Sunday, November 29, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
Muddiest Point (11/16/09)
Before we leave the class, I would like some information about some skills we should develop if we are interested in working with digital libraries once we finish this program. For example, what programming languages might we learn? Are there currently any DL projects in the area that we can volunteer to help with? What other skills might be useful to us as we enter the field?
I am particularly interested in any oppotunities there may be for someone in the medical librarianship track.
I am particularly interested in any oppotunities there may be for someone in the medical librarianship track.
Reading Notes: Social Issues in Digital Libraries
This week's readings were reflective on the past and future of digital libraries.
In Social Aspects of the Digital Library (UCLA-NSF Social Aspects of Digital Libraries Workshop
Research issues as
human-centered (human computer interactions, how humans interact with information)
artifact-centered (focused on the artifacts of human communication)
systems-centered (focus on the systems that support the products of the first two research areas)
Issues Raised:
lack of consensus on terminology
involving users in the development process / systematically determining user needs
development of an information life cycle to represent the flow of information
The infinite library: does Google's plan to digitize millions of print books spell the death of libraries--or their rebirth?
Discusses the role of libraries in the Google books projects. Some larger libraries are participating fully (Harvard) while others (Bodleian) only allow Google access to items already in the public domain.
Digitalization is a long and complicated process and will take a vast number of resources to digitize the holdings of the libraries that have opened their stacks.
Raises the issue of what roles libraries will play if/when a vast number of books become searchable online. Only snippets of the books will be available so libraries will still function to provide free full access to books. Some libraries vow to allow users access even if Google decides to charge. Discusses the reluctance of the library community to embrace tools provided by the internet.
A Viewpoint Analysis of the Digital Library
Discussing the future of DL development.
Organizational Develpment - Identifies how different major library systems can be integrated (i.e. with the Library of Congress as the center of the library world).
Technical Development - discusses interoperability research and technical standards that allow collaboration between libraries
User Development - discusses the user as the center of the library. Discusses the ideal of one seamless interface for multiple library systems, identifies a incoherence (as a result of interoperable systems) behind the current interfaces of federated systems.
Research Agenda:
Promotes the idea of evaluation as a core area of future research. Underscores the ideas of user-friendly seamless systems. Suggests the maturation of internet as a model for the possible progression of digital library development.
References:
Social Aspects of Digital Libraries. The final report of UCLA-NSF Social Aspects of Digital Libraries Workshop. http://is.gseis.ucla.edu/research/dig_libraries/index.html
The Infinite Library, Wade Roush, Technology Review, 2005. http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/05/issue/feature_library.asp
William Y. Arms, “A Viewpoint Analysis of the Digital Library”, D-Lib Magazine, Volume 11 Number 7/8, July/August 2005. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july05/arms/07arms.html
Questions/Comments:
I would like to see some examples of digital collections that embody the most current research in the field.
In Social Aspects of the Digital Library (UCLA-NSF Social Aspects of Digital Libraries Workshop
Research issues as
human-centered (human computer interactions, how humans interact with information)
artifact-centered (focused on the artifacts of human communication)
systems-centered (focus on the systems that support the products of the first two research areas)
Issues Raised:
lack of consensus on terminology
involving users in the development process / systematically determining user needs
development of an information life cycle to represent the flow of information
The infinite library: does Google's plan to digitize millions of print books spell the death of libraries--or their rebirth?
Discusses the role of libraries in the Google books projects. Some larger libraries are participating fully (Harvard) while others (Bodleian) only allow Google access to items already in the public domain.
Digitalization is a long and complicated process and will take a vast number of resources to digitize the holdings of the libraries that have opened their stacks.
Raises the issue of what roles libraries will play if/when a vast number of books become searchable online. Only snippets of the books will be available so libraries will still function to provide free full access to books. Some libraries vow to allow users access even if Google decides to charge. Discusses the reluctance of the library community to embrace tools provided by the internet.
A Viewpoint Analysis of the Digital Library
Discussing the future of DL development.
Organizational Develpment - Identifies how different major library systems can be integrated (i.e. with the Library of Congress as the center of the library world).
Technical Development - discusses interoperability research and technical standards that allow collaboration between libraries
User Development - discusses the user as the center of the library. Discusses the ideal of one seamless interface for multiple library systems, identifies a incoherence (as a result of interoperable systems) behind the current interfaces of federated systems.
Research Agenda:
Promotes the idea of evaluation as a core area of future research. Underscores the ideas of user-friendly seamless systems. Suggests the maturation of internet as a model for the possible progression of digital library development.
References:
Social Aspects of Digital Libraries. The final report of UCLA-NSF Social Aspects of Digital Libraries Workshop. http://is.gseis.ucla.edu/research/dig_libraries/index.html
The Infinite Library, Wade Roush, Technology Review, 2005. http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/05/issue/feature_library.asp
William Y. Arms, “A Viewpoint Analysis of the Digital Library”, D-Lib Magazine, Volume 11 Number 7/8, July/August 2005. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july05/arms/07arms.html
Questions/Comments:
I would like to see some examples of digital collections that embody the most current research in the field.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Reading Notes: Interaction and Evaluation
Evaluation involves considering the user when designing the interface. Without this consideration, the user may dismiss a powerful and useful system as too complex, irrelevant, or inconvenient. One such example of this is in medical informatics where systems are often ignored by practitioners who find them unmatched with their needs.
There is not a lot of interest in funding this field of study, although its principles and aims are structured and well-defined and it has applications in many types of systems: digital libraries, games, websites, internet applications, critical systems, and other programs in industrial, commercial systems, and personal systems.
In terms of Digital Libraries...
Usability goals include:
-the ability of users to access, control, and maintain the system
-with minimal personnel and training
-with reliable and functional interaction between hardware and software
-meeting standards for interoperability
-work is completed on time and according to budget
User Consideration:
-physical comfort, accessibility
-possible barriers to access (time, budget, environment, etc.)
-age
-ability
-expectations
-context of use
-personality type
-cultural and linguistic factors, etc.
Criteria for evaluating usability should include (Saracevic):
content
process
format
overall system (maintenence, scalability, interoperability, sharability, costs)
Studies have also considered usage patterns, use of materials, usage statistics, types of users, time factors, and intent (Saracevic)
According to Saracevic, ongoing study should also include how digital libraries ultimately affect the environment in which they are used.
Rob Kling and Margaret Elliott "Digital Library Design for Usability" http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/DL94/paper/kling.html
Tefko Saracevic, “Evaluation of digital libraries: An overview” http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~tefko/DL_evaluation_Delos.pdf.
Ben Sheiderman, Catherine Plaisant, "Designing the user interfaces" 4ed. chapter 1. A good introduction about usability and its application in human computer interaction hci4ed-ch1.pdf
READING QUESTIONS:
- Can you show us some digital libraries that are unusual in content, context, or user group?
- Can you show us some digital libraries with advanced features, not normally utilized by the general population?
-Are there examples of DLs pertinent to medical informatics? Can you show us examples?
-What sort of features are available but aren't used due to incompatibility with users and/or the environment of their use?
-What types of jobs are available for people who study HCI?
There is not a lot of interest in funding this field of study, although its principles and aims are structured and well-defined and it has applications in many types of systems: digital libraries, games, websites, internet applications, critical systems, and other programs in industrial, commercial systems, and personal systems.
In terms of Digital Libraries...
Usability goals include:
-the ability of users to access, control, and maintain the system
-with minimal personnel and training
-with reliable and functional interaction between hardware and software
-meeting standards for interoperability
-work is completed on time and according to budget
User Consideration:
-physical comfort, accessibility
-possible barriers to access (time, budget, environment, etc.)
-age
-ability
-expectations
-context of use
-personality type
-cultural and linguistic factors, etc.
Criteria for evaluating usability should include (Saracevic):
content
process
format
overall system (maintenence, scalability, interoperability, sharability, costs)
Studies have also considered usage patterns, use of materials, usage statistics, types of users, time factors, and intent (Saracevic)
According to Saracevic, ongoing study should also include how digital libraries ultimately affect the environment in which they are used.
READING QUESTIONS:
- Can you show us some digital libraries that are unusual in content, context, or user group?
- Can you show us some digital libraries with advanced features, not normally utilized by the general population?
-Are there examples of DLs pertinent to medical informatics? Can you show us examples?
-What sort of features are available but aren't used due to incompatibility with users and/or the environment of their use?
-What types of jobs are available for people who study HCI?
Friday, October 23, 2009
Muddest Point (10/16)
This is not exactly a request for clarification but positive feedback instead. I enjoyed the XML Hand on Points and assignment. I appreciated the opportunities to practice writing XML and DTDs. I thought they were very useful and practical activities. I look forward to completing more of these practical HOPs and skill development exercises in the future.
Reading Notes: Access in Digital Libraries II
The information community appears divided on the utility of federated searching. Federated searching appeals to the typical user because it is simple, doesn't involve a lot of effort, and provides the familiar comfort of a plain text box and natural language for search queries.
Federate searching is a more user-friendly approach but does currently can not support the powerful searching of an index content-specific search. Hane points out that that federated searches often lacking in advertised coverage (due to authentication problems, for one), removing duplicates, determining relevance and ranking in a way meaningful to the query, and can run into trouble keeping up with updates of various databases they cover.
Various standards have been introduced to try to improve federating searching. Z39.50 was introduced as a protocol for information retrieval which identified structures and rules for interchange. In 1997, attempts were being made to develop linkages with other standards and improving interoperability (specifically the ability to translate queries across systems).
Metadata harvesting offers possibilities in interoperability and increased dissemination of information by providing rules and a framework for sharing descriptive data (OAI-PMH). Reliance on user-created metadata can sometimes be problematic because when humans describe their own materials they often do so subjectively and without much consideration for the use of that metadata by outside sources and the possibility of lost context. Aggregated metadata increases efficiency, uniformity, speed, performance, analytical power, and meaningfulness in organization (OAI-PMH).
As the search tools offered by the library move further from traditional and into larger and domains with varied setups, development must focus on the ability to collage information across collections. The introduction of standards is helpful but depends on users to implement these standards with other uses in mind. Whether or not developers are willing to do this is another matter.
Questions:
Is Z39.50 still in use/development?
Can you discuss some of the current trends/developments metadata harvesting?
What other strategies are being used in implemented in modern federated searching?
Are the same federated searching roadblocks discussed in the Info Today article still valid?
Federate searching is a more user-friendly approach but does currently can not support the powerful searching of an index content-specific search. Hane points out that that federated searches often lacking in advertised coverage (due to authentication problems, for one), removing duplicates, determining relevance and ranking in a way meaningful to the query, and can run into trouble keeping up with updates of various databases they cover.
Various standards have been introduced to try to improve federating searching. Z39.50 was introduced as a protocol for information retrieval which identified structures and rules for interchange. In 1997, attempts were being made to develop linkages with other standards and improving interoperability (specifically the ability to translate queries across systems).
Metadata harvesting offers possibilities in interoperability and increased dissemination of information by providing rules and a framework for sharing descriptive data (OAI-PMH). Reliance on user-created metadata can sometimes be problematic because when humans describe their own materials they often do so subjectively and without much consideration for the use of that metadata by outside sources and the possibility of lost context. Aggregated metadata increases efficiency, uniformity, speed, performance, analytical power, and meaningfulness in organization (OAI-PMH).
As the search tools offered by the library move further from traditional and into larger and domains with varied setups, development must focus on the ability to collage information across collections. The introduction of standards is helpful but depends on users to implement these standards with other uses in mind. Whether or not developers are willing to do this is another matter.
Questions:
Is Z39.50 still in use/development?
Can you discuss some of the current trends/developments metadata harvesting?
What other strategies are being used in implemented in modern federated searching?
Are the same federated searching roadblocks discussed in the Info Today article still valid?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)