 |
 |
Jonathan, while having these thoughts your Umlaut service did come to mind. If you ever have time to expand on how it could work in a wide open web environment, I'd love to hear it. (I know you explain below, but I don't know enough about link resolvers to understand what it really means from a short explanation. Diagrams are always welcome!) kc On 2/23/12 12:37 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > On 2/23/2012 2:45 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: >> This links to thoughts I've had about linked data and finding a way to >> use library holdings over the Web. Obviously, bibliographic data alone >> is a full service: people want to get the stuff once they've found out >> that such stuff exists. So how do we get users from the retrieval of a >> bibliographic record to a place where they have access to the stuff? >> >> I see two options: the WorldCat model, where people get sent to a >> central database where they input their zip code, or a URL-like model >> where they get a link on retrievals that has knowledge about their >> preferred institution and access. > > I think we need both of those, and mixtures between the two, and more. > > OCLC is trying to do the second one too. For instance with their link > resolver redirector. But it requires link resolvers being registered, > link resolvers working, and link resolvers working for print materials, > etc. > > Of course "get a link on retrievals" begs the question of from where > they are retrieving and who is generating this link? But in theory, > anyone with a retrieval system could give you a link through OCLC's link > resolver redirector. Which isn't quite fleshed out yet, but > theoretically could then redirect you to the link resolver of your > choice based on preferences or proximity. Except, well, it doens't work > that well, for a variety of reasons both under and not under OCLC's > control. But it's the sort of architecture we're talking about, I think. > > (Now if there was a common machine-readable response for link resolver > type requests, an OCLC-like service could even aggregate the responses > from _several_ "preferred institutions" on one page. Umlaut originally > tried to do that with SFX link resolvers, but it never really went > anywhere). > > Anyhow, yeah, both of those, and more. They definitely aren't mutually > exclusive, and the sorts of technologies and metadata ecologies that are > needed to support each one have a whole lot of overlap. > > Incidentally, my Umlaut software, mostly targetted at academic > libraries, is really focused on that exact problem: "people want to get > the stuff once they've found out that such stuff exists. So how do we > get users from the retrieval of a bibliographic record to a place where > they have access to the stuff? " But it's definitely not done yet, it's > my goal with Umlaut, but there's still a lot left to do to get there. > (Ultimately, you need some kind of LibX-type approach, browser plugin or > javascript bookmarklet, to get people to a place where they have access > from third parties that have absolutely no interest in collaborating on > this plan. Amazon doesn't want to help you go anywhere other than Amazon > to acquire a book). Definitely a work in progress, but the goal it's > oriented to is exactly what you say. https://github.com/team-umlaut/umlaut > > Jonathan > > > > >> >> I have no idea if the latter is feasible on a true "web scale," but it >> would be my ideal solution. We know that search engines keep track of >> your location and tailor retrievals based on that. Could libraries get >> into that loop? >> >> kc >> >> On 2/23/12 11:35 AM, Eoghan Ó Carragáin wrote: >>> That's true, but since Blacklight/Vufind often sit over >>> digital/institutional repositories as well as ILS systems& subscription >>> resources, at least some public domain content gets found that otherwise >>> wouldn't be. As you said, even if the item isn't available digitally, >>> for >>> Special Collections libraries unique materials are exposed to potential >>> researchers who'd never have known about them. >>> Eoghan >>> >>> On 23 February 2012 19:25, Sean Hannan<[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>> >>>> It's hard to say. Going off of the numbers that I have, I'd say that >>>> they >>>> do >>>> find what they are looking for, but they unless they are a JHU >>>> affiliate, >>>> they are unable to access it. >>>> >>>> Our bounce rate for Google searches is 76%. Which is not necessarily >>>> bad, >>>> because we put a lot of information on our item record pages--we >>>> don't make >>>> you dig for anything. >>>> >>>> On the other hand, 9% of visits coming to us through Google searches >>>> are >>>> return visits. To me, that says that the other 91% are not JHU >>>> affiliates, >>>> and that's 91% of Google searchers that won't have access to materials. >>>> >>>> I know from monitoring our feedback form, we have gotten in increase in >>>> requests from far flung places for access to things we have in special >>>> collections from non-affiliates. >>>> >>>> So, we get lots of exposure via searches, but due to the nature of how >>>> libraries work with subscriptions, licensing, membership and such, >>>> we close >>>> lots of doors once they get there. >>>> >>>> -Sean >>>> >>>> On 2/23/12 1:55 PM, "Schneider, Wayne"<[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> This is really interesting. Do you have evidence (anecdotally or >>>>> otherwise) that the people coming to you via search engines found what >>>>> they were looking for? Sorry, I don't know exactly how to phrase this. >>>>> To put it another way - are your patrons finding you this way? >>>>> >>>>> wayne >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On >>>>> Behalf Of >>>>> Sean Hannan >>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 12:37 PM >>>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Local catalog records and Google, Bing, Yahoo! >>>>> >>>>> Our Blacklight-powered catalog (https://catalyst.library.jhu.edu/) >>>>> comes >>>>> up a lot in google search results (try gil scott heron circle of >>>>> stone). >>>>> >>>>> Some numbers: >>>>> >>>>> 59% of our total catalog traffic comes from google searches 0.04% >>>>> of our >>>>> total catalog traffic comes from yahoo searches 0.03% of our total >>>>> catalog traffic comes from bing searches >>>>> >>>>> For context, 32.96% of our total catalog traffic is direct traffic and >>>>> referrals from all of the library websites combined. >>>>> >>>>> Anecdotally, it would appear that bing (and bing-using yahoo) seem to >>>>> drastically play down catalog records in their results. We're not >>>>> doing >>>>> anything to favor a particular search engine; we have a completely >>>>> open >>>>> robots.txt file. >>>>> >>>>> Google regularly indexes our catalog. Every couple days or so. I >>>>> haven't >>>>> checked in awhile. >>>>> >>>>> We're not doing any fancy SEO here (though, I'd like to implement some >>>>> of the microdata stuff). It's just a function of how the site >>>>> works. We >>>>> link a lot of our catalog results to further searches (clicking on an >>>>> author name takes you to an author search with that name, etc). Google >>>>> *loves* that type of intertextual website linking (see also: >>>>> Wikipedia). >>>>> We also have stable URLs. Search URLs will always return searches with >>>>> those parameters, item URLs are based on an ID that does not change. >>>>> >>>>> All of that good stuff doesn't help us with bing, though. ...But >>>>> I'm not >>>>> really concerned with remedying that, right this moment. >>>>> >>>>> -Sean >>>>> >>>>> On 2/23/12 12:37 PM, "[log in to unmask]" >>>>> <[log in to unmask]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> First of all, I'm going to say I know little in this area. I've done >>>>>> some preliminary research about search indexing (Google's) and >>>>>> investigated a few OPAC robot.txt files. Now to my questions: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Can someone explain to me or point me to research as to why local >>>>>> library catalog records do not show up in Google, Bing, or Yahoo! >>>>> search >>>>>> results? >>>>>> - Is there a general prohibition by libraries for search engines to >>>>>> crawl their public records? >>>>>> - Do the search engines not index these records actively? >>>>>> - Is it a matter of SEO/promoted results? >>>>>> - Is it because some systems don't mint URLs for each record? >>>>>> >>>>>> I haven't seen a lot of discussion about this recently and I know >>>>>> Jason Ranallo has done a lot of work in this area and gave a great >>>>>> talk at code4lib Seattle on microdata/Schema.org, so I figured this >>>>>> could be part of that continuing conversation. >>>>>> >>>>>> I look forward to being educated by you all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Tod >>>> >> -- Karen Coyle [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet