Catalogue search interfaces just how smart should they be? Workshop leader: Ad Aerts (firstname.lastname@example.org)
The team ● Alberic Regent (University Leuven) ● Ramon Ros (Library Consortium of Catalonia) ● Frank Waajen (University of Wageningen) ● Miloš Petrovič (University of Maribor) ● Danica Radovanovič (University of Belgrade) ● Harry Janssen (University of Nijmegen) ● Bo Öhrström (Danish National Library Authority) ● Ad Aerts (AA Business Support)
Questions ● What are the pros and cons for an active interface? ● Should users be divided into groups? ● Should users be authenticated? ● What 'personalisation' is desirable in the search form? ● What 'personalisation' is desirable in the search results?
The active interface ● Understands what the user wants ● Takes decisions for the user ● Advises the user
Pros and cons ● Pros – Frees the user of a lot of otherwise mandatory decisions – Helps the user actively – Reduces the load for support staff – IF IT WOULD ONLY WORK!!! ● Cons – Is unable to correctly analyze and predict the users actions and needs – Is ultimately counter- effective
Prerequisites ● Procedures – clear – evident ● System help information – Complete – Concise ● Educate your users!!
Users and groups ● Users should be able to select their own personalized settings ● Settings should be as flexible as needed for the most demanding user ● Users should be able to choose from a limited number of template settings ● Initially, any user will be assigned one of the template settings
Authentification issues ● Secure – Avoid abuse – Protect user information and property – Protect organisation information and property ● Easy – One login for every system and every site – Login confirmation only when needed – Other authentification methods?
Authentification issues - privacy ● We want to know what our users do ● We have to store user 'behaviour' preferably without privacy-sensitive information
Search entry personalisation dependencies ● Level (novice-experienced user) ● Purpose (bibliographic information, loan) ● Preference for form or query language ● Language ● Physical limitation – Sight – Sound ● Material type
Search entry personalisation (continued) ● Elements to be personalised – Fields/Tags – Field/Tag Combinations – Word order – Word truncation – Fulltext search – Result representation
Search entry personalisation (continued) ● Inititial template – Basic ● google like – Intermediate ● ?? – Advanced ● Search specification fully user definable
Search results personalisation dependencies ● Level (novice-experienced user) ● Purpose (bibliographic information, loan) ● Preference for form or query language ● Language ● Physical limitation – Sight – Sound ● Material type
Search results personalisation ● Elements to be personalised – Fields/Tags – Presentation – Order – Selection
Search results personalisation (continued) ● Three levels – One-line shorthand list representation (i.e. Creator, title, date) – Multiline detail list presentation (i.e. catalogue card) – Full screen detail presentation ● Only relevant information should be shown
Search results personalisation (continued) ● Output type – Print – e-mail – Web – Downloadable (for import)
Workgroup wish list ● Users should be able to easily compose a personal database from any selection in a number of databases ● Virtual reading room, not only with a catalog, but also facilities to share (personal) documents with a group of users ● “Really” intelligent systems that learn from users, and can recognize group characteristics
Search results personalisation (continued) ● All databases within an organisation should be searchable in the same fashion ● Avoid 'useless' loans: give users acces to tables of contents and summaries ● Evaluation of system usage (what do the users do with our system??) ● A prototype of the ideal search interface
The ultimate wish Not having to search at all......