Users or potential users of Koha software may be interested in this conference paper: http://www.alia.org.au/conferences/alia2000/proceedings/tony.barry.html ALIA conference proceedings: The User Interface: glitz versus content Antony Barry Introduction Building new client software for interfaces to library systems is over. The user community will strongly resist another piece of software to view information. They want to view everything through the one interface, the browser. Attempts to modify this interface, such as the Java based Dynix client, while it may prove attractive features[BIBLIO] will be resisted by the casual user. =========================================== This email message has been swept by MIMESweeper for The Wesley Group of Hospitals- Australia ===========================================
Building new client software for interfaces to library systems is over. The user community will strongly resist another piece of software to view information. They want to view everything through the one interface, the browser. Attempts to modify this interface, such as the Java based Dynix client, while it may prove attractive features[BIBLIO] will be resisted by the casual user.
I beg to differ on many points made in this paper. *) if the new software looks very similar to the previous software and permits the user to perform the same functions in the same way, but with added second order features (i.e. slow managed evolution), then it is unlikely to be resisted. *) if the new software offers features with high perceived value which are obviously impossible to do though the old user interface (i.e. truly revolutionary UI), then it is unlikely to be resisted. *) if the new software is available on platforms or in natural languages for which the old wasn't available then it is unlikely to be resisted by those using those platforms or languages. *) i disagree that the casual user market is the only target group worth chasing, there are thousands of professional librarians and library workers out there. *) you have a bad value in your table of figures. *) you only mention in passing the difference between formal errors (errors according to the specification) and real world errors (errors that cause problems with any known browser). real world errors are all that matter for web site builders. *) your abstract appears not to be supported by your conclusions. Your actual research approach (running library web sites against validation engines) appeared good, but some of the text you've written about it seems dubious. Nowhere that i noticed did you give feedback to the actual site maintainers to help them improve their sites... stuart -- stuart yeates <s.yeates@cs.waikato.ac.nz> aka `loam' "Oh, havoc," cried Pooh, as he let slip the heffalumps of war. X-no-archive:yes
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 11:27:27AM +1300, Stuart A Yeates said:
Building new client software for interfaces to library systems is over. The user community will strongly resist another piece of software to view information. They want to view everything through the one interface, the browser. Attempts to modify this interface, such as the Java based Dynix client, while it may prove attractive features[BIBLIO] will be resisted by the casual user.
This, of course, is nothing particular new. I recall having long and protracted arguements with the librarians at NLNZ about why NDIS should be a web application, and not a standalone client, and that was in 1995! Unfortunately, it wasn't until they took their shiny new Win32 application out to the real world users who (pretty much) all said "why can't we have it on the web?" that they realised the magnitude of their mistake, and the wheels fell off some more... (all IMHO, of course) (for those unware, NDIS was an attempt at a library system jointly developed by the Australian and NZ National Libraries in 1994-96. After some insane amount of money (NZ$12-15million at the Kiwi end, and possibly double that in Oz), it was abandoned).
*) i disagree that the casual user market is the only target group worth chasing, there are thousands of professional librarians and library workers out there.
But that's hardly for you to dictate - every library defines its target group(s), and should be judged in how well their interface meets that groups' needs. For most libraries, the P in OPAC is paramount.
*) you have a bad value in your table of figures.
Nowhere that i noticed did you give feedback to the actual site maintainers to help them improve their sites...
Practice what you preach, Stuart. Nowhere that I see do you give feedback to the actual author of the paper - Kaye was just passing on what she thought was an interesting read - she doesn't appear to have any relationship with the author that I can see. Cheers Si -- Simon Blake simon@katipo.co.nz Katipo Communications +64 25 300 825
participants (3)
-
kaye.guidettiļ¼ wesley.com.au -
Simon Blake -
Stuart A Yeates