using a federated searching solution to keep pace with user expectations digital odyssey 2005...
TRANSCRIPT
Using a Federated Searching Solution to Keep Pace with User Expectations
Digital Odyssey 2005
Friday, May 13th, 2005
11:30 am – 12:45 pmCarolyn Lam, Jane Foo
About Seneca College• Student Enrolment: Approx 18,000 full-time; 90,000
part-time• Approx. 678 FT faculty, 612 support, 138 admin• 3 major campuses: Newnham, Seneca@York and
King• Library Holdings:
– 65 Web-based research databases with 12,000+ electronic books, 17,000+ full-text electronic journals
– Print holdings: 82,000 books, 600+ periodicals– 110,000 annual circulation– 30000+ reference questions (3000 Virtual Reference
Questions)
CL
Recent Development
Searching – the fastest growing sector in the IT industry
Why?– # of digitization projects increasing– Deep web expanding– E-publishing increasing– Information seekers’ expectation expanding
(2004 Information Format Trends, OCLC)
CL
ENCompass for Resource Access
CL
Purchased Spring 2002
Training Spring and Fall 2003
XML Training Summer 2003
Configuration, Technical Setup and Testing
Fall 2003 and Winter 2004
Interface Design Spring and Summer 2004
Launched September 2004
JF
© 1999-2005 www.barrysclipart.com
“Federated searching consists of transforming a query and broadcasting it to a group of disparate databases with the appropriate syntax, merging the results collected from the databases, presenting them in a succinct and unified format with minimal duplication, and allowing the library patron to sort the merged result set by various criteria.”
(Jacso, 2004)
At a Quick Glance…What it is:• one-stop searching• merged result lists• information discovery• customized research
collections made up from different types of electronic resources
JF
What it is not (yet): • customizable to users • a search-all• comprehensive
scholarly research • a substitute for search
methodology• replacing library
catalogues
Why a Federated Search Solution?
Maximize awareness of online research resources via discovery
Simplify access to online research resourcesSave time in online researchProvide an integrated search that supports
student and faculty in online academic activities
Develop an information infrastructure that enables the library to create applications in support of college e-Learning strategies
JF
Usability in the Libraries• Library Web Site Student & Faculty Focus Groups
in 2000“I know it’s there, but I can’t remember where”
• Web Library Usability:– Searching > Navigating– Breadth vs. Depth– Terminology
JF
Usability tests show that even though students cannot rely on Internet Web sites & search engines for their academic research needs, they prefer them because of their ease of access and ease of use
A Typical Day on the Internet…
• 35 million adult Americans get their news from the Internet
• 24 million adult Americans do research for their job
• 14 million adult Americans do research for school or training online
(Pew Internet Report, January 2005)
“In total, more than 90% of patrons, including undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty, use search engines on a daily or weekly basis”
(ARL Bimonthly Report, October 2004)
(ARL Bimonthly Report, October 2004)
The New GenerationInformation-Age
Mindset (Frand, 2000)1. Computers Aren’t
Technology*2. Internet Better than TV3. Reality No Longer Real 4. Doing Rather Than
Knowing5. Nintendo over Logic6. Multitasking Way of Life7. Typing Rather Than
Handwriting8. Staying Connected9. Zero Tolerance for Delays10.Consumer/Creator Blurring
Born with the Chip(Abrams & Luther, 2000)
Information Use:1. Format Agnostic2. Nomadic3. MultitaskingLearning Behaviours:1. Experiential2. Collaborative3. IntegratedBeliefs:1. Principled2. Adaptive3. Direct
“Millenials” = “NextGens”JF*see also Norman’s The Invisible Computer
mary poppins special fx
Factors to consider
• Main players
CL
Main Players Biggest Players• MuseGlobal – MuseSearch• Fretwell-Downing – Zportal• Webfeat – Knowledge Prism Vendors of Library Systems• Endeavor – Encompass• Exlibris – Metalib• Sirsi – SingleSearch and RoomOthers• Serials Solutions – Central Search• TDnet – TES • Surfwax
CL
Factors to consider
• Integrated solution
• Technology
• Number of targets
• Authentication
• Customer support
• End user community
CL
• Main players
Implementing Encompass – how does it work?
ENCompass for Resource Access
HTTP XMLGateway
Z39.50 Z39.50Voyager
API HTTP
Resource A Resource B Resource C Resource D Resource E Resource F
LinkfinderPlus
ReportDue!
Federated Search Protocols
Voyager API (Application Programming Interface)
• Search of any Voyager databases
• OPAC, local or other
• Stable protocol with quick,precise results
CL
ERA
VoyagerAPI
LibraryCatalogue
Federated Search Protocols
Z39.50 (ANSI/NISO Standard) • Widely employed in libraries• Connection to OPACs and other
databases containing scholarly content
• Setup is straightforward• Fairly stable connections• Results are true to native
interface
CL
ERA
Z39.50
ProQuest
Federated Search Protocols
XML Gateway
• Exchange of XML documents
• Structured way to search a database or resource
• Programmed specifically for each resource
• Stable and consistent results
CL
ERA
XMLGateway
ScienceDirect
Federated Search Protocols
Http connectors
• Mimics end user searching through the generation of URLs
• Individually programmed for each resource
• Also called screen scraping
• Least structured and stable of the protocol types
CL
ERA
HTTP
Limitations of Federated Searching
• Quality of Searching
• Database Coverage
• Search Details
• Database Licensing Issues
• Response Rate
• Limit of Hits per Database
• Results List Orders
• Record Details
CL
Successful Implementation
• Understand the limitations
• Thoroughly test
• Staff expertise in metadata and XML
• Involve reference staff
• Provide staff training
• Invest in a development/testing environment
CL
Demo
Live
Video Clip
Screenshots
Customizing Federated Searching
JF
Customize & Integrate• Minimizing Complexities
– automatic search index selection– skipping “Results by Database” page– eliminating unnecessary functions (e.g., login,
Find a Resource)• Terminology (e.g., Linkfinder Plus)• Collections
– Seneca program-specific– Annotated
• Learning Commons Online Look & Feel• No major Web site redesign
“Find” Services
JF
JF
What’s Next at Seneca?• Resolving performance issues• More access points
(“JIT” search, GTA-wide catalogue search, etc.)
• Expansions (new content, new collections, new search functions)
• Integrating into existing college systems (portal, courseware, online Web conferencing, etc.)
• Development and integration of digital collections at the college level
