Comments on: Dumb down the catalog? Yes, let’s! http://meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/2005/05/13/dumb-down-the-catalog-yes-lets/ A librarian, writer and educator reflecting on the profession and the tools we use to serve our patrons Mon, 06 Feb 2012 09:11:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: Malins WP-blogg » Blog Archive » links for 2006-02-20 http://meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/2005/05/13/dumb-down-the-catalog-yes-lets/comment-page-1/#comment-39356 Malins WP-blogg » Blog Archive » links for 2006-02-20 Mon, 20 Feb 2006 22:20:37 +0000 /?p=220#comment-39356 [...] Dumb down the catalog? Yes, let’s! (tags: library usability opac) [...] [...] Dumb down the catalog? Yes, let’s! (tags: library usability opac) [...]

]]> By: Dr. Mohamed Taher http://meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/2005/05/13/dumb-down-the-catalog-yes-lets/comment-page-1/#comment-39118 Dr. Mohamed Taher Tue, 14 Feb 2006 06:01:35 +0000 /?p=220#comment-39118 Hi Within one day, this is the second time I came across your great blog. First I came looking for Library 2.0; and this time looking for middleware. Any ways, I can't stop mysefl from my 2 cents. First it is about OPAC and making our catalogs more accessible, compatible and communicable. I have been addomg contnet on how libraries can improve their catalogs to find every book its readers: See <a href="http://www.geocities.com/drmtaher/AlternativeCataloging.htm" rel="nofollow">Innovative Practices to Connect Every Book, Its Reader</a> and <a href="http://www.geocities.com/drmtaher/data_mining_in_libraries.htm" rel="nofollow">Mining The Library Catalog. Read more, in above page, about the UBCs Visual catalog and data mining in libraries. Second, about libraries, librarians, and information as </a><a href="http://www.geocities.com/researchtriangle/thinktank/8596/infostructure.htm" rel="nofollow">infostructure</a> and middleware. Would be happy if you guys visit my above links and give your comments. Best wishes from a <a href="http://akbani.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">information visualization blogger and </a><a href="http://www.library.omc.ca/" rel="nofollow">Multifaith Librarian</a>, Dr. Mohamed Taher Hi
Within one day, this is the second time I came across your great blog.
First I came looking for Library 2.0; and this time looking for middleware.
Any ways, I can’t stop mysefl from my 2 cents.
First it is about OPAC and making our catalogs more accessible, compatible and communicable. I have been addomg contnet on how libraries can improve their catalogs to find every book its readers: See Innovative Practices to Connect Every Book, Its Reader and Mining The Library Catalog.
Read more, in above page, about the UBCs Visual catalog and data mining in libraries.
Second, about libraries, librarians, and information as infostructure and middleware.
Would be happy if you guys visit my above links and give your comments.
Best wishes from a information visualization blogger and Multifaith Librarian, Dr. Mohamed Taher

]]> By: The History Librarian » Thoughts on “Library 2.0″ http://meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/2005/05/13/dumb-down-the-catalog-yes-lets/comment-page-1/#comment-36258 The History Librarian » Thoughts on “Library 2.0″ Fri, 06 Jan 2006 19:54:02 +0000 /?p=220#comment-36258 [...] I agree completely with the sentiment, but think that the terminology is pointless. “Library 2.0″ as a term seems to represent a feeling that technology will save libraries from irrelevance, that without technology libraries are nothing (the philosophy behind information commons in some ways). Technology is a tool - wavecrests on the ocean, but not the ocean itself; I fear that adhering to “Library 2.0″ conceptually, we will come to mistake the waves for the ocean, as it were. Technology can never replace service, but it can enhance it. That’s why it seems to me that we should be focusing on the service philosophy that underpins what we want to indicate when we say “Library 2.0″ - that librarians and libraries need to be more open and responsive to their respective communities rather than blithely running along inside of some insular feedback loop. If I were to talk more broadly about librarianship today (and I may at some point), I wouldn’t focus on the tech stuff/social software, but on the groundswell of discussions focusing on the user (e.g., the user is not stupid if they can’t use our catalogs or prefer to search using a Google interface - see, for example, Meredith’s post on “dumbing down the catalog“). By taking a bigger-picture approach (stepping back from the techne and looking at the underlying intention), we create a more inclusive philosophy of librarianship, one that can accomodate libraries running library 1.0 (or 0.0!) all the way to library 2.0.1 and beyond. [...] [...] I agree completely with the sentiment, but think that the terminology is pointless. “Library 2.0″ as a term seems to represent a feeling that technology will save libraries from irrelevance, that without technology libraries are nothing (the philosophy behind information commons in some ways). Technology is a tool – wavecrests on the ocean, but not the ocean itself; I fear that adhering to “Library 2.0″ conceptually, we will come to mistake the waves for the ocean, as it were. Technology can never replace service, but it can enhance it. That’s why it seems to me that we should be focusing on the service philosophy that underpins what we want to indicate when we say “Library 2.0″ – that librarians and libraries need to be more open and responsive to their respective communities rather than blithely running along inside of some insular feedback loop. If I were to talk more broadly about librarianship today (and I may at some point), I wouldn’t focus on the tech stuff/social software, but on the groundswell of discussions focusing on the user (e.g., the user is not stupid if they can’t use our catalogs or prefer to search using a Google interface – see, for example, Meredith’s post on “dumbing down the catalog“). By taking a bigger-picture approach (stepping back from the techne and looking at the underlying intention), we create a more inclusive philosophy of librarianship, one that can accomodate libraries running library 1.0 (or 0.0!) all the way to library 2.0.1 and beyond. [...]

]]> By: See Also http://meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/2005/05/13/dumb-down-the-catalog-yes-lets/comment-page-1/#comment-34498 See Also Wed, 21 Dec 2005 05:59:04 +0000 /?p=220#comment-34498 <strong>2005 Non-Required Reading</strong> I love the year-end lists. (If you love year-end lists, you surely know of the exhaustive annual Fimoculous meta-list). I have put together a little year-end non-required reading list of the library-related stuff I have read this year that has... 2005 Non-Required Reading

I love the year-end lists. (If you love year-end lists, you surely know of the exhaustive annual Fimoculous meta-list). I have put together a little year-end non-required reading list of the library-related stuff I have read this year that has…

]]> By: Dorothea Salo http://meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/2005/05/13/dumb-down-the-catalog-yes-lets/comment-page-1/#comment-6489 Dorothea Salo Sat, 14 May 2005 02:30:33 +0000 /?p=220#comment-6489 While I completely agree with you on the need for emphasis on usability (you knew I would, right?), I do think there's something to be said for acquiring the necessary expertise ourselves. I do like to see experts working on our stuff, but honestly, if we took the trouble to get a clue (much of this stuff isn't rocket science), we wouldn't be in such sad straits as we are. While I completely agree with you on the need for emphasis on usability (you knew I would, right?), I do think there’s something to be said for acquiring the necessary expertise ourselves. I do like to see experts working on our stuff, but honestly, if we took the trouble to get a clue (much of this stuff isn’t rocket science), we wouldn’t be in such sad straits as we are.

]]>