1 / 37

custom versus standard : the inforum case

custom versus standard : the inforum case. Dublin 8 september 2005 European Unicorn Users group meeting. The presentation scheme. The legal database inforum The goals of the new version (4.0) The results from an user point of view The technics to achieve the goals Custom versus Standard

rupali
Download Presentation

custom versus standard : the inforum case

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. custom versus standard : the inforum case Dublin 8 september 2005 European Unicorn Users group meeting

  2. The presentation scheme • The legal database inforum • The goals of the new version (4.0) • The results from an user point of view • The technics to achieve the goals • Custom versus Standard • The drawbacks

  3. Who are we? • Inforum is a legal database for local entities • We gather regulations, serial articles, books, court decisions, parlementary question etc …. • Each document is a record • We are specialized in a specific public : the local authorities • Wa abstract, catalogue and link documents • We are self-supporting : the municipalities are paying a subscription fee to consult the database

  4. Type of library • We are a special library  • Very pragmatic approach • If our customer are not satisfied, they will not pay us anymore • We have competitors on the market place • The information we work with is time sensitive (our SLA is 4 hours maximum downtime in a year)

  5. The goals of the new version • New look • The right information faster • A step toward personnalization • Easier to use • To mature from a document database to a knowledge database To make things easier for the client who is overwhelmed with information

  6. New look : Ilink did it great!

  7. Main Customization for the look : the icons

  8. The right information faster : the dilemma • 2 languages (at least) • 3 libraries • 6 typical usertypes • 1 internet + 1 extranet type of access  24 environments Because the knowledge database so labour intensive was, we decided to focus on 2 gateways and to personnalize the information in another way

  9. Faster to the important documents : each type of user has his information

  10. Faster : the essence of each document

  11. Personnalization : not yet the best it could be • Based on user profiles • We don’t use MyILink or MyIBistro because it focuses on authors and subjects • We have to refine cataloging first before trying the standard features • OR we could customize the MyILink feature otherwise (choice not made yet)

  12. Easier to use : Standard iLink + some customization Shortcut to today’s official journal information www.google.be Based on classification

  13. Easy : the print button + the 2d button bar!

  14. The knowledge database

  15. From knowledge to encyclopaedia definition

  16. Technics we used • Lots of possibilities of Unicorn self • Html and java • Some tricks • API

  17. The possibilities of Unicorn self • Cascading style sheets for colors, printing, display • Language possibilities and an extensive use of variables used in Unicorn/Language/Custom/French/labels and messages • Order of entry list (to put the essence first) • Find it fast for the knowledge database • You found titles • Profiling • System.env, iLink.env , etc

  18. Html • Adapt the « feeling » of the pages and add icons • Add a definition for each « cupboard » of Find it fast in gatelist_table.h the a href must be changed 3 times <td valign="top" align="<SIRSI_Data Session="ALIGN_HEAD">" class="defaultst yle"><a href="<SIRSI_Data Gateway_URL="LIST">" TITLE="$<<SIRSI_Data List_DC="mE">>"><SIRSI_Data List_DC="Ma"></a></td> Where mE and Ma refers to a variable name (paragraph) and content • Button bars added twice in each state page

  19. Some tricks (1) : the environment title • By organizing the environments by usertype, we restricted the types of personnalization to 4 • Municipalities • Welfare organization • Police • Local entities (everything – ourselves) • So, 4 titles x 2 languages = 8 types of information to show

  20. Some tricks (1) : the environment title : exemple • <SIRSI_Conditional IF Environ="TITLE^Inforum pour les COMMUNES"> • <td class="enrichheader" width="25%">$<E10></td> • <td width="25%" rowspan="2" class="enrichcontent"> • </tr> • <tr> • <td width="25%"><SIRSI_Include File="ti_communes"></td> • </tr> • </SIRSI_Conditional>

  21. Some tricks (2): Cascading style sheet • Very interesting feature but why is it integrated in each page? • Outside css make things go much faster because the style sheet it than cached • Used a print.css and a normal.css to implement the print button

  22. Some tricks (3): Sirsi_Conditional • Change the content of the item information : the use of the SIRSI_Conditional • <SIRSI_List Listcode="LT"> • <SIRSI_Conditional IF List_DC_Comp="NH^521"> <!-- Print the essence, if one exists --> • &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<SIRSI_Data List_DC="NE"><br> • </SIRSI_Conditional> • </SIRSI_List>

  23. Some tricks (4) : to divert functions Paragraph name = definition Icon name = user type information

  24. API • API was used to change massively profiles

  25. Custom versus standard • It’s a wrong discussion • Standard is great as long as it upgrades • Custom is a necessary front-runner pain/joy • Keep it as much standard as you can • Study standard thoroughly before to decide to go for custom • Sometimes Standard solutions exist but are too heavy to maintain (e.g. gateways). The directions you want to take and your own people environment can plead for custom.

  26. Custom versus standard • The great think to Sirsi is that custom or standard is a personal choice that each library continuously does • How more you go custom how more you got ideas concerning further developments • Everything is possible and the most difficult is to limit yourself because paradise is not affordable

  27. The drawbacks • Not enough information is passed through the state page (e.g. profile or environment of the user) • Moreover, ID and password information is passed through!

  28. Drawbacks : documentation The information gives is often not really practical although a little bit of creativity would make it easier (e.g. the datacode information) The great think is that there is documentation Forums are a terrific way to keep in touch with what is going on and to give ideas, but it’s almost a full time job

  29. Drawbacks : accents • Accents is the big problem. Most of the time I type directly in html in order to avoid translation problems, but it isn’t a good solution. Unicode please! • Not to mention that typical bibliographical american standards (ANSI) are often even unknown to computer people

  30. Drawbacks : html treatment • There is not enough visibility about the way Unicorn handles html and java. Sometimes Unicorn does things « behind » the scene • The Mozilla stuff is not that clear either

  31. Drawbacks : very public • For a special library, the way personnalization is handled by Unicorn doesn’t match the needs. Unicorn is designed for public and academic libraries and oriented author and title. Couldn’t it be possible to customize the awareness features (MyBistro) like we did with the « You found titles in » feature?

  32. Drawbacks : halt and run • The halt and run must take place before any change in several cases. We work with a test server, so that’s all right. But for the ones who don’t have a test server …. • However, html changes doesn’t need a halt and run. Two possibilities : to work quickly or to work with a Sirsi_Conditional so that the changes are only visible to you …

  33. Drawbacks : Charachter based versus Workflows in Opac manager • Discrepancy between Opac manager character based and Opac manager in Workflows : you can’t do the same things in both systems. • If you use them without being very carefull, everything got mixed up! • We chose to create all elements and move them in character based Manager and to modify existing ones in Workflows (e.g. for accents or adding paragraph names)

  34. Drawbacks : staff training • Everything we do while cataloging has an impact • The training level must be high • The gap between computer people and cataloguer is hard to fill.

  35. Mandatory : keep track • Keep track on everything you do • Sometimes, customizing is so easy that you don’t remember what you have done • Unicorn is complicated, so if something goes wrong and you are not there, have pity for your colleagues and the helpdesk!

  36. A case for the pleasure : Adding sort options • Search The Unicorn literature • Ask if things are planned/announced for coming updates • Have a look at the policies • Look for places where things are sorted (reports?) • And try things out!

  37. Conclusion • Unicorn = the world of the possible you can almost do whatever you want if you have time • We appreciate at most the possibilities that are offered but have always to be aware of the problems customization brings • In a small team, I regret not to be enough aware of the capabilities of the standard Unicorn

More Related