Agenda: a brainstorming session about possible ways of displaying information about databases to our users.
Present: Benda, Brown, Erickson, Gambill, Kutka, Loder, Porter, Rich, Stewart-Mailhiot Absent: Franco, Foutch, Gray, Jordan
Minutes: (Sue) The committee discussed issues related to the display of databases generally and came up with a list of desired features. Some features are related to a subject-based list of databases, but many relate to content and display issues for subjec-based guides, course guides, and lists of databases on campus library websites. Members of the group presented examples that illustrated desired features.
Jodie shared information about LibData, an open source option for subject and course guides that she saw at TLA. MTSU is using it. She will work on getting this installed so that we can create some sample guides to test out. We would like to conduct usability on both the back-end (i.e. is it really easy for library staff to use?) and on the end products created for users.
Sue mentioned that LibGuides, a commercial product, offers trials and we could set this up if desired.
Top priorities:
Ability to pull from “big database” into needed place, whether that be a subject page, a course guide or a campus library page.
Little technical skills necessary to build a subject/course page from the available content about the databases.
2nd tier priorities:
Ability to customize elements of entries that display (dates of coverage, descriptive elements, truncation symbol, etc.) within each context (subject guide, course guide, etc.) -- (see Denver)
Ability for librarian to rank/rate the database within each context (e.g. PsycINFO may be rated highly for one subject or one course, but not for others where it is listed as key). -- (see Denver)
Flexible categories within the lists of databases by subject or on course and subject guides. This should include the ability to add descriptions of print resources, other textual elements, widgets and links.
Icons for VU only, free, trial -- (see Denver)
Hierarchy of subjects such as, Social Sciences—Sociology—Demography and ability to drill down through them.-- (See U. of Minnesota)
Contents on left -- (See U. of Minnesota)
Other elements that we’d like to see, but that are not as critical as the above:
Library 2.0 features such as the ability for users to rank databases, build their own set of favorite databases, RSS feeds, tagging. -- (see Iowa)
Ability to easily link to vendor generated lists of titles within databases and to vendor and locally created tutorials and other help features. -- (See Denver)
Customized look and feel of entries (font size, etc.). -- (see U. of Minnesota)
Other things we want to keep in mind for a new system:
List fewer databases at the top of the screen, possibly with a way to go to a fuller list (more…).
Both subject guides and course guides are still needed, as well as a way to list databases by subject.
Flexibility in customizable content trumps look and feel issues, but we really want both!