Comments on: Hiding Complexity in Library 2.0 http://about.scriblio.net/scribbles/140/hiding-complexity-in-library-20/ open source software for libraries Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:59:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: “Fuck Privacy” and my poor prose at ebyblog http://about.scriblio.net/scribbles/140/hiding-complexity-in-library-20/#comment-1664 “Fuck Privacy” and my poor prose at ebyblog Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:01:43 +0000 http://libdev.plymouth.edu/?p=26#comment-1664 [...] The first thing Walt goes into is my Hiding Complexity post. I was surpised to see it cited as a post “about potential difficulties with a more open architecture”. I actually opened the post with “One of the benefits of a more open architecture” but maybe I didn’t back that up with the rest of the post. My hope was to show that having an open architecture would allow libraries to customize the interface to their needs, making it as complex or as simple as needed for the application. Currently in some systems you can tweak templates and remove icons but it doesn’t have a robust system that can really push the customization. [...] [...] The first thing Walt goes into is my Hiding Complexity post. I was surpised to see it cited as a post “about potential difficulties with a more open architecture”. I actually opened the post with “One of the benefits of a more open architecture” but maybe I didn’t back that up with the rest of the post. My hope was to show that having an open architecture would allow libraries to customize the interface to their needs, making it as complex or as simple as needed for the application. Currently in some systems you can tweak templates and remove icons but it doesn’t have a robust system that can really push the customization. [...]

]]> By: libdev » LiveSearch and Clustered Displays http://about.scriblio.net/scribbles/140/hiding-complexity-in-library-20/#comment-1663 libdev » LiveSearch and Clustered Displays Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:39:23 +0000 http://libdev.plymouth.edu/?p=26#comment-1663 [...] As I’ve written here before though, you have to be careful not to make things overly complicated. The results screen should probably avoid looking like a space shuttle cockpit. What do you think should be included in a results screen? [...] [...] As I’ve written here before though, you have to be careful not to make things overly complicated. The results screen should probably avoid looking like a space shuttle cockpit. What do you think should be included in a results screen? [...]

]]> By: casey20 http://about.scriblio.net/scribbles/140/hiding-complexity-in-library-20/#comment-1662 casey20 Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:21:42 +0000 http://libdev.plymouth.edu/?p=26#comment-1662 Yeah, I don't really get the feeling that Amazon has an overarching technical vision, just a whole lot of really smart people. A good example is their <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/gsl/search/finder/%3FproductGroupID%3Dloose%255fdiamonds" rel="nofollow">diamond search</a>. Yeah, it's a very cool hack, but it's not similar anything else on their website. What was their plan when they put that interface together? Yeah, I don’t really get the feeling that Amazon has an overarching technical vision, just a whole lot of really smart people. A good example is their diamond search. Yeah, it’s a very cool hack, but it’s not similar anything else on their website. What was their plan when they put that interface together?

]]> By: Information Takes Over » Blog Archive » Removing complexity http://about.scriblio.net/scribbles/140/hiding-complexity-in-library-20/#comment-1661 Information Takes Over » Blog Archive » Removing complexity Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:33:57 +0000 http://libdev.plymouth.edu/?p=26#comment-1661 [...] libdev talks about the complexity of opacs and warns us that this could increase with library 2.0. Indeed. has anybody looked at worldcat lately? There are so many bells and whistles that it is easy to get lost. I once even found that I had somehow managed to move from WorldCat to ArticleFirst without realising it, after puzzling over the way the book display had changed. [...] [...] libdev talks about the complexity of opacs and warns us that this could increase with library 2.0. Indeed. has anybody looked at worldcat lately? There are so many bells and whistles that it is easy to get lost. I once even found that I had somehow managed to move from WorldCat to ArticleFirst without realising it, after puzzling over the way the book display had changed. [...]

]]> By: Eby http://about.scriblio.net/scribbles/140/hiding-complexity-in-library-20/#comment-1660 Eby Tue, 29 Nov 2005 07:23:57 +0000 http://libdev.plymouth.edu/?p=26#comment-1660 I think it's a good idea to keep watching some of the others such as Yahoo and Amazon that are in the same boat as the OPAC, having legacy and politics to deal with when adding these features. Neither can become "simpler" tomorrow without huge consequences. Yahoo is making an increased effort to fix what problems they can and make things easier to use. Amazon, however, seems to be adding on features (tags, forums, etc) without much thought into the integration. At least it seems to me that the pages are getting more and more bloated and confusing. Maybe it's just me. I think it’s a good idea to keep watching some of the others such as Yahoo and Amazon that are in the same boat as the OPAC, having legacy and politics to deal with when adding these features. Neither can become “simpler” tomorrow without huge consequences. Yahoo is making an increased effort to fix what problems they can and make things easier to use. Amazon, however, seems to be adding on features (tags, forums, etc) without much thought into the integration. At least it seems to me that the pages are getting more and more bloated and confusing. Maybe it’s just me.

]]> By: casey20 http://about.scriblio.net/scribbles/140/hiding-complexity-in-library-20/#comment-1659 casey20 Tue, 29 Nov 2005 05:24:15 +0000 http://libdev.plymouth.edu/?p=26#comment-1659 I personally think we've failed if all this fantastic newness makes the catalog even one iota more complex than it is now. Things are already too complicated, even if we were offering twice as much functionality. I think your point about having the experts-only features there but having it hidden in a logical way is crucial. Ideally, your users won't have to go through some hassle to add or subtract features, because the features will be there just when they need them, and where they would think of looking for them. The software needs to be more intelligent so your users can get by with knowing less. If that sounds like a tall order, it is. It's made much harder by the inflexibility of current systems -- and the inflexibility of the library world in general. Even among the online giants, I think most don't get it. Amazon is a prime offender. Yahoo is almost as bad. The future is in sites with rich, intuitive interfaces where you can figure out how to do 90% of the stuff you want without looking at the instructions. I'm thinking Remember the Milk, Gmail & the 37signals webapps as prime examples of web 2.0 stuff that just works. What would happen tomorrow if the entire library catalog was replaced by a single page with a single search box on it? How could you make that work? Do I need all those dropdowns and boxes to find what I'm looking for? Why can't I type "Bob Dylan CD's" into anyone's library OPAC and just get Bob Dylan CD's back? Or "books about dogs written before 1900"? I don't see any way to get to that amazing 2.0 future without throwing a lot of dead weight -- old protocols and decades of card catalog-centric thinking -- off the side first. Hiding complexity should start with the complexity we've already got. It's time for less. I personally think we’ve failed if all this fantastic newness makes the catalog even one iota more complex than it is now. Things are already too complicated, even if we were offering twice as much functionality.

I think your point about having the experts-only features there but having it hidden in a logical way is crucial. Ideally, your users won’t have to go through some hassle to add or subtract features, because the features will be there just when they need them, and where they would think of looking for them. The software needs to be more intelligent so your users can get by with knowing less.

If that sounds like a tall order, it is.
It’s made much harder by the inflexibility of current systems — and the inflexibility of the library world in general. Even among the online giants, I think most don’t get it. Amazon is a prime offender. Yahoo is almost as bad. The future is in sites with rich, intuitive interfaces where you can figure out how to do 90% of the stuff you want without looking at the instructions. I’m thinking Remember the Milk, Gmail & the 37signals webapps as prime examples of web 2.0 stuff that just works.

What would happen tomorrow if the entire library catalog was replaced by a single page with a single search box on it? How could you make that work? Do I need all those dropdowns and boxes to find what I’m looking for? Why can’t I type “Bob Dylan CD’s” into anyone’s library OPAC and just get Bob Dylan CD’s back? Or “books about dogs written before 1900″?

I don’t see any way to get to that amazing 2.0 future without throwing a lot of dead weight — old protocols and decades of card catalog-centric thinking — off the side first. Hiding complexity should start with the complexity we’ve already got. It’s time for less.

]]>