal files and correspondance
4. Personal reprint files and publications
5. Departmental files and research in progress (Dept library)
6. Institutional records and institutional library collection
7. The universe of knowledge outside the institution
There should not be sharp breakes, descrete steps, and different
interfaces as the user moves down the hierarchy. The personal
file manager and the database manager should flow into and be
part of the OPAC, stocked and maintained more-or-less
automatically as the user retrieves items for reading. At the very
least, personal bibliography file managers like Reference Manager
should be integrated with the OPAC and some SDI capability. At
the other end, the break between library owned material and
databases and resources outside the institution should be more
transparent.
I would rather risk failure than achieve it without risk.
Millard Johnson, PORTALS
johnsonm@ohsu.edu
*-----
From: tdowling@milton.u.washington.edu (Thomas Dowling)
Subject: Post-Boolean opacs
This discussion has been mirroring a debate at the University of
Washington Libraries concerning what we want in our next opac (whatever
generation that turns out to be). A number of the desired facilities,
namely extended notes fields and the ability to search standard journal
abbreviations, have little to do with the catalog's capabilities. They
have to do with information that is just plain not there in the record,
regardless of the search engine.
So my personal desired feature for a new opac is that it come with funding
for significant work on enhancing the underlying MARC records.
Thomas Dowling
University of Washington Libraries
*-----
From: Ernest Perez <EPEREZ@UTDALLAS>
Subject: 3d generation OPAC
I'd like to add Mundane Functionality to the 3rd Generation Liberry
Catalogs...
Maybe we could talk about "3d generation OCS" (online catalog
systems)...at least dropping the "public access" silliness. I mean, is
Dialog or Lexis an "OPAD" (online public access database). I will use
OCS during the course of this reply to Charles Hildreth's invitation
for some comments on his next-generation topic....
>an Enhanced, Expanded, and Extended OPAC. It would be *Enhanced* in
>functionality and usability, *Expanded* in indexing (in-depth
>collection coverage) and data files, and *Extended* through linkages,
>networks, and gateways to additional library collections, information
>systems and resources.
I do agree with Hildreth's listing of 7 tentative retrieval criteria.
I myself have contributed to S.L.A. News Division specifications for
news text databases, and have written consultation reports for several
full text database developers. I have included variations on the
criteria that he mentions. The features mentioned are all overdue
approaches to improving on the old-timey, limited, data-processing
value retrieval and Boolean combination approach.
But I also want to point out that his point of "*Enhanced* in
functionality and usability" does not apply only to the retrieval. The
"2d generation" of OCS (online catalog systems) did after all head
down the evolutionary path to integrated library systems. These
systems extended the catalog item/retrieval functionality into a
number of other areas of collection maintenance, management,
acquisitions, circulation control, etc. They wound up being a bunch
more convenient and functional for the library staff, without putting
much concern for user convenience.
The functionality can and should easily be extended in the PA (Public
Access) mode. PACS-L messages have already mentioned some of these
extensions, such as posting number of circulations along with
retrieved items, for a user-judgement aid.
Lets not forget all that "needs analysis" stuff we picked up in
library schools. Maybe we have forgotten that the whole point of these
systems is after all to help the users identify potentially useful
materials and expedite their getting physical or cognitive access of
some sort to said materials.
Remember, word processors didn't stop at the automated typewriter
level. My Royal portable, at least, didn't do cut&paste,
search&replace, spell-checking, synonym lookup, style-checking,
keystroke macros, etc. All of these neat add-ons were improvements in
practical functionality, to make the pedestrian graphic recording task
a lot more powerful and flexible and easy. Hey, it's like automatic
transmission and cruise control vs. crank starting and non-synchromesh
double-clutching. I may not write better, but by gosh, I write easier.
How about putting some of this same kind of PRACTICAL user aid
front-end automation into OCS interfaces and functionalities. Things
like, in no particular ranking:
* Online reserve requests;
* Online reference requests (I mean, we really CAN handle e-mail all
the way to the Reference Desk, even commercial software help desks are
doing this on Compuserve and Genie);
* Display of not only the number of circulations for individual
entries, but how about a Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down or Five-Star rating
scale, based upon voluntary feedback by users who've used the item;
* Request for postal mail or interoffice mail circulation (This is a
computer, we can handle a postage deposit);
* Stored searches for my user i.d., for complex searches on stuff I
want to check regularly;
* Stored macros for my user i.d., again, for repetitious or power user
stuff;
* User request function for "How about getting another copy of this?
Or, at least check on this," for things that are always out, or
apparently lost; *
* Online interlibrary loan requests - surely if we do get all these
wunderbar transparent accesses to extended collections, for material
that we "don't got here,";
* Online renewals ("I'm sorry, Dave, I won't be able to do that; we
have a request for that item. Oh, and by the way, I've locked the
airlock, until you return the book.");
* Campus- or Community-Wide-Information-System pointer database
module... pointers to experts, departmental gurus, specialists,
professional groups, special interest societies, authorities, etc.
We've been fooling ourselves...the virtual library should include the
most valuable and easily usable information resource - other people. I
was once in a class where the professor told us, "The best way to
learn in this class is to sit next to somebody that knows something.
And to talk to them."
* Online user requests for materials to add to the collection. Okay,
let's take the early capture of biblio infor even back ahead of the
Acquisitions Folk. Hook BIP-Plus to this OCS thing, and capture
citations/ISBNs, etc., departmental account charges, etc., at the
moment of request. Along with instant validation check, "Oh, Dave, we
already have that item, it's under QA76.75...."
* Automatic output to diskette of selected and correct biblio format
citations for selected items (and go find the ones you don't have, I
don't care where, just do it). Eliminate the chore and responsibility
of some poor library drudge having to go download to PC and
import/export to ProCite or Papyrus. C'mon, Make My Day.
And all of you can think of dozens of other neat helper and gofer
aids. You're OCS users, as well as librarians. Besides, isn't this
What Computers Are For?
Cheers,
Ernest
Ernest Perez, Ph.D
Access Information Associates
2183 Buckingham, Suite 106
Richardson TX 75081
214-530-4800
INTERNET: eperez@utdallas.edu
BITNET: eperez@utdallas
(Okay, for all you confidentiality buffs, I agree, a lot of these
features assume you've logged on with a user i.d., but so what? I log
on to Dialog or Lexis or my ATM using a personal i.d., also. And I get
worthwhile benefits for doing so.)
