This is pretty much where I can see us going. At the moment it's easy for us
to have our OPAC terminals dedicated solely to that task because they're
dumb terminals. They've got a very limited working life left to them and our
next generation of OPAC terminals (which I'm currently trying not to worry
about as I've got a few months' grace on that project and huge over-runs on
most everything else I'm supposed to be juggling!) will need to be PCs or
thin clients. In that case, there will be pressure to have additional
functions on there for the same reasons outlined by Margaret. The model I
have in mind is that many of the OPAC-equivalents would probably end up
being "OPAC + a limited amount of other stuff", with some sort of short-stay
session management, and the PN terminals would be "Internet + email + office
applications + OPAC", the latter being predicated on our getting the
catalogue on the web (I'll probably die of apoplexy in the process but by
criminey I'll get that catalogue on the web eventually).
Personally, and I apologise in advance for the gross generalisation involved
here, I think the public library community has a pretty stupid attitude
towards library catalogues. Aside from the very basic management need to
know what you've got, where it is and what's happening to it, the potential
usefulness of the catalogue as a stock promotional tool is too often
overlooked. The OPAC is our Argos catalogue.
As for the position of cataloguers (and I write as a non-librarian), I
understand that some library courses are downgrading cataloguing on the
grounds that most libraries will be buying in MARC records. Aside from the
questions: "if there ain't any cataloguers who'll be creating the MARC
records?" and "if there ain't any cataloguers, where will the metadata come
from for electronic information resources?", there is a pretty fundamental
question about the role of the "traditional" local library catalogue. Public
libraries are, essentially, retail operations (the only difference being
we'd quite like the stock back, please) and have the same marketing needs as
retail operations. I cannot for the life of me imagine Argos or Amazon, for
example, out-sourcing the description of their stock and then publishing it
without editorial review, and yet this is precisely what happens when
libraries buy in MARC records and just take what they're given and make it
available on a PAC.
IMHO.
Steven Heywood
Systems Manager
Rochdale Library Service
Wheatsheaf Library
Baillie Street
Rochdale OL16 1JZ
Tel: 01706 864967
Fax: 01706 864992
The story of the Hen-pecked Club
http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/living/libraries.asp?url=DPhenpecked
<http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/living/libraries.asp?url=DPhenpecked>
-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Snook [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 14 January 2004 10:01
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: FW: Is this the end for OPACs?
We have dedicated OPACs in all our libraries - and for a short time when
they weren't working due to a technical problem we did receive complaints
from the public. However in the very small libraries the OPACs do often lie
unused alongside over-subscribed PN computers so we are now considering
allowing dual use of the OPAC computers - the public will be able to use
them for 15 minutes to send emails etc. but they won't be able to book them
in advance. This means that anyone coming to use the OPAC or with a stock
query can either get the staff to do if for them or wait a maximum of 15
minutes to get access to the OPAC.
Margaret Snook
Greenwich Council
"Hall, Chris" wrote:
May I take the liberty of forwarding this on to lis-pub-libs? Not sure how
many public librarians get to see lis-link, but apologies if I have created
a deluge of duplicate postings! I would certainly be interested to see the
responses.
Chris Hall
Bibliographical Services Librarian
Corporation of London Libraries
Email:[log in to unmask]
Tel: 020 7332 1075
Textphone: 020 7332 3803
-----Original Message-----
From: Aidan Turner-bishop [ mailto:[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> ]
Sent: 13 January 2004 18:02
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Is this the end for OPACs?
My local public library service has made a policy decision to replace
OPACs in its libraries with People's Network PCs. This means that there
are no more dedicated OPAC library catalogues in Lancashire Libraries.
If you want to to find out where a book is you have either to book a PC
- busily used by emailers and web surfers - or queue up and ask busy
library staff to tell you where you can find the book. I have been told
by the Assistant County Library Manager Resources that the decision was
taken because of "An awareness that fewer than one person in a hundred
coming into a public library would normally consult the catalogue on a
regular basis".
Now, am I just a fuddy duddy or isn't this policy just so patronising
and unhelpful, especially for local history researchers, students,
business users and many others who don't wish to be treated like
children? Is this an effective way to maximise use of the thousands of
pounds-worth of unused assets (old books) kept in reserve stocks in
public libraries? Is this Best Value? Does this improve access?
Is this excuse used elsewhere to withdraw OPACs from public use? Is
Lancashire bracingly avant-guard or has this been done elsewhere? Are
catalogues the new steam mangles? Will cataloguers soon only be seen in
folk museums, alongside cloggers and coal miners? Are they just wasting
their time? What do you think please?
Aidan Turner-Bishop
Preston, Lancashire
(and LCC council tax payer too)
THIS E-MAIL AND ANY ATTACHED FILES ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE LEGALLY
PRIVILEGED.
If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, copying,
distribution
or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you
have received this transmission in error please notify the sender
immediately and
then delete this e-mail.
Opinions, advice or facts included in this message are given without any
warranties
or intention to enter into a contractual relationship with the Corporation
of London
unless specifically indicated otherwise by agreement, letter or facsimile
signed by
an authorised signatory of the Corporation.
Any part of this e-mail which is purely personal in nature is not authorised
by the
Corporation of London.
All e-mail through the Corporation's gateway is potentially the subject of
monitoring.
All liability for errors and viruses is excluded.
Website: http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk <http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk>
This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and may also be legally
privileged. They are intended solely for the intended addressee. If you are
not the addressee please e-mail it back to the sender and then immediately,
permanently delete it. Do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in
reliance on it. This e-mail may be monitored by Rochdale Council in accordance
with current regulations.
This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been swept for the
presence of computer viruses currently known to the Council. However, the
recipient is responsible for virus-checking before opening this message and
any attachment.
Unless otherwise stated, any views expressed in this message
are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views
of Rochdale Council.
|