Skip to content

Category: Tools and Technology

Free Beta Open-Source CMS

The Web Services Group at my college has developed a Content Management System that the whole college has been using for a couple of years. Last year the library migrated over to this system (and instantly became the “power users” on campus), and just the day before yesterday the current version was released as a beta open-source CMS called Reason.

Earlier this month there were a spate of messages on Web4Lib talking about the pros and cons of a CMS, and a few people wondering if there were any cheep ones out there. Well, this one’s free, but it’s beta. It’s a very good beta, but still…

I’m no techie, but the guys that built this thing work within the library (they don’t work for the library, but their offices are here), so I can hook you up if you have questions.

In other open-source news, Northeastern University has incluced our material type icons in their catalog. Cool!

Technorati tags: ,

Comments closed

That Whole Tagging Thing

As I’m sure many of you have noticed, I haven’t been tagging my posts at all. There’s no good reason for this. Pure laziness (and forgetfulness) is all there is to it. There was no way I could see myself remembering to type in all the link code at the end of every post. But I just found a cool bookmarklet that will help me. You just copy the code found in this post into the “location” box of a new bookmark. Then every time you click the bookmarklet you get a little dialog box into which you can type your tags. Click “OK” and it spits out the HTML you can paste into your blog post.

Now, will I remember to tag stuff… We’ll see. We’ll also see if I can come up with any useful tags. How do you tag meandering posts about tagging, for example?

Oh, and on a completely unrelated note, I’ve added the options to save to del.icio.us and email posts that come over my feedburner feed. It’s been a blogarific evening.

Technorati technorati tags:

2 Comments

Making reference Desk Statistics Fun and Even More Useful

Up until this year, librarians have made little tick marks on a grid to indicate questions answered at the reference desk. We had a new grid every day, and we could tick off how many short questions and long questions we answered every hour, as well as how many questions we’d solved jointly with the IT help people, and how many questions we simply referred to the IT people (I’ll write more about our IT help later, but for now suffice it to say that we have joint service point in the library). I hate to think how much time was put into compiling these paper tick marks each week.

But this year, we’ve beefed up our statistics. In fact, it’s becoming much more than a statistics-collection project. We’re building a knowledge base and learning from our co-workers’ reference interactions.

How are we doing all this? We’re using LibStats, a free, open-source, PHP/SQL database designed by library people at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. This term, we’re using the default install which is perfect for reference interactions either at one location or multiple locations. We had grand plans of customizing the install to allow us to track our instruction and appointment statistics and notes, but we ended up simply taking the default settings so that we could get the system up and running in one day. (Seriously, it didn’t take more than a few hours to set up and get the minor field customizations entered. We got our web team to install the database, and then told the system what values to include for things like “patron type” and “question type.”)

Check out the demo, if you want to play around, but here’s a little run-down of what it does and what I like. You can specify location, patron type, question type, time spent, and librarian VERY easily. Then you can either click “Save Question” or you can type in the question and the answer before saving. You can also go back and change saved questions, backdate them, or add comments. (We use this to help each other out with questions, build in more complete answers, and so on.) We also each initial our questions, which helps with follow up. (It also means that you can filter to see how many questions you have answered this week, which is fun.)

My favorite feature, other than how completely easy it is to use, is that the database remembers your settings so that, for example, when I’m in my office and want to enter an email question I got, I open the database and it remembers that last time I worked from this computer I was in my office, so that location code is already selected for me and my initials are already suggested for me. Or if I go out to the reference desk, I don’t have to specify “Reference Desk” as a location because it remembers that from the last time that computer was used. It remembers all the values you specify, simply adding a date/time stamp to each entry whenever you click “save.” This drastically reduces the necessary clicks.

You can also search questions by keyword, and this is where the knowledge-base comes into the picture. Our database is only 5 weeks old, but already I can search to find passwords to things or for answers to those questions where you know the answer is right under your nose but you can’t think of it. We can also mark trends in questions, so it’s easier for liaisons to get in contact with their professors and say, “hey, we’re seeing a lot of questions about your numerical essay assignment.”

I can’t speak for my co-workers, but I know that this has helped me keep track of things like the questions I get at home or in my office via email. Now I can access the database from anywhere and just enter my question and answer. No more remembering to run out to the desk and make those little tick marks. And we’re hoping to do some database customization over winter break that would allow us to check a box saying that the question still needs attention, which would allow us to flag questions needing follow up, or use the system more like a trouble/ticket system.

Oh, and you can do queries and reports (there are some default reports, but for everything else you’d need to know SQL), or you can do a data dump into Excel and play with data to your heart’s content.

5 Comments

A Wiki Library Web Site?

Jennifer over at Life as I Know It pointed me toward a new blog and a new idea, all in one post. The new blog is Library 2.0: An Academic’s Perspective by Laura Cohen (into my aggregator she goes….), and the new idea is that of making library web pages in the form of a wiki.

Here’s what Laura writes:

There are some people who rightly sing the praises of the Ann Arbor District Library because its site is blog-based. However, blogs are restrictive relative to wikis in that the typical user cannot create an entry but only comment on it. In the library context, librarians are in control of their Web site content and users can only respond. This is valuable, to be sure, but in terms of radical trust (a Library 2.0 buzzword), it falls short. […] The technologies exist to make library sites a joint venture, in which librarians and their constituencies work together to create an online presence that hears voices from both sides of the fence. In a way, this type of site would remove most of the fence.

This is an idea I haven’t heard before, and just based on that I’m inclined to say “Cool!” That’s my default reaction to ideas that bring together fun and usefulness, interaction, learning, and (hopefully) improved service. And I think this idea has the potential to be meet all of those coolness criteria.

However, my personal experience causes me to pause, just a little. Would the presence of wiki functionality actually increase participation? I’m not sure. Laura is not advocating a wiki-only approach. She mentions combining wiki and blog bases to come up with a more interactive environment. But the suggestion that a wiki is more interactive than a blog got me thinking.

I know that when I view a wiki, I am hesitant to change the content unless I either own the wiki or I’m one of a small group of people working on a collaborative project. Each page in the wiki looks and feels to me like a draft of someone else’s paper. I’m happy to comment on it and let the other person change the content, but I don’t want to go changing another person’s writing willy-nilly.

In fact, I’m even less likely to change a wiki than I am to post to a massive listserv, and for many of the same reasons. Call it shyness. Call it respect. Call it pathological inability to force myself on someone. Call it what you will, but the fact is that I’ve only written to a large listserv a few times in my life, and I’ve never changed any substantive content on “someone else’s” wiki.

Blogs, on the other hand, present no barriers to me. I’m happy to comment because I’m not fundamentally changing someone else’s work, but I can still add my two cents. And I create my own content secure in the knowledge that even if people disagree with me, all they can do is comment, so all the time I spend drafting will not be wasted. (Well, I guess wasted time could be argued… but we won’t go there now.) Not only that, but my content isn’t going directly to someone’s inbox unless they specifically want ME in their inbox. They can visit me or subscribe to me at will, but I’m not forcing myself on them.

So where does this leave me? I think my answer is still “cool.” I like the idea of including a collaborative and constructive research space where patrons can work with patrons, librarians with patrons, and librarians with librarians, and where everyone can contribute to the research experience. This collaborative space to include blog space for patrons who wanted to write and comment individually or in groups. Patrons should also have note-taking space via the library, citation managers, and the ability to tag and review resources that they find (see this earlier post for more on my wishes for a research portal). But as a library user, I’d also like the basic, predictable structure of an HTML page to organize my experience so that when I visit my library’s web page tomorrow I’ll still know where to find the catalog. What’s more, my reservations are based only on my own interactions with collaborative platforms, so others may have an entirely different take on it.

Ultimately, I end up with a similar reaction to Jennifer’s: I think the ideal research space would include a combination of a bunch of tools and formats which serve users and librarians and which, together, allow for constructive and healthy interaction.

p.s. What is the plural of “wiki”? I’ve seen “wikies” and “wikis” in use. Does it have an official plural? You’ll notice I scrupulously avoided plurals in this post even though that made the language a little wonky.

Comments closed