 |
 |
We don't do tabs (we use SubjectsPlus, not Libguides). Our rules about side columns read as follows: Left Column should contain primary content. Right column should contain supplemental content including, but not limited to: - Dashboard (directly under subject specialist) - Other content may include Related guides, Selected journals / RSS, Associations, Help documents. Not very strict, since "primary" and "supplemental" are subjective. I've also had to remind that their right-column content will display below their left column content on a smaller screen. On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Josh Welker <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Thanks.Do you have any guidelines around the numbers and colors of tabs? > That is one of the big issues. Also, do you have rules around what is > allowed in side columns? > > Josh Welker > > On Aug 14, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Ron Gilmour <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > At Ithaca College, the web team has recently written some very loose > > guidelines on the construction of subject guides. Generally, we stayed > away > > from saying much about content, so most of the rules apply to the > presence > > and placement of certain common structural elements. For example, there > > should always be contact information for the librarian and this should > > always be in the top right. There should be table of contents (unless the > > guide is really short) and it should be located at the top of the main > > column. > > > > There are also some rules that are intended to prevent responsivity > > problems (e.g., wrap your embedded videos in a <div > > class="fitvid<http://fitvidsjs.com/>"> > > to make sure they are usable on mobile devices). > > > > In order to keep a reasonable content hierarchy, we ask that librarians > use > > only h3 or lower for internal headers. > > > > We've specified what we call a "dashboard" widget that contains links to, > > well, things that are often linked to from subject guides (e.g., ILL, > > citation info). This element is required on all guides. > > > > Regarding buy-in, we stressed that these rules were based on responses > from > > actual users in usability tests. This is convincing to most (not all) > > librarians. Our usability tests showed that consistency across guides is > > important to users. We presented the rules as representing a balance > > between pedagogical freedom for librarians and the need for consistency > and > > ease of navigation for users. (A paper on this is currently under > review.) > > > > Enforcement has not been a major issue. Content-creators have been > *cough* we > > use tasers *cough* very cooperative. > > > > Ron Gilmour > > Web Services Librarian > > Ithaca College Library > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Joshua Welker <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > >> One of the recurring themes in the LibGuides thread was that libraries > >> need better policies regarding content and style management in guides. I > >> wholeheartedly agree here, but my attempts to do so in the past were > shot > >> down in favor of giving all librarians maximum freedom. > >> > >> I have two questions: > >> > >> 1) What kind of policies do you all have in place for subject guide > style > >> and content management? > >> 2) How do you get librarians to buy in to the policies, and how are they > >> enforced? > >> > >> Josh Welker > >> Information Technology Librarian > >> James C. Kirkpatrick Library > >> University of Central Missouri > >> Warrensburg, MO 64093 > >> JCKL 2260 > >> 660.543.8022 > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > >> Jimmy Ghaphery > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM > >> To: [log in to unmask] > >> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > >> > >> I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and > I > >> researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, > demonstrating > >> the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control > outside > >> of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] > >> > >> Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech > >> community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was > >> "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content > >> management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or > >> adaptability of local content management system implementations in > >> libraries." > >> > >> One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial > >> alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the > >> various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the > >> download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across > >> themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything > >> really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here > >> certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, > >> governance, etc. > >> > >> As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the > >> public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. > From > >> the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a > >> third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres > >> and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public > side > >> there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to the > >> core of value of professionally knowing one's community and serving it. > >> > >> [1] https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/1830 > >> > >> best, > >> > >> Jimmy > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Galen Charlton <[log in to unmask]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke <[log in to unmask] > >>>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to > >>>> host pathfinders. Those are supposed to be periodically revisited. > >>>> One of > >>> the > >>>> big problems is that librarians will start a guide and never finish, > >>>> or make one then never maintain it. Periodically deleting > >>>> everything is a good thing for pathfinders and subject guides, and > >>>> people should do it anyway. No one's talking about tools for > >>>> digital archives, which have > >>> lock > >>>> in issues and are way more expensive. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Lock-in doesn't have to be absolute to be effective, it just has to > >>> has raise the bar sufficiently high to make users think twice about > >>> migrating away. > >>> > >>> This applies even if the data to be moved is transitory and constantly > >>> changing. For example, if a library has been diligently updating > their > >>> pathfinders, but wants to switch platforms, if there were no way to > >>> export them to load into the successor system, the effort of redoing > >>> them or doing a lot of copy-and-pasting could be prohibitive. > >>> > >>> As a general statement -- and I know that this battle has been > >>> bitterly fought in the ILS space -- I believe that *all* library > >>> software services, whether based on F/LOSS software or proprietary > >>> software, should provide a way for the library to obtain a full dump > >>> of their data, in an accessible format, at no additional charge. > >>> > >>> I see that LibGuides advertises the ability to make local backups of > >>> individual pages and also provides (via a paid add-on module) an XML > >>> export function. I don't know if SpringShare will also provide free > >>> one-time exports on request, but I would hope they do. > >>> > >>> Of course, even if one has the data in hand, data migrations can still > >>> take a lot of time, effort, and expertise. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> > >>> Galen > >>> -- > >>> Galen Charlton > >>> Manager of Implementation > >>> Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts > >>> email: [log in to unmask] > >>> direct: +1 770-709-5581 > >>> cell: +1 404-984-4366 > >>> skype: gmcharlt > >>> web: http://www.esilibrary.com/ > >>> Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org & > >>> http://evergreen-ils.org > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Jimmy Ghaphery > >> Head, Digital Technologies > >> VCU Libraries > >> 804-827-3551 > >> >