It looks to me as if the nextgen catalogs are better for those who already had a basic understanding of library catalogs, but not for those who currently find most of their information with Google. During the testing, users were generally happy with the results when they searched for a broad term, but they were not happy with results for more specific searches because often they had to further limit to find what they wanted in the first screen of results. Nextgen catalogs do not currently have a search algorithm that is robust enough to pull up perfect results every time. This shows that commercial search engines are more advanced than library search engines. It also probably means there are problems with the back-end data. Much more research will have to be done to improve searching, and I am not sure libraries have the resources available to complete such research. Additionally, such research could potentially revolutionize libraries, searching, and metadata in the future, and I am not sure the profession is ready for another momentous shift in our culture.
The nextgen catalog movement is another aspect of how libraries are changing in the digital era. Online catalogs were slow to change because of their complex nature, but now that changes are being made that are perceived as useful to patrons, they should only continue to improve. I feel that the current nextgen systems are only the beginning and they will lead to larger changes on the horizon, such as OCLC’s recent announcement that WorldCatLocal will be the cornerstone of a new integrated library system and the eXtensible Catalog Project’s goal of uniting library digital resources under one interface and integrated into existing information delivery mechanisms.
Correspondence concerning this column should be addressed to M. Kathleen Kern, Associate Reference Librarian and Associate Professor of Library Administration, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 300 Library, 1408 West Gregory Drive, Urbana, IL 61801; e-mail: katkern@illinois.edu.
Jenny Emanuel is Digital Services Librarian in Reference, Research, and Government Information Services, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Libraries and 2.0: The Twitter-Facebook Showdown
Twitter: Last week I found out via a Twitter announcement (a tweet) that a local restaurant had halibut as the nightly special. It got me into a restaurant that I had not been into for awhile. The 140 character messages via Twitter are a great way to reach a network of people that have chosen to follow a person, business, or library. Announcements about events are an obvious application. New books, resources related to current events, and even community news are a few other things that libraries are tweeting about. A Twitter feed can be directed to post to a blog, webpage, or Facebook so that even people (such as myself ) who do not have Twitter accounts can view a library’s tweets.
Facebook: Good for keeping track of people you know, playing games, and taking quizzes on your personality as defined by the type of underwear you sport. Some people (myself included) visit Facebook daily. Some visit obsessively. But what they are doing there doesn’t seem to mesh well with the ways libraries have tried to use it. There are Facebook apps for searching library catalogs and for contacting your librarian, but Facebook is about fun and connections, not about research. The best match seems to be using Facebook in the same way as Twitter: to announce library events, new books, and community news through status updates.
Showdown winner: Twitter. But don’t abandon Facebook—send your Twitter feed to post to your Facebook status update.
Sources for Nextgen Catalogs
Vendor Products
Aquabrowser, Serials Solutions
Encore, Innovative Interfaces Inc.
Enterprise, SirsiDynix
Primo, Ex Libris
Visualizer, VTLS
Open-Source Products
[...] Next Generation Catalogs: What Do They Do and Why Should We Care? (RUSQ, vol. 49, n° 2, jan. 2010) [...]
[...] Next Generation Catalogs: What Do They Do and Why Should We Care? (RUSQ, vol. 49, n° 2, jan. 2010) [...]
While I don’t disagree with what you’ve written, I don’t think you get to the real problem. Catalog interfaces, whether nextgen or not, and cataloging “rules” haven’t kept up with the mediums, formats and digital access that we’re providing.
Creating a catalog record that incorporate a print holding along with digital access via a JSTOR or a Lexis “database” is awkward and not very informative. We manage to step on both our feet at once; not providing cogent access to important materials and not even being able to present what it is we do have (and spend substantial funds on.)
The nextgen catalog faces are just that, cosmetic. They don’t address or answer the real need which is to present an entry that informs the user what it is we have, how we have it, and “go here” if it’s digital.