Categories
Info Tech

Tag: Using it in Library Catalogs

Folksonomies and tagging is a relatively new occurrence in library catalogs. Although the integration of tagging features seems to have caught on quite well within public and community libraries, the implementation of tagging software in academic and special library collections seems to be moving at a bit of a slower rate.

At any rate, let’s take a look at some library catalogs that are implementing folksonomies. I’ll be comparing a university/college union catalog, a city public library catalog, both of which are using tags from LibraryThing, and a law school library catalog that is implementing the rather popular Encore library search tool.

TOPCAT is a union catalog of the SWITCH Library Consortium of universities and colleges in Wisconsin. According to TOPCAT Features, the “tags are from LibraryThing, a book cataloging site that features a database of over 22 million titles. Public members of LibraryThing contribute tags describing the contents of each item. Tags are viewable within the full record of many TOPCAT titles although they are not in all records.” Additionally, according to the What are Tags? page the university library users cannot add their own tags, and tags may be “irrelevant or not quite ‘right’.” Once a user clicks on a tag to look for related resources, a Tag Browser appears.

Here is an example of a library catalog description with “Tags” and LibraryThing’s “Similar Titles” feature:

Mary Daly's Beyond God the Father
Mary Daly's Beyond God the Father
Mary Daly: Similar Titles and Tags
Mary Daly: Similar Titles and Tags

Having read Daly’s work, and having completed a minor in Gender and Women’s Studies, I find several things to be interesting about the tags for this catalog entry. One is the absence of the term “radical feminism” which we can see referenced in the title of one of her other works. The other is that once I start to explore the Tag Browser, I find only related works on “feminist theology” or “feminist theory” that take me to other related authors, but that do not privilege Mary Daly’s other works as relevant. The relationships between terms are associative rather leading me to greater degrees of specificity.

Of course, there isn’t anything necessarily wrong or bad about this, but if I wanted to be able to browse from the broader term of “feminist theory” or “feminism” to a specific kind of theory, such as “radical feminism,” these tag features do not allow me to do so. All that being said, as an exploration and discovery tool that brings together variously associative works, the tag feature works quite well.

The Danbury Public Library, is the city library of Danbury, Connecticut. The Danbury Public Library Catalog also integrates some LibraryThing’s features, mainly tags and a list of similar books without thumbnail icons. Here is another example of a catalog entry and tags:

Ursula K. Le Guin: The Birthday of the World and Other Stories
Ursula K. Le Guin: The Birthday of the World and Other Stories
Ursula K. Le Guin: Similar Books and Tags
Ursula K. Le Guin: Similar Books and Tags

The catalog description also features an excerpt of the works provided by Syndetic Solutions. In this case, it’s interesting to note that one of the tags includes the name of the author, and (possibly) where the work is published (i.e., USA). Also, we have terms with a much greater degree of specificity that are unique to Le Guin’s world building, namely “Ekumen” and “hainish.” As expected, broader terms like “speculative fiction” and “feminism” yield a larger variety of associative works.

The Mendik Library, the New York Law School’s library switched to Encore library discovery search a couple years ago, according to product website. Additionally, according to the product website, both library staff and users can add tags and includes specialized terms. One noticeable difference between the tag feature in Encore, as opposed to LibraryThing, is the presence of a Refine Searches tag cloud at the bottom of a retrieved search list and a Refine by Tag cloud to the immediate right of a retrieved search list. Here are examples with a search on “anarchism”:

New York Law Library: "Anarchism" search tag cloud
New York Law Library: "Anarchism" refine tag cloud
New York Law Library: "Anarchism" refine search tag cloud
New York Law Library: "Anarchism" related search tag cloud

The “Established Terms” to the left of the related searches tag cloud are terms “chosen by librarians to ensure consistency in organizing library materials.” In addition to librarian-recommended search terms, the associated “anarchism” tags offer a very rich variety of associated topics, people, events, times, historical movements, and places, offering greater degrees of specificity or generality of related terms. Looking at a specific catalog entry may reveal an absence of “Community Tags,” however, the option to Add a Tag is clearly available to patrons:

Emma Goldman: Community Tag option
Emma Goldman: Community Tag option

What’s particularly interesting about the use of tags in a special library like the Mendik Library, is that its overall usefulness seems unclear. Tag searches work quite well as a general discovery tool for those who are just beginning to familiarize themselves with the topic; however, the use of tags for highly specific and specialized research would also be useful. Additionally, the inability to add or modify tags within the systems that utilize LibraryThing, seems like a bit of a moot point.

As a public library patron, I would be much more inclined to use Encore’s tagging system for discovery, as well as utilize the option of being able to contribute my own personal tags to a work. From the perspective of an academic library patron, I would most likely view the integrated LibraryThing tags as a limited discovery tool that may become less useful once a greater familiarity with the subject and research topic is acquired. Additionally, I would view inability to add or modify links as pretty significant limitation to being able to leverage the power of tagging within a participatory academic and scholarly community. Overall, I would suggest that other libraries consider the usefulness of having tags as a discovery tool and a means of refining one’s search, and I would also suggest that other libraries do not integrate tags without the option of user participation. As others have explained, the greatest appeal of tagging, folksonomies, and social bookmarking is the ability leverage user participation and community knowledge.

Categories
Info Tech

Web 2.0 Technologies in California Public Libraries

The status of libraries in California has been pretty grim over the last decade. Budget cuts, the rising recession and unemployment rate have had a tremendous impact on state, county, and city libraries in California. A recent article in Education-Portal.com, “Libraries in Crisis: What Budget Cuts Mean for CA Libraries” by Meghan Driscoll summarizes that “Since the early 2000s, over 75% of funds for the programs listed above have been eliminated. This latest round of cuts will mean yet another loss of library staff, a potentially deep reduction in library hours and limited availability of books and other materials.” According to a Library Journal article by Michael Kelley the budget cuts will lead to a collapse of a 30-year-old resource-sharing network, such as interlibrary loan services. Whether or not such decisions constitute a “shock and awe” budgetary approach, the goal of which “is to inspire middle class voters to come out in June to vote for a revenue-raising ballot proposal,” as Driscoll states, is ultimately beside the point. What does matter is how California’s libraries will be able to maintain certain levels of services.

Some of you may recall an earlier 2004 California public library crisis, the closure of the Salinas public libraries. Here is an American Library article by Pamela A. Goodes and an ALA 2004 press release that presents a refresher. Lots of changes have happened to the Salinas Public Libraries since 2005. With the help from private contributions and the passage of a local tax measure, the library now features a Digital Arts Lab (as of 2007), a Bookmobile (as of 2009), as well as a new and improved web interface. Whether or not the state of California will rally to the aid of libraries, schools, and universities, is a discussion that is beyond the scope of this entry. However, as a former Californian, I find the issue of what sorts of services are available or provided through local libraries to be of particular interest.

Let’s take a comparative look at a few libraries that feature Web 2.0 services: the San Francisco Public Library, the San Jose Public Library, and  the Los Angeles Public Library. Here are some screen shots of their homepages:

 

San Francisco Public Library : Homepage
San Francisco Public Library : Homepage
The circles represent the dispersed access points for various Web 2.0 services: mobile services, social networking and microblogging services, and e-library services (which include podcasting, vodcasting, as well as eBooks, eAudiobooks, and eMusic).
Los Angeles Public Library : Homepage
Los Angeles Public Library : Homepage

Access points to mobile services and e-Media, such as LAPL podcasts and vodcasts. It’s interesting to note that social media applications are not accessible anywhere on the main page.

San Jose Public Library : Homepage
San Jose Public Library : Homepage

All Web 2.0 applications are accessible from the icons at the bottom of the page. Out of the three public libraries, this interface features the best and most straight forward access points.

Here is a comparative breakdown of the different services that each public library offers:

San Francisco Public Library Los Angeles Public Library San Jose Public Library
RSS feeds RSS feeds RSS feeds
IM service IM service IM service
Mobile interface Mobile search application Mobile search application
Podcasts Podcasts Podcasts
Vodcasts Vodcasts Vodcasts
Blogs Blogs
Facebook Facebook
Twitter Twitter
Delicious Flickr
LibraryThing
GoodReads

Couple of contrasting points worth mentioning. One point is the surprising lack of social media software utilized at the Los Angeles Public Library. Out of all Web 2.0 features offered, the mobile search application was the most prominent and easiest to find, with podcasts and vodcasts following second. RSS feeds could only be found after a thorough website search. The San Jose Public Library on the other hand had RSS feeds for practically everything, and nearly all Web 2.0 services are accessible from the Get Updates page. Additionally, between the three library sites, the San Francisco Public Library utilized more social bookmarking tools geared for reader advisory services. A last point of interest, is the technology service focus of the San Jose Public Library, exemplified by the device format listing on the FAQs About Digital Content page:

 

Device/Format Chart for Digital Content
Device/Format Chart for Digital Content

 

Let’s take a closer look at podcasts and vodcasts, since all three libraries utilizes these services. The SFPL offers very limited podcasting in comparison to the SJPL and the LAPL. SFPL podcasting spans from 2007-2009, featuring local readings, spoken word, discussions, and performances. SJPL podcasts span from 2010-2011 and are mainly composed of poetry readings and staff pick recommendations. The LAPL features three different podcast programs, Children’s podcasts from 2008-2009, interviews and talks on Richard Neutra the architect, and the ALOUD at Central Library speaker series. The ALOUD series has been a part of the LAPL since 1993 and features “leading figures in the worlds of literature, the arts and ideas. These dynamic programs are designed to contribute to an informed, engaged, and democratic community and to foster life-long learning in a welcoming environment. The great majority of ALOUD programs are presented free of charge to the people of Los Angeles” (from ALOUD at Fora.tv). Between the three libraries, the LAPL offers a strong variety of podcast topics, spanning over a 10+ year period. The utilization of vodcasts also offer an interesting comparison. The SFPL, again seems to offer surprisingly little in terms of diverse topics and readings. SJPL, on the other hand, has a wide variety of vodcasts centered on community events, story times, staff picks, library tours, and overall community participation all featured on the library’s blip.tv channel. Again, the LAPL’s vodcasting exclusively features ALOUD talks, lectures, and discussions.

The use of podcasting and vodcasting offers an interesting snapshot of how each library frames their services. The lack of user-centered social media services at the LAPL and the overall top-down podcast and vodcast programing, frames the LAPL as a kind of cultural mecca. The SJPL on the other hand, utilizes vodcasting as an archival and broadcasting tool for community events and participation, offering a very clear picture of the kind of communities these libraries serve. The SFPL seems to be situated somewhere in-between, offering some forms of top-down programming but with some awareness of the importance of having some user-centered services, albeit with inconsistent application. However, it is important to keep in mind that these differences may have more to do with funding and budgetary constraints, rather than mere variations in community or user orientation.

Between these three libraries, I would probably be more inclined to use the SJPL vodcasting services if I were a new local patron wanting to get a sense of my local community, and the LAPL podcasting and vodcasting for cultural enrichment. For SFPL, I might be inclined to utilize their social media applications for reader advisory purposes, but I would be less drawn to their limited podcast and vodcast programming. I do think that the SFPL and LAPL could learn from SJPL website interface, user-centered focus, and overall usability regarding Web 2.0 applications and I think that the SFPL would benefit from re-evaluating their social media strategies, goals and purposes in support of local communities, local writers and authors, or local issues within California generally.

…and on that note, I’d like to end with a reference to a SFPL video talk with Stacy Alderich, California’s State Librarian, and her discussion of the California budget crisis and where libraries are heading. What I find particularly interesting is her focus on technology trends rather than on the overall statewide trend of slashing funding for public services and the plateaued unemployment rate. Again, it does seem as though California has been facing larger structural issues that go beyond the question of “How can we offer the same level of services for less?”

OK, I’m off of my soap box.

 

Spam prevention powered by Akismet