[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Evergreen for Academics -- PAC Flavor

[Kathy Lussier]

>   * Never make a user click twice if there is a way to click once
>   * Must be compatible with all manner of handheld devices
>   * Must comply with current accessibility standards for the sight
>     impaired
>
I would argue these are principles that should be kept in mind for a 
catalog for all audiences. Looking at the last two: the responsive 
design catalog is fairly new and probably has areas where it could be 
improved for handheld devices. If there is a specific area of the 
catalog that needs improvement for mobile devices, I encourage you to 
file a LP report on it. There were several people involved in that 
project, and I'm sure many of us would be happy to continue work to make 
it better.

My understanding is also that the catalog is WCAG compliant as of 2.6, 
so this is another area where a bug report should be filed if it's not 
meeting standards.

> Must comply with current library standards (no matter how ridiculous)

I would need more information on this one.

> In my opinion there should be: less art, more text, less white space, 
> fewer headings

So *this* is the area where I would say we're talking about an academic 
flavor.  A lot of this is customizable, of course, but, if there was 
consensus among a several academics on this idea of less art, more text, 
etc., then I do think it would be fairly easy to incorporate these 
things into another template directory that is available in the core code.

> Note that the author and subject entries are hot links. Clicked 
> authors would result in an Author Browse Results Screen. Clicked 
> Subjects would result in a Subject Browse Results Screen.
>
> I believe it is critical to treat the whole subject phrase as a single 
> entity. Treating each individual subdivision as its own searchable 
> entity is not helpful. Probably 10% of the records in our collection 
> have the subject subdivisions "Religious aspects -- Christianity." You 
> can imagine that the results from a keyword search for either of these 
> terms would be unhelpful. On the other hand clicking on the entire 
> phrase, such as Psychotherapy -- Religious aspects -- Christianity, 
> and being placed on a results screen for that entire phrase would lead 
> the researcher to subject areas they may not have been aware of.


The current links in the record were created before a browse search was 
even available in the catalog. Now that we have browse search, I would 
be curious to hear if others think these links should now go to a browse 
search or continue launching a keyword search. I know I've heard this 
suggestion from publics and academics alike. I can't say I have an 
opinion on it, but I think it's a worthwhile discussion to have now that 
we do have a browse search that could be utilized for these links.

Kathy

Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier at masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier

On 7/25/2014 12:10 PM, Donald Butterworth wrote:
> Kathy and All,
>
> I have been pondering for a couple days how I would spec out an 
> Academic PAC Flavor. I was going to try to write out my thoughts but 
> decided it would be easier to understand if I just drew them. So 
> please find attached a starting point for what seems to me like a more 
> academically oriented bibliographic record display.
>
> Here are some principles keep in mind:
>
>   * Never make a user click twice if there is a way to click once
>   * Must be compatible with all manner of handheld devices
>   * Must comply with current accessibility standards for the sight
>     impaired
>   * Must comply with current library standards (no matter how ridiculous)
>   * In my opinion there should be: less art, more text, less white
>     space, fewer headings
>
> Note that the author and subject entries are hot links. Clicked 
> authors would result in an Author Browse Results Screen. Clicked 
> Subjects would result in a Subject Browse Results Screen.
>
> I believe it is critical to treat the whole subject phrase as a single 
> entity. Treating each individual subdivision as its own searchable 
> entity is not helpful. Probably 10% of the records in our collection 
> have the subject subdivisions "Religious aspects -- Christianity." You 
> can imagine that the results from a keyword search for either of these 
> terms would be unhelpful. On the other hand clicking on the entire 
> phrase, such as Psychotherapy -- Religious aspects -- Christianity, 
> and being placed on a results screen for that entire phrase would lead 
> the researcher to subject areas they may not have been aware of.
>
> That's it for me, for now. Please understand that these are my 
> personal meanderings and should not be considered anything officially 
> endorsed by my employer.
>
> Happy Friday,
>
> Don
>
> ---Kathy Lussier wrote ---
>> PAC: Academic flavor.
>> It might be nice to offer a different look to the PAC that defaults 
>> to a fuller bibliographic description. 
> This idea is something that I think would be fairly easy to implement 
> by anyone who can customize the OPAC. You could create an 
> academic_template directory, add the customized tt2 file there, and 
> then contribute those changes to the community along with some 
> documentation telling people how to point to this directory in eg.conf 
> if they want to use an academic flavor.
>
> We have sites that do use a fuller bibliographic description than the 
> default, but I think they do so because they find it to be useful for 
> all of their libraries, not just their academics. Are there other 
> things you (or other academics out there) would like to see in the 
> academic flavor of the catalog?
>
> Kathy
>
>
> -- 
> Don Butterworth
> Faculty Associate / Librarian III
> B.L. Fisher Library
> Asbury Theological Seminary
> don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu 
> <mailto:don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu>
> (859) 858-2227 <tel:%28859%29%20858-2227>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20140725/5b1adabb/attachment-0001.htm>