James Weinheimer wrote:
"5) arranging (as I read it: Access points)
In my opinion, this is the real task of metadata: to assign access
points that are consistently retrievable. In spite of some protests to
the contrary, people love to browse; in fact, when you get a result of
850 in a search result, how can you do much of anything else? Since you
are browsing anyway, it would be nice to have a meaningful browse
instead of a mindless one based on the number of times a word is used,
or the number of links there are to the page, etc."
As a public librarian, I think there's a lot of people who don't like to
browse. Most people who have a particular need want a quick answer - and
they get frustrated when they don't get it.
That's where I think metadata will be a godsend to librarians. We need
tools to find information quickly, and we need tools for organising our
electronic resources, because the majority of the public do not have the
skills or the desire to do it for themselves. The public employ
accountants, not because the public aren't capable of handling money, but
because accountants take the burden of money-handling off their
shoulders. Same goes for librarians. Some people will want to handle
their money and their information themselves, but most will want to
employ accountants and librarians. I find it hard to believe this will
change, no matter how user-friendly the Internet becomes.
Consequently we need general search engines, where those who are inclined
can browse away, but we also need search engines which concentrate on
particular subjects, designed for people with particular needs or
interests, which will bring back very specific results.
That's my obsession for the day.
Helen Leech
CIRCE Project
http://www.gloscc.gov.uk/circe/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|