1 / 26

Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager: A Comparison of Their OPACs

Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager: A Comparison of Their OPACs. Ten Years of Experience, A Future of Possibilities VALE / NJ ACRL/ NJLA CUS Tenth Annual Users' Conference Friday, January 9, 2009 Sharon Yang, Melissa A. Hofmann, and Meghan Weeks Rider University Libraries.

aangle
Download Presentation

Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager: A Comparison of Their OPACs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager: A Comparison of Their OPACs Ten Years of Experience, A Future of Possibilities VALE / NJ ACRL/ NJLA CUS Tenth Annual Users' Conference Friday, January 9, 2009 Sharon Yang, Melissa A. Hofmann, and Meghan Weeks Rider University Libraries

  2. Overview of the Presentation • Introduction • Open Source & GNU GPL • Open Source ILS • Koha and Evergreen • Ten visions for the Next Generation Catalog • Comparison of the OPACs of Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager based on the ten visions • Conclusion

  3. Introduction: Open Source & GNU GPL GNU General Public License • GNU is a recursive acronym for "GNU's Not Unix" • Free to run, study, modify, and redistribute the software • Support is not free Other open source licenses • Mozilla Public License • Creative Commons licenses • BSD License • Apache Software License • GNU Free Documentation License

  4. Introduction: Why Open Source ILS? • Financial considerations • Ability to tailor to fit local needs or customization • No restrictions on use • User driven vs. profit driven • Dissatisfaction with current ILS and vendors • No vendor lock-in

  5. Introduction: Open Source ILS • Avanti MicroLCS (http://www.avantilibrarysystems.com/) • Emilda, Finland (http://www.emilda.org) • Evergreen, US (http://evergreen-ils.org/) • Koha, New Zealand (http://koha.org) • Learning Access ILS, US (www.learningaccess.org) • NewGenLib, India (http://www.verussolutions.biz) • OpenBiblio (http://obiblio.sourceforge.net/) • PhpMyLibrary, Philippines (http://phpmylibrary.com/pml/) • PMB (PhpMyBibli), France (http://www.sigb.net) • PYTHEAS, US (http://web2.uwindsor.ca/library/leddy/people/art/pytheas/index.html) • OPALS, US (http://www.opals-na.org/opals-fac.html) • WebLIS, UNESCO & Poland (http://www.unesco.org/isis/) In conceptual stage: • OLE: The Open Library Environment (http://www.oleproject.org)

  6. Introduction: Open Source OPACs • VuFind: http://www.vufind.org • Blacklight: http://blacklight.rubyforge.org/ • XC Extensible Catalog: http://www.extensiblecatalog.org

  7. Introduction: Koha & Evergreen • English language • More mature that other open source ILSs • More complete functions/modules • More users • Available technical support and planned future releases

  8. Comparison: Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager

  9. Introduction: Status Quo • How many libraries? • Koha: 400 (9 academic libraries) • Evergreen: 305 (1 academic library) • Voyager: 1179 • Who provides support/services? • Koha: Liblime and others • Evergreen: Equinox and others • Voyager: Ex Libris • Why do libraries hesitate? • Hard to install and some parts do not work • Lack of good documentation • Lack of functionality

  10. OPAC Comparison: Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager • “A thorough process of evaluating an integrated library system(ILS) today would not be complete without also weighing the open source ILS products against their proprietary counterparts." ~Marshall Breeding, Chapter 4, "Open Source Integrated Library Systems"

  11. Ten Visions for the Next Generation Catalog In addition to all the features of a legacy catalog, the Next Generation Catalog should also include the following (Breeding 2007): • Single point of entry for all library information • State-of-the-art web interface • Enriched content • Faceted navigation • Keyword searching • Relevancy • Did you mean…? • Recommendations/related materials • User contribution: ratings, reviews, comments, and tagging • RSS feeds

  12. Comparison: A Single Point of Entry for All Library Information A single search box that includes all traditional ILS content and the full text of all the electronic resources to which a library subscribes (Breeding 2007). Article & full text level access. • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  13. Comparison: State-of-the-Art Web Interface Library catalogs should be “intuitive interfaces” and “visually appealing sites” that compare well with other Internet search engines (Breeding 2007). • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  14. Comparison: Enriched Content In addition to printed materials, enriched content includes images of book jackets, movie cases, table of contents, summaries, reviews, etc. • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  15. Comparison: Faceted Navigation Use of facets to narrow the search results. It allows users to interact with an information resource by discovering the information held within rather than having to guess in advance. • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  16. Comparison: Keyword Searching A simple keyword search box with a link to advanced search for libraries. • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager 

  17. Comparison: Relevancy In addition to relevancy based on the frequency and positions of a keyword, a library catalog should also consider other factors such as the number of times an item has been checked out, the number of copies in a library, the number of times an item has been cited, etc. • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  18. Comparison: Did you mean…? A technique to detect common spelling errors in a query and suggest possible search terms. Goes beyond a simple spell-check. • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  19. Comparison: Recommendations A library catalog will recommend materials when it does not hold an item a user is looking for. • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  20. Comparison: User Contributions “A resource isn’t just a one-way presentation of information, but rather invites user participation and involvement” such as reviews, comments, summaries, tag clouds. (Breeding 2007) • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  21. Comparison: RSS Feed RSS stands for really simple syndication or rich site summary. When incorporated into a library’s catalog, it can broadcast new additions or other information to users. • Demonstration • Koha • Evergreen • Voyager

  22. Features that need work • Navigation • Koha (must use Internet browser) • Subject heading browse • Voyager (both a “starts with” and keyword in heading browse) vs. Koha (poor) and Evergreen (none) • Advanced search • AND, OR, NOT options available/explicit? • Highlighting of search terms

  23. Conclusion: Who Is Closer to Next Generation Catalog? • Koha (6/7 out of 10) • Voyager (4 out of 10) • Evergreen (3 out of 10)

  24. Questions & Answers The next presentation will cover: • A comparison of staff modules of Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager • Technologies behind the scene • Cost analysis • Recommendations

  25. References • Anderson, J.D. and Hofmann, M.A. 2006. “A fully faceted syntax for Library of Congress Subject Headings.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 43(1), 7-38. • Boss, R.W. 2008. “Open source” integrated library system software [PDF document]. Retrieved December 26, 2008 from Public Library Association http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/pla/plapublications/platechnotes • Breeding, M. 2008. Automation Marketplace 2008: Opportunity Out of Turmoil. Library Journal 133 (6), 32-38. • Breeding, M. 2007. Next-generation library catalogs. Library Technology Reports 43 (4). • Riewe, L. M. (2008). Survey of Open Source Integrated Library Systems. Unpublished master's thesis, San José State University, 210 North 4th  Street San Jose, CA 95112 . Retrieved January/February, 2009, from  http://users.sfo.com/~lmr/ils-survey.html • Wikipedia: the Free encyclopedia. 2008. Integrated Library System. Retrieved December 29, 2008 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

More Related