I found this paper very helpful in explaining what Library 2.0 can do for libraries, and how and why it could improve our service.
My interest is in the ILS, and after experience with three different companies and their patchy functionality, I really like the idea of connecting different components designed to deal with a "specific area of complexity" (think acquisitions and serials control) that can be "made available to any other component through an Application Programming Interface". With this we could put together an ILS that would really work for us! (Does anyone have any idea how soon this could happen?)
I do have to wonder about their recommendation that there be a single library catalog based on Amazon's pattern, though. When I'm in Amazon unless I search on something very specific, I get page after page of hits, and I don't have the time or patience to look at all of them. John once told me that a study he saw said that people were willing to look at only 40 things, and Martha recently said that 23% of our circulation comes from the new title shelves, which tells me that people want fewer things to look at, not more.
5 comments:
I've heard the same argument with the results from Google. It returns such a shear quantity of stuff, that it's hard to find what you're actually looking for. "Results 1 - 10 of about 435,000,000 for 'library'" Ouch!
Great point. When I am in the grocery store choosing cough syrup, I want fewer choices. When I'm in the library choosing books, the more the merrier. However, judging from the speaker's comments on LTD, not to mention the number of people who like to browse the shelving carts, I am the exception, not the norm.
Regarding the "looking at less" statement - I know that's how I feel. I will very seldom take the time to wade through more than one page worth of hits. But I find my 20-something sons seem to thrive on plenty of flash and visual chaos - guy thing? young thing? I would be interesting to know...
I think we want variety, but not overwhelming variety. Variety with subcategories maybe.
Post a Comment