Yeah, as one of the developers of Xerxes, I've been meaning to fix that
long-page problem. If any other PHP developers want to contribute a patch,
please feel free. It won't take any herculean R&D to fix that feature, just
figuring out what the interface ought to look like and making it so. (Fixing
the caching headers so a browser can cache that page wouldn't hurt either).
Just hasn't been a big enough priority for me to get to. Open source,
developers work on what's a priority for them locally, if you need something
else please help fix it!
As far as librarians wanting certain resources to be findable but NOT through
the catalog... this is a mystery to me. If you want users to find it, why would
you want it not to be findable thorugh the catalog? In my experience, sometimes
there are semi-reasonable reasons behind this, that don't really mean what they
seem to mean:
1) We don't want it in the ILS back-end because it will confuse our data
management prctices, and having it in the ILS back-end is the only way to get
it in "the catalog". This really means the ILS back-end workflow is crap (as
all of ours are), but a solution (in addition to getting a better ILS), would
be creating a 'discovery layer' on top of the ILS that is your front-end
catalog, but can include records not actually in the back-end ILS. (But you're
going to run into problems with (de-)duplication if SOME of your 'extra'
content is ALSO in the catalog and others isn't. What we really need is a
back-end metadata management system that actually WORKS WELL, but none of us
have it.)
2) The catalog interface sucks, nobody will ever be able to find databases in
there. Solution here obviously is a better catalog interface, possibly
including the ability to list/limit just the things you call 'databases'.
3) We just don't want them in the catalog, because they don't belong there.
Okay, on this one I'm stymied. Some people are insane.
I think we need to do it with an interface that works for users, and we need to
do it without making back-end workflow more expensive (ideally it should make
it LESS expensive to not have to maintain seperate datastores for this stuff!),
but I can't see any reason we should _intentionally_ present our users with
multiple search interfaces, each of which searches over different "types" of
content. Oh, you use THIS form to find e-journals, and you use this OTHER
interface that works completely differently to find databases ("what's a
'database' exactly? Well, you see, I dunno, I know it when I see it), and you
use this OTHER thing we call 'the catalog' to find, well, it's hard to say
exactly what's in there, it's just everything else, except for the things that
aren't in it either.
I understand how some of us are stuck doing that because we can't figure out a
way out that doesn't mess up workflows and that works for users -- but I
absolutely and completely do not understand doing that with INTENTION.
________________________________________
From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Thompson, Keri
[thomps...@si.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 5:46 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A to Z lists
We have a home grown system built on CF/MSSQL. It currently manages our
electronic serials licensing workflow (or part of it at least) as well as
generating the A-Z list. One peculiarity of the list, and one reason why we're
still using it, is that staff wanted to be able to include "select" free/open
access serials in a list while *not* adding them to the catalog.
I hope to replace it with something more automated in the near future.
Keri Thompson
Head, Web Services Department
Smithsonian Institution Libraries
e. thomps...@si.edu t. 202.633.1716
www.sil.si.edu || www.smithsonianlibraries.si.edu || www.biodiversitylibrary.org
.: yes, we're on twitter @silibraries :.
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of
Nadaleen F Tempelman-Kluit
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 4:37 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A to Z lists
We user Xerxes too to serve up our databases A-Z list but as we have so many
databases (900 or so.....) that it takes a really long time for the page to
load, as the way Xerxes is currently designed, it loads the whole A-Z list at
once. So if you have a large number of databases, be warned that providing them
through Xerxes may result in your users waiting awhile...
Nadaleen Tempelman-Kluit
Discovery and Digital Access Librarian
Bobst Library, New York University
n...@nyu.edu
(212) 998-2469
----- Original Message -----
From: Naomi Dushay <ndus...@stanford.edu>
Date: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 4:29 pm
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A to Z lists
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> if you put the info in a Solr index, you could use Blacklight on top.
>
> On Feb 16, 2011, at 1:18 PM, Michele DeSilva wrote:
>
> > Hi Code4Lib-ers,
> >
> > I want to chime in and say that I, too, enjoyed the streaming
> > archive from the conference.
> >
> > I also have a question: my library has a horribly antiquated A to Z
>
> > list of databases and online resources (it's based in Access). We'd
>
> > like to do something that looks more modern and is far more user
> > friendly. I found a great article in the Code4Lib journal (issue 12,
>
> > by Danielle Rosenthal & Mario Bernado) about building a searchable A
>
> > to Z list using Drupal. I'm also wondering what other institutions
>
> > have done as far as in-house solutions. I know there're products we
>
> > could buy, but, like everyone else, we don't have much money at the
>
> > moment.
> >
> > Thanks for any info or advice!
> >
> > Michele DeSilva
> > Central Oregon Community College Library
> > Emerging Technologies Librarian
> > 541-383-7565
> > mdesi...@cocc.edu
