| Graeme's profileBooks and LibrariesPhotosBlogLists |  Tools  Help |
|
October 22 Amazon wish lists as a model for book listsAs you may know, I really like book lists, and I'm pretty happy with the way book lists work on WorldCat, but the one thing that I can't do is to add books to my lists before publication. In WorldCat specifically, I can't add a book to a book list until it's added to the WorldCat catalog. I don't know anything about the database that WorldCat runs on, but you can imagine that each entry in a book list includes a link to a catalog entry. No catalog entry, no way to create an entry in a book list. This makes sense, right?
Amazon had something similar to book lists, namely wish lists. It worked in basically the same way: you found a book on Amazon, and clicked a button to add it to one of your wish lists. And it had the same weakness as WorldCat lists: if something wasn't in the Amazon "catalog", you couldn't add it to a wish list. But Amazon has now extended wish lists so that you can add any web page to a wish list, via a button added to your links bar (what used to be called a bookmarklet). You can add any page you like to a wish list. For example, you can add a page from the Freakonomics blog from the NY Times, because I've already done that.
What does Amazon get out of this? Well, as soon as you click that magic button, you're whisked back to Amazon from whatever site you were on, and you'll presumably go back to Amazon more often to check on your rapidly growing wish list. But more importantly, assuming that people use it as intended (and not do goofy things like I did, like adding your wish list page to your wish list), Amazon will soon know what people want that isn't on Amazon. And a list of their principal competitors, with prices (since they ask for that when you add an item).
It wouldn't make sense for a public library to do exactly the same thing for book lists, since random web pages aren't books. But a library could certainly allow book lists to include books-to-be in the form of ISBNs. Among other things, it would provide data for acquisitions.
I guess it's possible that I'm the only person that wants this feature, but I'd love some library to do the experiment. October 16 I heart WorldCat!Worldcat has just added a feature I wanted: the ability to define, in your profile, one or more libraries which will (potentially) appear first when you do a search. This is great! I explained below why I search on WorldCat rather than using the local library network catalog, and this new feature is exactly what I mentioned in the final paragraph.
(To try this out, you have to have a WorldCat account and be logged in. When you do a search, you'll see a link under each library allowing you to set that library as a 'favorite'. Favorite libraries are shown in your profile, but they're not set there.)
Now I just need the same feature in the local library network: the ability to specify one or more specific libraries in the network so that those libraries will be listed first in searches. And since I seem to have developed a tell WorldCat what to do fairy, the next thing I'd like WorldCat to do is to implement the ability to add books to personal lists as soon as they're assigned an ISBN, even before they're added to WorldCat by a member library, thus slightly reducing the need for my non-existent books list (in the left pane).
But WorldCat has inadvertently violated a serious style rule in using the heart symbol (♥) to indicate a favored library. The heart symbol can legally be used in only two phrases: I♥NY, and I ♥ two cricket teams, Australia and whoever's playing England. October 14 Work like a Patron DayBrian Herzog, the Swiss Army Librarian, has declared tomorrow, October 15, to be Work like a Patron Day, when librarians use the same facilities and tools as patrons. Even the same entrance! It's a good idea, and several other bloggers have picked up on it. Jessamyn, the rarin' librarian, has pointed out the similarity to Ryan Deschamp's ideas for zero-tech library 2.0 no-brainers, an excellent post which emphasizes the idea that Library 2.0 is about openness and change, rather than just about particular web tools. And while I was looking at Ryan's post, I noticed that WordPress had automatically generated some "possibly related posts", one of which was Jono's These Things I Believe, a set of principles for user interface design which deserve to be nailed to the door of every library web site. To cap off this festival of patron love, the current issue of OCLC Abstracts mentions an article on "Perkonomics" from trendwatching.com. I don't think I'm trendy enough to precisely describe Perkonomics, but it definitely includes a focus on the patron. It's useful to see what organizations other than libraries have done to provide perks for patrons. I think the "killer app" for Library 2.0, the sine qua non of patron focus, the Tower of Pisa, is ease of use. Brian Herzog deserves a kudos, or ice cream, or chocolate, for springing loose the idea and turning it into blueprint for action. October 10 You may be Library 2.0 if ...You may be Library 2.0 if ... your New Books page is as nice as the Pentagon Library's.
It makes sense that the Pentagon has a library. I was just a little surprised that they had used Blogger for their New Books page, and slightly more surprised that rather than hosting it themselves they're letting Google host it for them on BlogSpot. Very cost-conscious.
Their New Books page could be improved by linking each new book to its entry in the catalog. I was going submit that as a suggestion to the Pentagon Library, because that's the kind of helpful guy I am, but they have the most terrifying comment page I've ever seen.
I'm not sure what lessons a public library could draw from this, other than to use all the tools available, even Blogger. October 08 "Waiter Rant"I suppose you could say that Waiter Rant is to the restaurant front of house as Anthony Bourdain's Kitchen Confidential is to the back of the house. In fact, Anthony Bourdain did, right on the front of the book. I can't, since I haven't read Kitchen Confidential.
The book is written by the same anonymous waiter that writes the blog, Waiter Rant. But the blog doesn't have the short entries that are typical of a blog. The entries are more like the chapters of a book, so it's not too surprising that the book appeared. Also, while this book is being marketed as a behind-the-scenes (or would that be in-front-of-the-scenes) expose of the life of a waiter, it's more introspective and autobiographical than just that.
The Waiter (the author's chosen pseudonym) only becomes a waiter by accident, starts a blog, becomes famous, and then lands a book deal by accident. The book ends up being about work and career, and fate I suppose, as much as it is about the goings on in a a restaurant. That doesn't make it worse, just different than you might expect from the way the book is marketed.
I don't think this is the ultimate book on working in the front of a restaurant. That will take someone with far more restaurant experience than The Waiter, and probably a better non-fiction writer. But I liked this book a lot, and recommend it to anyone who is interested in how restaurants work. October 07 WorldCat as your primary discovery applicationOver at Library Web Chic, Karen Coombs is wrangling a discussion on WorldCat search. I've taken the comment I made there and expanded it somewhat for this blog post.
I don't think I'd get any value from the ability to limit WorldCat searches to my local library network. I search for books on WorldCat in preference to using my local library network web site because (i) WorldCat has more books, so I have a greater chance of verifying that I have the search (e.g., author or title) correct; (ii) I can get from WorldCat to my library network web site in one click with no retyping, but not vice versa; (iii) Unlike the library network, WorldCat groups together different editions of the same work; (iv) A search on WorldCat gives me a list of books in cases where the library network gives me $@%&! authority records; (v) I can add the book to one of my WorldCat book lists (my library network web site doesn't have book lists); (vi) WorldCat has a better UI. In effect, I've broken search into two parts: getting validated bibliographic data from WorldCat, and then clicking over to the library network to check availability and so on. By restricting searches, I'd lose the ability to distinguish between invalid searches (e.g., typos) and books the library network doesn't have. As an example of (iii,) if I do an author search for "King, Stephen" in WorldCat I get a list of King's books. On my local library network web site, I get a six-line result giving me a choice among three different Stephen Kings and a pseudonym (Richard Bachman). I suppose it's a matter of preference, but I prefer WorldCat's response. The library network's approach is not necessarily worse, but it's undercut by the fact that the metadata in the catalog isn't clean, so I can't just click on a single line to get all of King's books. While sorting results by zip code is a little nutty, it's not altogether useless. If my library network doesn't have something but a geographically-close library does, I can get it via a third-level ILL, where I go to the library and fill out an actual paper form. It's true that I can't get availability data from WorldCat -- I need to go to the library network web site -- but because it's the web site for a network and not just the site for the local town library, the same problem is repeated one level down. I want to see both availability in my local branch and in the network as a whole (since I have one-click ILL for the network), but the network web site doesn't let me specify my local library. Also, the library network web site has a strange approach to displaying availability. When it shows a list of books as the result of a query, it indicates when a book has a hold on it, but it doesn't display either "out" or "available" for books that don't have holds. So ... it would make things a little easier if WorldCat let me specify my library affiliation, since WorldCat could then display my local library network first. But because my affiliation is a network and not an individual library I'm still too many clicks away from the information I want. Similarly, I'm a patron and not a library, so I don't have access to the WorldCat API, but even if I did it wouldn't be much use without an API to the library network. Since that's not going to happen, I'm hoping for a really nice screen scraper for Christmas. October 06 "Understanding FRBR: What it is and how it will affect our retrieval tools"I have an academic background, as well as some experience with international standards, so perhaps I'm more interested in FRBR than the average patron. FRBR stands for Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, and it's not something I'm going to try to explain here. I'll just make two points: it's a model of a library catalog, and it's an abstract model (e.g., as opposed to a data model, or an implementation design). I've just finished reading Understanding FRBR: What it is and how it will affect our retrieval tools, a collection of essays edited by Arlene G. Taylor. Click the link for a table of contents.
As other reviewers have pointed out, the book is divided into two parts: seven essays introducting FRBR and a history of cataloging lead up to it; and seven essays discussing particular aspects of FRBR or issues in how it could be applied to different kinds of cataloging. I found the first half of the book very helpful in introducing FRBR and placing it in the context of cataloging in general. It's possible that a professional librarian with some background in cataloging would get less out of the more general essays, and more out of those that introduce FRBR.
I'm not sure whether I got smarter the more I read, but I found the last essay the most interesting: "FRBR and Serials: One Serialist's Analysis" by Steven C. Shadle. Shadle is excellent in describing the limits of the current model in describing serials (i.e., journals, magazines, ...) and in illuminating some possible ways forward. The worked out examples are particularly good. Knowing clearly what you can't do is a lot better than ignorance or confusion. Finishing with this essay made me quite optimistic about the prospects for a complete and correct implementation of FRBR.
Sherry Vellucci ("FRBR and Music") was very helpful in describing the problems of applying FRBR to musical works. She brings up an interesting test case: the movie by Bergman of The Magic Flute by Mozart. Is Bergman or Mozart the author of the work? In other words, is the work a dessert topping or a floor wax, a movie that happens to be be about an opera, or a performance of an opera that happens to be on film? I'm not bothered by this, because I've never bought into the idea that a work (or the other entities in the model) has a single, simply defined author. Vellucci's essay also contains a good discussion of aggregrates, and brought to light an assumption I'd made that was flat wrong. I'd assumed that the smallest catalogable unit was the same as the smallest loanable unit, and that this would be represented in FRBR by an item. But the former is just plain wrong. If I want to hear Abba playing Dancing Queen, I can borrow any number of different CDs, but all of them have more than just that song. I suppose this might be translated into FRBR in a number of ways, but I clearly want the work Dancing Queen to be in the catalog, even though I can't borrow exactly that.
On the other hand, Alexander C. Thurman ("FRBR and Archival Materials: Collections and Context, not Works and Content") convinced me that nothing like the present FRBR will work for archival material. And I learnt a new word: fonds.
There was one thing about the book that struck m as odd: there was almost nothing on how catalog results would be presented in the user interace. In fact, there are no screen shots (or mockups) until Shadle's essay. The focus of the book is on the FRBR model and what that means for the contents of the catalog, but to consider only the model and contents is, in my view, to miss two important steps. I'd want to look at:
I think setting up the problem this way gets at the tension between the need for precision in the cataloging rules (e.g., deciding between Mozart and Bergman) and the need for completeness in the user interface (e.g., links to other films by Bergman, other music by Mozart, and other films of operas). This seems to have surfaced as discussions of super-works and links between works in FRBR, such as in this posting by Karen Coyle. More about this in a subsequent posting.
Partly, this is just a complaint that this book is not some other (and larger) book. I'd recommend this book for any audience, certainly the ones that I could think of: people working on FRBR, catalogers who want to learn about the train that is speeding down the tracks towards them, and interested patrons.
October 05 "Library 2.0: a guide to participatory library service"I've been trying to read as much as I can about Library 2.0, and I've just finished reading Library 2.0: a guide to participatory library service by Michael E. Casey and Laura C. Savastinuk. The web site for the book includes a table of contents as well as links to all the web sites mentioned in the book.
The audience for the book consists of library professionals and administrators who are thinking about introducing Library 2.0 services. Given that this is a book for librarians and I'm a patron, there's a lot of good material in this book. There's an excellent section on surveys, including an important reminder to include non-users. The book also includes many references to useful books, articles and web sites.
But there is one thing in the book that drove me crazy. This might be some sort of dog-whistle code phrase understood only by librarians, but the book repeatedly warns against "change for the sake of change" (e.g., p12, p108). I don't get it. First, where ARE all these libraries veering out of control in their headlong rush into the twenty-first century? All I see is a few libraries trying a few different things in what appears to be an attempt to improve services to their patrons. Second, what exactly is wrong with change for the sake of change? It sounds a lot like trial and error! Or the scientific method. Change is an experiment that gives you information about whether to speed up or change direction. I understand that you'll feel silly if you do something that probably won't work and it doesn't work, but if something is easy to do and easy to reverse, why not? And how do you know it won't work? Finding out what patrons want is an important part of Library 2.0, and trying new stuff is a good way to do that.
I've observed (or perhaps imagined) a disconnect in discussions about Web 2.0 and library web sites: the catalog isn't included. It makes perfect sense for librarians to think about how to include interactive Web 2.0 features and applications in the library web site, but Library 2.0 has to be more than that. Library 2.0 should include improvements to whatever a patron (or for that matter, a librarian) touches, as well as the underlying machinery.
Library 2.0 = Catalog 2.0 + OPAC 2.0 + Web 2.0 + UI 2.0. October 02 Library Services for SeniorsHey! It's my birthday! I'm turning 56, so allow me to feel insulted by this conference presentation about library services for seniors.
THIS senior wants Library 2.0, not Wii gaming. If I see one more article about seniors gaming in the library, I think I'll scream.
As my eyesight gets worse, I want a user interface that's clean and efficient.
As my fine-motor skills deteriorate, I want an interface that I can navigate with the minimum of mouse clicks. When the library doesn't have a book, I want one-click access to inter-library loan.
As my typing gets worse, I don't want to have to retype titles and authors. In fact, I don't want to have to type them the first time -- I want applications to auto-complete.
Let me have the hardback OR the paperbook. Let me have FRBR.
As my memory goes, I want the library to keep track of books for me and let me know when they're available. I want the library to remember books for me even before they're in the catalog.
When I get tired and cranky, I want a discovery application that's helpful and accurate. I don't want to play guessing games with the catalog. I want metadata that's more reliable than dial tone.
I want to be able to personalize my library account, because my quirks are getting quirkier.
I want library applications that are tolerant of errors, because I intend to keep making them for several more decades.
October 01 Feed me (new books)!The Shifted Librarian pointed me towards this page showing an embedded RSS feed of new books on knitting from the Ann Arbor District Library.
First, before I start criticizing this feature, I want to make clear that it's really neat, and I completely support the idea of libraries trying things out before they're fully baked. And it's easy to use. You just click on "New Items" in the navigation pane to the left, do a search for the subject you're interested in, and click on the RSS icon.
My general problem with this sort of service is that it isn't limited to books that are available. The worst offender, in my mind, are the "Most Popular Books" lists that some OPACs provide. This is the opposite of a list of available books, since these are the books with the most holds. Arguably, someone interested in knitting wants to see books as soon as they are entered into the catalog, whether or not they're available, so this may be personal preference as much as anything.
Interestingly, when you do an ordinary search in the AADL catalog, you can restrict the search to available items. It's not obvious how to do the same thing for new items. After all, any item is available the moment it is added to the catalog, since users haven't had time to reserve it. That's why the feature I really want is book lists that will notify me (by RSS or email) when an item on the list becomes available. Any item on the new book list that I wanted, I could add to a book list and be kept up-to-date on availability that way.
What's wrong with just putting a hold on any book I want? Well, a hold is more or less a commitment to borrow the item. I can't read more than four or five books at once, so I need some way to keep books in a queue.
There are a couple more problems with the AADL new items search and resulting RSS feed. The search is based on items' subject fields, and oddly, the search seems to be intermittently case sensitive. 'Knitting' and 'knitting' seem to return the same results, but 'fantasy' returns nothing, although 'Fantasy' does. Or I'm doing something wrong?
A more critical problem is that some books don't have subject fields at all. Looking at Elizabeth Bear's novels, Blood and Iron is classified as Fantasy Fiction, but Carnival has no subject data at all. The catalog does have some books classified as Science Fiction, just not any by Bear.
You can't sit new services on the same old catalog data. You can't claim a privileged status for metadata unless it really is better than full-text search or patron-provided tags. Web 2.0 services require Catalog 2.0.
How clean (and complete!) is your data? |
|
|
