This is fascinating after all this time


Yet when I look at the opac I have to use, I still don't know what
constitutes a keyword, or who decides, what constitutes an author, and
how the structure will be built, and what sorts of words will find what
in a title, never mind, for here I don't have it, but at ulrls I do,
what constitutes a subject, where does it come from, what is being
extracted simply from Library of Congress records, and who decides, and
when may I be able to click on classmark, but what do I have to do?


Teaching eleven year olds how to use a card catalogue was easy

If any lis-linkers are interested and want to pursue any of this, on
Wednesday, 24th June, 1pm, here at KU I'm doing my annual seminar, this
year, entitled, Virgil in the English Landscape Garden




-----Original Message-----
From: A general Library and Information Science list for news and
discussion. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of LIS-LINK
automatic digest system
Sent: 22 June 2009 00:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: LIS-LINK Digest - 20 Jun 2009 to 21 Jun 2009 (#2009-151)

There is 1 message totalling 78 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Evaluating online catalogue

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Sun, 21 Jun 2009 00:46:15 +0100
From:    Bruce Royan <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Evaluating online catalogue

Hi Liz

At the beginning of the 90s, it was fashionable to evaluate systems =
against
some "Heuristics of Usability". Here is the version I used to advocate =
back
then, as a starting point for the questions you might ask:
=B7        Simple natural dialogue
=B7        Minimal jargon
=B7        Minimal call on user's memory
=B7        Consistency
=B7        Feedback
	       where am I?
	       what can I do next?=20
=B7        Ease of exit=20
=B7        Shortcuts
=B7        Prevention of errors=20
=B7        Clear non-threatening error messages

Good luck!

Bruce

********************************************************
Professor Bruce Royan,                   Trustee,
CILIP=20
   (Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals)
41 Greenhill Gardens, Edinburgh, EH10 4BL, UK (44) 131 447 3151
********************************************************

-----Original Message-----
From: A general Library and Information Science list for news and
discussion. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Liz Johnson
Sent: 20 June 2009 10:44
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Evaluating online catalogue

Dear all

I work with a group of volunteers and one of them has spent a lot of =
time
setting up the online library catalogue as we couldn't afford to buy
anything.=A0 While the thing offends my professional sensibilities (!!)
=
I
thought it would be ok if it suited the people who are most likely to =
use
it.=A0 He has now gone a bit over the top with tags and so on which =
would be
fine but is now confusing those who use it.=A0 It needs simplifying, =
however I
don't want to barge in with my views and upset him, he's already =
threatened
to withdraw his services because someone else started meddling with =
it.=A0
We've asked for general feedback but not much was forthcoming and many
customers blame themselves for not being web-savvy so don't criticise =
the
actual catalogue. So I would like to put together a simple checklist for
users to feed back with some more direct questions.

Some questions are obvious - ('did you find what you were looking for?'
=
for
example) - but I wonder if anyone else has done this or knows of any
existing very simple checklist to get customer feedback.

Many thanks

Liz Johnson

------------------------------

End of LIS-LINK Digest - 20 Jun 2009 to 21 Jun 2009 (#2009-151)
***************************************************************

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.