Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
Okay, thanks for the background on Contribute. I am new here and haven't really used it before. I only know what I gathered from the documentation online. If Contribute is most powerful in conjunction with Dreamweaver, that is another strike against it in my book. I have not had very good experiences with Dreamweaver from a code maintainability standpoint. Maybe the people whose code I was maintaining just did not use Dreamweaver to its fullest potential, but it has left a bad taste in my mouth nonetheless. No spaghetti code for me, thanks. Josh Welker -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Wilhelmina Randtke Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 10:32 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it) Avoid Contribute, if possible. A Dreamweaver and Contribute framework makes for a very flexible website. But... the Contribute editor accounts have to be very locked down or else there will be some problems with the two programs playing together. In Contribute, it is possible to enable editing as text, which gives you all the power of fingers on keyboard coding. However, a site done in Dreamweaver with templates and other structural awesomeness pretty much rules out edit as text in Contribute. If you go in and edit as text with Contribute, it is very easy to accidentally disassociate a page from the Dreamweaver template. Then when there is an update to the template, you have problems. Most likely, your page will kick back to what it looked like the last time it was in compliance with the template. There may also be some problems editing pages that use spry widgets, so some of the awesome looking things that are easy in Dreamweaver are off the table in Contribute. The alternative to edit as text is to allow you to insert code snippets in Contribute, but then going in and editing them later is annoying. Like every CMS ever, Contribute will insert some white space or garbage at times. And with no way to edit code, you can't fix these issues. When you say there are no plugins or scripting for Contribute, that's not true of the program. That's how your campus has configured things. It's a political issue, not 100% tech. But they have very good technology reasons to lock down the Contribute accounts, from Dreamweaver and Contribute not working well together. A politically favorable main campus which wants to serve does best by not giving you enough rope to hang yourself, and no matter how techy you are, it's easy to do that in innately buggy Contribute. -Wilhelmina Randtke On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Joshua Welker wrote: > Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or > should not compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS > rather than a custom library one? We are going through this process > right now. Our web pages are currently all in static HTML and > LibGuides. I am wanting to move to Drupal, and campus IT wants us to > move to their Adobe Contribute platform. AFAIK, Contribute does not > allow for any server-side scripting and does not have any sort of > plugin system, and I am very concerned that Contribute would harm the > library's ability to effectively integrate its online resources into a > single web portal (server-side caching, indexes, scheduled tasks, etc). > > I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping > others can share the fruits of their experience. > > Thoughts? > > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf > Of Jimmy Ghaphery > Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White > and I researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, > demonstrating the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus > of control outside of systems' departments, and the state of content > policies.[1] > > Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech > community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) > was "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content > management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or > adaptability of local content management system implementations in > libraries." > > One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial > alternative is that the library code community is so di
Re: [CODE4LIB] Subject guide policies (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
We don't do tabs (we use SubjectsPlus, not Libguides). Our rules about side columns read as follows: Left Column should contain primary content. Right column should contain supplemental content including, but not limited to: - Dashboard (directly under subject specialist) - Other content may include Related guides, Selected journals / RSS, Associations, Help documents. Not very strict, since "primary" and "supplemental" are subjective. I've also had to remind that their right-column content will display below their left column content on a smaller screen. On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Josh Welker wrote: > Thanks.Do you have any guidelines around the numbers and colors of tabs? > That is one of the big issues. Also, do you have rules around what is > allowed in side columns? > > Josh Welker > > On Aug 14, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Ron Gilmour wrote: > > > At Ithaca College, the web team has recently written some very loose > > guidelines on the construction of subject guides. Generally, we stayed > away > > from saying much about content, so most of the rules apply to the > presence > > and placement of certain common structural elements. For example, there > > should always be contact information for the librarian and this should > > always be in the top right. There should be table of contents (unless the > > guide is really short) and it should be located at the top of the main > > column. > > > > There are also some rules that are intended to prevent responsivity > > problems (e.g., wrap your embedded videos in a > class="fitvid<http://fitvidsjs.com/>"> > > to make sure they are usable on mobile devices). > > > > In order to keep a reasonable content hierarchy, we ask that librarians > use > > only h3 or lower for internal headers. > > > > We've specified what we call a "dashboard" widget that contains links to, > > well, things that are often linked to from subject guides (e.g., ILL, > > citation info). This element is required on all guides. > > > > Regarding buy-in, we stressed that these rules were based on responses > from > > actual users in usability tests. This is convincing to most (not all) > > librarians. Our usability tests showed that consistency across guides is > > important to users. We presented the rules as representing a balance > > between pedagogical freedom for librarians and the need for consistency > and > > ease of navigation for users. (A paper on this is currently under > review.) > > > > Enforcement has not been a major issue. Content-creators have been > *cough* we > > use tasers *cough* very cooperative. > > > > Ron Gilmour > > Web Services Librarian > > Ithaca College Library > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Joshua Welker wrote: > > > >> One of the recurring themes in the LibGuides thread was that libraries > >> need better policies regarding content and style management in guides. I > >> wholeheartedly agree here, but my attempts to do so in the past were > shot > >> down in favor of giving all librarians maximum freedom. > >> > >> I have two questions: > >> > >> 1) What kind of policies do you all have in place for subject guide > style > >> and content management? > >> 2) How do you get librarians to buy in to the policies, and how are they > >> enforced? > >> > >> Josh Welker > >> Information Technology Librarian > >> James C. Kirkpatrick Library > >> University of Central Missouri > >> Warrensburg, MO 64093 > >> JCKL 2260 > >> 660.543.8022 > >> > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > >> Jimmy Ghaphery > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM > >> To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > >> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > >> > >> I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and > I > >> researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, > demonstrating > >> the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control > outside > >> of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] > >> > >> Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech > >> community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was > >> "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content > >> manag
Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
Avoid Contribute, if possible. A Dreamweaver and Contribute framework makes for a very flexible website. But... the Contribute editor accounts have to be very locked down or else there will be some problems with the two programs playing together. In Contribute, it is possible to enable editing as text, which gives you all the power of fingers on keyboard coding. However, a site done in Dreamweaver with templates and other structural awesomeness pretty much rules out edit as text in Contribute. If you go in and edit as text with Contribute, it is very easy to accidentally disassociate a page from the Dreamweaver template. Then when there is an update to the template, you have problems. Most likely, your page will kick back to what it looked like the last time it was in compliance with the template. There may also be some problems editing pages that use spry widgets, so some of the awesome looking things that are easy in Dreamweaver are off the table in Contribute. The alternative to edit as text is to allow you to insert code snippets in Contribute, but then going in and editing them later is annoying. Like every CMS ever, Contribute will insert some white space or garbage at times. And with no way to edit code, you can't fix these issues. When you say there are no plugins or scripting for Contribute, that's not true of the program. That's how your campus has configured things. It's a political issue, not 100% tech. But they have very good technology reasons to lock down the Contribute accounts, from Dreamweaver and Contribute not working well together. A politically favorable main campus which wants to serve does best by not giving you enough rope to hang yourself, and no matter how techy you are, it's easy to do that in innately buggy Contribute. -Wilhelmina Randtke On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Joshua Welker wrote: > Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or should > not compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS rather than a > custom library one? We are going through this process right now. Our web > pages are currently all in static HTML and LibGuides. I am wanting to move > to Drupal, and campus IT wants us to move to their Adobe Contribute > platform. AFAIK, Contribute does not allow for any server-side scripting > and does not have any sort of plugin system, and I am very concerned that > Contribute would harm the library's ability to effectively integrate its > online resources into a single web portal (server-side caching, indexes, > scheduled tasks, etc). > > I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping others > can share the fruits of their experience. > > Thoughts? > > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > Jimmy Ghaphery > Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I > researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating > the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside > of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] > > Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech > community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was > "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content > management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or > adaptability of local content management system implementations in > libraries." > > One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial > alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the > various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the > download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across > themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything > really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here > certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, > governance, etc. > > As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the > public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From > the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a > third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres > and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public side > there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to t
Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
Not really that I can see. Since I maintain the API, I maintain the API responses and I only return what is necessary for display and interaction. For example, our Service & Location Hours (http://www.library.jhu.edu/hours.html) are all managed in separate Google Calendar calendars. The GCal API response for a week's worth of opening and closing times is around 9k (per calendar). With 10 services/locations, that would be 100k in JSON alone being sent every time the hours page loads. So, the Gcal API response is processed on the server side so that I only send about 600 bytes to the user (per calendar). My API also sits behind varnish so the responses are cached and served up super quick. I <3 varnish. We're not currently in the central CMS. It's just a locally hosted Apache site. But, we have a branch campus (https://www.sais-jhu.edu/library) that is hosted within their centralized (and rather locked-down) Drupal install that makes use of some of the same API components (the list of libguides and databases). And really, your data backend could be anything. It could be a "dark" Wordpress install from which you grab ATOM feeds from for content. We use a mixture of Google Calendar, Google Docs, LibGuides, Wordpress, Twitter, and locally-generated XML. -Sean On 8/14/13 10:37 AM, "Josh Welker" wrote: > That's an interesting idea. Do you run into performance issues with the > abundance of DOM updates with the javascript? Also, how much control do you > have over the content of library pages on the CMS? > > Josh Welker > > On Aug 14, 2013, at 8:35 AM, Sean Hannan wrote: > >> You could do something like what I did and run your own data backend and use >> whatever you need to/have to to display content. >> >> Our website is just static HTML, CSS, and Javascript. Everything >> dynamic/data-powered is javascript that is pulling from a centralized API >> (written using grape: http://intridea.github.io/grape/). We can move the >> website to some cloud provider, into a central IT-managed system, or >> elsewhere and it won't break. >> >> I originally presented the concept at code4lib 2011 (slides: >> http://www.slideshare.net/MrDys/lets-get-small-a-microservices-approach-to-l >> ibrary-websites), but it's in production now. >> >> -Sean >> >> On 8/14/13 9:21 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: >> >>> Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or should >>> not compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS rather than a >>> custom library one? We are going through this process right now. Our web >>> pages are currently all in static HTML and LibGuides. I am wanting to move >>> to Drupal, and campus IT wants us to move to their Adobe Contribute >>> platform. AFAIK, Contribute does not allow for any server-side scripting >>> and does not have any sort of plugin system, and I am very concerned that >>> Contribute would harm the library's ability to effectively integrate its >>> online resources into a single web portal (server-side caching, indexes, >>> scheduled tasks, etc). >>> >>> I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping others >>> can share the fruits of their experience. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Josh Welker >>> Information Technology Librarian >>> James C. Kirkpatrick Library >>> University of Central Missouri >>> Warrensburg, MO 64093 >>> JCKL 2260 >>> 660.543.8022 >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of >>> Jimmy Ghaphery >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM >>> To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU >>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it >>> >>> I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I >>> researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating >>> the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside >>> of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] >>> >>> Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech >>> community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was >>> "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content >>> management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or >>> adaptability of local content management system implementations in >>> libraries." >>> >>> One of the bigges
Re: [CODE4LIB] Subject guide policies (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
Thanks.Do you have any guidelines around the numbers and colors of tabs? That is one of the big issues. Also, do you have rules around what is allowed in side columns? Josh Welker On Aug 14, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Ron Gilmour wrote: > At Ithaca College, the web team has recently written some very loose > guidelines on the construction of subject guides. Generally, we stayed away > from saying much about content, so most of the rules apply to the presence > and placement of certain common structural elements. For example, there > should always be contact information for the librarian and this should > always be in the top right. There should be table of contents (unless the > guide is really short) and it should be located at the top of the main > column. > > There are also some rules that are intended to prevent responsivity > problems (e.g., wrap your embedded videos in a class="fitvid<http://fitvidsjs.com/>"> > to make sure they are usable on mobile devices). > > In order to keep a reasonable content hierarchy, we ask that librarians use > only h3 or lower for internal headers. > > We've specified what we call a "dashboard" widget that contains links to, > well, things that are often linked to from subject guides (e.g., ILL, > citation info). This element is required on all guides. > > Regarding buy-in, we stressed that these rules were based on responses from > actual users in usability tests. This is convincing to most (not all) > librarians. Our usability tests showed that consistency across guides is > important to users. We presented the rules as representing a balance > between pedagogical freedom for librarians and the need for consistency and > ease of navigation for users. (A paper on this is currently under review.) > > Enforcement has not been a major issue. Content-creators have been *cough* we > use tasers *cough* very cooperative. > > Ron Gilmour > Web Services Librarian > Ithaca College Library > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Joshua Welker wrote: > >> One of the recurring themes in the LibGuides thread was that libraries >> need better policies regarding content and style management in guides. I >> wholeheartedly agree here, but my attempts to do so in the past were shot >> down in favor of giving all librarians maximum freedom. >> >> I have two questions: >> >> 1) What kind of policies do you all have in place for subject guide style >> and content management? >> 2) How do you get librarians to buy in to the policies, and how are they >> enforced? >> >> Josh Welker >> Information Technology Librarian >> James C. Kirkpatrick Library >> University of Central Missouri >> Warrensburg, MO 64093 >> JCKL 2260 >> 660.543.8022 >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of >> Jimmy Ghaphery >> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM >> To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU >> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it >> >> I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I >> researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating >> the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside >> of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] >> >> Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech >> community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was >> "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content >> management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or >> adaptability of local content management system implementations in >> libraries." >> >> One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial >> alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the >> various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the >> download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across >> themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything >> really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here >> certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, >> governance, etc. >> >> As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the >> public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From >> the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a >> third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres >> and push out an api/xml feeds t
Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
I agree 100% with all points, and i want to keep the library server separate. I just was curious if anyone had any advice otherwise. Does anyone have experience using a separate library CMS hosted on a campus-IT server? (Also I recently implemented a Wordpress library site and loved it, but at my new job I am leaning towards Drupal. The admin interface for WP is not great when you are using custom content types, and non-techie librarians were getting scared. Also, Drupal 8 is resolving a lot of my complaints about the content creation UI. But yes I will probably miss the ease of theming and plugin creation in WP. ) Josh Welker On Aug 14, 2013, at 8:38 AM, Michael Schofield wrote: > Our university has Cascade Server and we have a Wordpress Network on in-house > servers we control. Here is a list of good reasons to fly solo [if your > library can support it properly, etc.]: > > 1.) A lot of university websites really suck, and as part of your > institution's CMS you are going to have a lot less freedom to innovate or > implement an immediate design change. Of course, these options might be > already culled depending how strictly you're mandated to adhere to your uni's > style guide. If you have enough freedom for it to matter, you might benefit > from the control. > > 2.) Campus IT often doesn't comprehend the usability needs of a library's > unique and varied patronbase - and if they do, they are concerned more with > registration and any of the other constituents (colleges, departments, admin) > to devote to the library. Your patrons are potential power users and they > will be critical and vocal about access and usability flaws. > > 3.) Moving to an open CMS like [sigh ...] Drupal* or [yay!] Wordpress lets > your library participate in and--if you're able--contribute to the #libtech > community. You may create a module or plugin that may seem particularly > geared toward the library niche, but you will be surprised by the positive > feedback from this excellent community of good-natured peers if you let > others use and improve on it. > > 4.) Contribute is going to make it difficult to aspire to either DRY Content > or community. If your colleagues are going to produce a lot of content for > the web, you will benefit from a CMS - what's more, if it's a CMS your > library controls, then you can more fairly respond to any training or > technical needs that might otherwise pend in your university's significantly > larger queue. > > 5.) If you control your own PHP server, it doesn't just *have* to be a Drupal > / WP silo; you'll be able to plug in or build any assortment of applications > as your library requires. > > All the best, > > Michael Schofield > // Front-End Librarian > // www.ns4lib.com > > * I'm just kidding, but I've chosen my colors! > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > Joshua Welker > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 9:21 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems > (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it) > > Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or should not > compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS rather than a custom > library one? We are going through this process right now. Our web pages are > currently all in static HTML and LibGuides. I am wanting to move to Drupal, > and campus IT wants us to move to their Adobe Contribute platform. AFAIK, > Contribute does not allow for any server-side scripting and does not have any > sort of plugin system, and I am very concerned that Contribute would harm the > library's ability to effectively integrate its online resources into a single > web portal (server-side caching, indexes, scheduled tasks, etc). > > I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping others > can share the fruits of their experience. > > Thoughts? > > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Jimmy > Ghaphery > Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I > researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating > the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of c
Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
That's an interesting idea. Do you run into performance issues with the abundance of DOM updates with the javascript? Also, how much control do you have over the content of library pages on the CMS? Josh Welker On Aug 14, 2013, at 8:35 AM, Sean Hannan wrote: > You could do something like what I did and run your own data backend and use > whatever you need to/have to to display content. > > Our website is just static HTML, CSS, and Javascript. Everything > dynamic/data-powered is javascript that is pulling from a centralized API > (written using grape: http://intridea.github.io/grape/). We can move the > website to some cloud provider, into a central IT-managed system, or > elsewhere and it won't break. > > I originally presented the concept at code4lib 2011 (slides: > http://www.slideshare.net/MrDys/lets-get-small-a-microservices-approach-to-l > ibrary-websites), but it's in production now. > > -Sean > > On 8/14/13 9:21 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: > >> Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or should >> not compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS rather than a >> custom library one? We are going through this process right now. Our web >> pages are currently all in static HTML and LibGuides. I am wanting to move >> to Drupal, and campus IT wants us to move to their Adobe Contribute >> platform. AFAIK, Contribute does not allow for any server-side scripting >> and does not have any sort of plugin system, and I am very concerned that >> Contribute would harm the library's ability to effectively integrate its >> online resources into a single web portal (server-side caching, indexes, >> scheduled tasks, etc). >> >> I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping others >> can share the fruits of their experience. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Josh Welker >> Information Technology Librarian >> James C. Kirkpatrick Library >> University of Central Missouri >> Warrensburg, MO 64093 >> JCKL 2260 >> 660.543.8022 >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of >> Jimmy Ghaphery >> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM >> To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU >> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it >> >> I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I >> researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating >> the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside >> of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] >> >> Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech >> community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was >> "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content >> management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or >> adaptability of local content management system implementations in >> libraries." >> >> One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial >> alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the >> various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the >> download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across >> themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything >> really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here >> certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, >> governance, etc. >> >> As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the >> public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From >> the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a >> third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres >> and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public side >> there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to the >> core of value of professionally knowing one's community and serving it. >> >> [1] https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/1830 >> >> best, >> >> Jimmy >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Galen Charlton >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke >>> wrote: >>> >>>> There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to >>>> host pathfinders. Those are sup
Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
Why can't it be both? Just because the library has its own Web server (something I would never, ever give up, mostly for Michael's reason #5), that doesn't mean some of the library's content can't be part of the main institutional Web site. That's what we do here. All of the relatively static content--policies, guidelines, "About Us" type information, etc.--lives on the College's Web site, as does content that benefits from being able to draw on other College systems -- e.g., the library staff directory and calendar of events. However, we still run a couple of "specialized library CMSs" on our own Web server for content types that benefit from special handling: Archon for our archival collections, and SubjectsPlus for our subject and course guides. As much as is practical I try to keep a relatively consistent look and feel across all three systems (as well as the library catalog, our public-facing Serials Solutions pages, the IR, etc.), so patrons think of the whole ball of wax as "the library web site" no matter which specific system they're really using. Julia * Julia Bauder Social Studies and Data Services Librarian Grinnell College Libraries Sixth Ave. Grinnell, IA 50112 641-269-4431 On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Joshua Welker wrote: > Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or should > not compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS rather than a > custom library one? We are going through this process right now. Our web > pages are currently all in static HTML and LibGuides. I am wanting to move > to Drupal, and campus IT wants us to move to their Adobe Contribute > platform. AFAIK, Contribute does not allow for any server-side scripting > and does not have any sort of plugin system, and I am very concerned that > Contribute would harm the library's ability to effectively integrate its > online resources into a single web portal (server-side caching, indexes, > scheduled tasks, etc). > > I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping others > can share the fruits of their experience. > > Thoughts? > > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > Jimmy Ghaphery > Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I > researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating > the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside > of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] > > Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech > community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was > "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content > management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or > adaptability of local content management system implementations in > libraries." > > One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial > alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the > various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the > download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across > themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything > really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here > certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, > governance, etc. > > As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the > public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From > the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a > third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres > and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public side > there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to the > core of value of professionally knowing one's community and serving it. > > [1] https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/1830 > > best, > > Jimmy > > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Galen Charlton > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke > >wrote: > > > > > There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to > > > host pathf
Re: [CODE4LIB] Subject guide policies (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
At Ithaca College, the web team has recently written some very loose guidelines on the construction of subject guides. Generally, we stayed away from saying much about content, so most of the rules apply to the presence and placement of certain common structural elements. For example, there should always be contact information for the librarian and this should always be in the top right. There should be table of contents (unless the guide is really short) and it should be located at the top of the main column. There are also some rules that are intended to prevent responsivity problems (e.g., wrap your embedded videos in a http://fitvidsjs.com/>"> to make sure they are usable on mobile devices). In order to keep a reasonable content hierarchy, we ask that librarians use only h3 or lower for internal headers. We've specified what we call a "dashboard" widget that contains links to, well, things that are often linked to from subject guides (e.g., ILL, citation info). This element is required on all guides. Regarding buy-in, we stressed that these rules were based on responses from actual users in usability tests. This is convincing to most (not all) librarians. Our usability tests showed that consistency across guides is important to users. We presented the rules as representing a balance between pedagogical freedom for librarians and the need for consistency and ease of navigation for users. (A paper on this is currently under review.) Enforcement has not been a major issue. Content-creators have been *cough* we use tasers *cough* very cooperative. Ron Gilmour Web Services Librarian Ithaca College Library On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Joshua Welker wrote: > One of the recurring themes in the LibGuides thread was that libraries > need better policies regarding content and style management in guides. I > wholeheartedly agree here, but my attempts to do so in the past were shot > down in favor of giving all librarians maximum freedom. > > I have two questions: > > 1) What kind of policies do you all have in place for subject guide style > and content management? > 2) How do you get librarians to buy in to the policies, and how are they > enforced? > > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > Jimmy Ghaphery > Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I > researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating > the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside > of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] > > Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech > community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was > "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content > management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or > adaptability of local content management system implementations in > libraries." > > One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial > alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the > various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the > download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across > themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything > really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here > certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, > governance, etc. > > As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the > public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From > the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a > third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres > and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public side > there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to the > core of value of professionally knowing one's community and serving it. > > [1] https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/1830 > > best, > > Jimmy > > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Galen Charlton > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke > >wrote: > > > > > There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to > > > host pathfinders. Those are supposed to be periodi
Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
Our university has Cascade Server and we have a Wordpress Network on in-house servers we control. Here is a list of good reasons to fly solo [if your library can support it properly, etc.]: 1.) A lot of university websites really suck, and as part of your institution's CMS you are going to have a lot less freedom to innovate or implement an immediate design change. Of course, these options might be already culled depending how strictly you're mandated to adhere to your uni's style guide. If you have enough freedom for it to matter, you might benefit from the control. 2.) Campus IT often doesn't comprehend the usability needs of a library's unique and varied patronbase - and if they do, they are concerned more with registration and any of the other constituents (colleges, departments, admin) to devote to the library. Your patrons are potential power users and they will be critical and vocal about access and usability flaws. 3.) Moving to an open CMS like [sigh ...] Drupal* or [yay!] Wordpress lets your library participate in and--if you're able--contribute to the #libtech community. You may create a module or plugin that may seem particularly geared toward the library niche, but you will be surprised by the positive feedback from this excellent community of good-natured peers if you let others use and improve on it. 4.) Contribute is going to make it difficult to aspire to either DRY Content or community. If your colleagues are going to produce a lot of content for the web, you will benefit from a CMS - what's more, if it's a CMS your library controls, then you can more fairly respond to any training or technical needs that might otherwise pend in your university's significantly larger queue. 5.) If you control your own PHP server, it doesn't just *have* to be a Drupal / WP silo; you'll be able to plug in or build any assortment of applications as your library requires. All the best, Michael Schofield // Front-End Librarian // www.ns4lib.com * I'm just kidding, but I've chosen my colors! -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Joshua Welker Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 9:21 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it) Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or should not compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS rather than a custom library one? We are going through this process right now. Our web pages are currently all in static HTML and LibGuides. I am wanting to move to Drupal, and campus IT wants us to move to their Adobe Contribute platform. AFAIK, Contribute does not allow for any server-side scripting and does not have any sort of plugin system, and I am very concerned that Contribute would harm the library's ability to effectively integrate its online resources into a single web portal (server-side caching, indexes, scheduled tasks, etc). I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping others can share the fruits of their experience. Thoughts? Josh Welker Information Technology Librarian James C. Kirkpatrick Library University of Central Missouri Warrensburg, MO 64093 JCKL 2260 660.543.8022 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Jimmy Ghaphery Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or adaptability of local content management system implementations in libraries." One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, governance, etc. As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From the tech side once it is a
Re: [CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
You could do something like what I did and run your own data backend and use whatever you need to/have to to display content. Our website is just static HTML, CSS, and Javascript. Everything dynamic/data-powered is javascript that is pulling from a centralized API (written using grape: http://intridea.github.io/grape/). We can move the website to some cloud provider, into a central IT-managed system, or elsewhere and it won't break. I originally presented the concept at code4lib 2011 (slides: http://www.slideshare.net/MrDys/lets-get-small-a-microservices-approach-to-l ibrary-websites), but it's in production now. -Sean On 8/14/13 9:21 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: > Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or should > not compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS rather than a > custom library one? We are going through this process right now. Our web > pages are currently all in static HTML and LibGuides. I am wanting to move > to Drupal, and campus IT wants us to move to their Adobe Contribute > platform. AFAIK, Contribute does not allow for any server-side scripting > and does not have any sort of plugin system, and I am very concerned that > Contribute would harm the library's ability to effectively integrate its > online resources into a single web portal (server-side caching, indexes, > scheduled tasks, etc). > > I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping others > can share the fruits of their experience. > > Thoughts? > > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > Jimmy Ghaphery > Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I > researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating > the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside > of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] > > Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech > community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was > "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content > management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or > adaptability of local content management system implementations in > libraries." > > One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial > alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the > various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the > download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across > themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything > really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here > certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, > governance, etc. > > As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the > public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From > the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a > third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres > and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public side > there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to the > core of value of professionally knowing one's community and serving it. > > [1] https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/1830 > > best, > > Jimmy > > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Galen Charlton > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke >> wrote: >> >>> There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to >>> host pathfinders. Those are supposed to be periodically revisited. >>> One of >> the >>> big problems is that librarians will start a guide and never finish, >>> or make one then never maintain it. Periodically deleting >>> everything is a good thing for pathfinders and subject guides, and >>> people should do it anyway. No one's talking about tools for >>> digital archives, which have >> lock >>> in issues and are way more expensive. >>> >> >> Lock-in doesn't have to be absolute to be effective, it just has to >> has raise the bar sufficiently high to make users think twice about
[CODE4LIB] Subject guide policies (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
One of the recurring themes in the LibGuides thread was that libraries need better policies regarding content and style management in guides. I wholeheartedly agree here, but my attempts to do so in the past were shot down in favor of giving all librarians maximum freedom. I have two questions: 1) What kind of policies do you all have in place for subject guide style and content management? 2) How do you get librarians to buy in to the policies, and how are they enforced? Josh Welker Information Technology Librarian James C. Kirkpatrick Library University of Central Missouri Warrensburg, MO 64093 JCKL 2260 660.543.8022 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Jimmy Ghaphery Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or adaptability of local content management system implementations in libraries." One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, governance, etc. As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public side there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to the core of value of professionally knowing one's community and serving it. [1] https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/1830 best, Jimmy On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Galen Charlton wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke >wrote: > > > There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to > > host pathfinders. Those are supposed to be periodically revisited. > > One of > the > > big problems is that librarians will start a guide and never finish, > > or make one then never maintain it. Periodically deleting > > everything is a good thing for pathfinders and subject guides, and > > people should do it anyway. No one's talking about tools for > > digital archives, which have > lock > > in issues and are way more expensive. > > > > Lock-in doesn't have to be absolute to be effective, it just has to > has raise the bar sufficiently high to make users think twice about > migrating away. > > This applies even if the data to be moved is transitory and constantly > changing. For example, if a library has been diligently updating their > pathfinders, but wants to switch platforms, if there were no way to > export them to load into the successor system, the effort of redoing > them or doing a lot of copy-and-pasting could be prohibitive. > > As a general statement -- and I know that this battle has been > bitterly fought in the ILS space -- I believe that *all* library > software services, whether based on F/LOSS software or proprietary > software, should provide a way for the library to obtain a full dump > of their data, in an accessible format, at no additional charge. > > I see that LibGuides advertises the ability to make local backups of > individual pages and also provides (via a paid add-on module) an XML > export function. I don't know if SpringShare will also provide free > one-time exports on request, but I would hope they do. > > Of course, even if one has the data in hand, data migrations can still > take a lot of time, effort, and expertise. > > Regards, > > Galen > -- > Galen Charlton > Manager of Implementation > Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts > email: g...@esilibrary.com > direct: +1 770-709-5581 > cell: +1 404-984-4366 > skype: gmcharlt > web:http://www.esilibrary.com/ > Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org & > http://evergreen-ils.org > -- Jimmy Ghaphery Head, Digital Technologies VCU Libraries 804-827-3551
[CODE4LIB] Separate library CMS systems vs Campus-wide CMS systems (was [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
Does anyone have any suggestions as to where the library should or should not compromise when it comes to using an institutional CMS rather than a custom library one? We are going through this process right now. Our web pages are currently all in static HTML and LibGuides. I am wanting to move to Drupal, and campus IT wants us to move to their Adobe Contribute platform. AFAIK, Contribute does not allow for any server-side scripting and does not have any sort of plugin system, and I am very concerned that Contribute would harm the library's ability to effectively integrate its online resources into a single web portal (server-side caching, indexes, scheduled tasks, etc). I know the answer to this question is "it depends," but I am hoping others can share the fruits of their experience. Thoughts? Josh Welker Information Technology Librarian James C. Kirkpatrick Library University of Central Missouri Warrensburg, MO 64093 JCKL 2260 660.543.8022 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Jimmy Ghaphery Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:49 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or adaptability of local content management system implementations in libraries." One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, governance, etc. As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public side there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to the core of value of professionally knowing one's community and serving it. [1] https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/1830 best, Jimmy On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Galen Charlton wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke >wrote: > > > There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to > > host pathfinders. Those are supposed to be periodically revisited. > > One of > the > > big problems is that librarians will start a guide and never finish, > > or make one then never maintain it. Periodically deleting > > everything is a good thing for pathfinders and subject guides, and > > people should do it anyway. No one's talking about tools for > > digital archives, which have > lock > > in issues and are way more expensive. > > > > Lock-in doesn't have to be absolute to be effective, it just has to > has raise the bar sufficiently high to make users think twice about > migrating away. > > This applies even if the data to be moved is transitory and constantly > changing. For example, if a library has been diligently updating their > pathfinders, but wants to switch platforms, if there were no way to > export them to load into the successor system, the effort of redoing > them or doing a lot of copy-and-pasting could be prohibitive. > > As a general statement -- and I know that this battle has been > bitterly fought in the ILS space -- I believe that *all* library > software services, whether based on F/LOSS software or proprietary > software, should provide a way for the library to obtain a full dump > of their data, in an accessible format, at no additional charge. > > I see that LibGuides advertises the ability to make local backups of > individual pages and also provides (via a paid add-on module) an XML > export function. I don't know if SpringShare will also provide free > one-time exports on request, but I would hope they do. > > Of course, even if one has the data in hand, data migrations can still
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Galen Charlton writes > Lock-in doesn't have to be absolute to be effective, it just has to has > raise the bar sufficiently high to make users think twice about migrating > away. I fully agree with this. In general, lock-in is pervasive in the use of any information product. It even appears in the informational use of non-information products. Example: a supermarket provides you with your groceries. It's not an information product. Yet, you will prefer to use a supermarket that you are familiar with because you know where to find what you want. Lock-in reduces competitive forces. An important advantage of open-source solutions is that they reduce lock-in. They can't eliminate it because it is generic to the nature of information. > As a general statement -- and I know that this battle has been bitterly > fought in the ILS space -- It is not bitterly fought elsewhere because people just don't think this far. They think, say, "oh Google gives me such a great infrastructure for my email. And I don't care about the spying thrown in for good measure. So let me go for it." But twenty years from now will you have an archive of your mails? If you change providers, do you migrate the email archives? These are important questions to ask. I have not used Google mail, neither have I used libguides, so I have no idea how easy or how hard it is to migrate. But it is important to keep this is in mind when choosing between informational products. > I believe that *all* library software services, whether based on > F/LOSS software or proprietary software, should provide a way for > the library to obtain a full dump of their data, in an accessible > format, at no additional charge. I could not agree more. I don't think this is given enough prominence. > I see that LibGuides advertises the ability to make local backups of > individual pages and also provides (via a paid add-on module) an XML export > function. I don't know if SpringShare will also provide free one-time > exports on request, but I would hope they do. Spot on Galen, you raise the important (IMHO) issue. Cheers, Thomas Krichel http://openlib.org/home/krichel skype:thomaskrichel
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I have followed this thread with great interest. In 2011 Erin White and I researched many of the issues the group has been hitting on, demonstrating the popularity of LibGuides in ARL libraries, the locus of control outside of systems' departments, and the state of content policies.[1] Our most challenging statement in the article to the library tech community (which was watered down a bit in the peer review process) was "The popularity of LibGuides, at its heart a specialized content management system, also calls into question the vitality and/or adaptability of local content management system implementations in libraries." One of the biggest challenges I see toward creating a non-commercial alternative is that the library code community is so dispersed in the various institutions that it makes it difficult to get away from the download tar.gz model. Are our institutions ready to collaborate across themselves such that there could be a shared SaaS model (of anything really) that libraries could subscribe/contribute to? The barriers here certainly aren't technological, but more along the lines of policy, governance, etc. As for Research Guides in general, I see a very clear divide in the public/tech communities not only on platform but more philosophical. From the tech side once it is all boiled down, heck why do you even need a third party system; catalog the databases with some type of local genres and push out an api/xml feeds to various disciplines. From the public side there is a long lineage of individually curated guides that goes to the core of value of professionally knowing one's community and serving it. [1] https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/1830 best, Jimmy On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Galen Charlton wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke >wrote: > > > There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to host > > pathfinders. Those are supposed to be periodically revisited. One of > the > > big problems is that librarians will start a guide and never finish, or > > make one then never maintain it. Periodically deleting everything is a > > good thing for pathfinders and subject guides, and people should do it > > anyway. No one's talking about tools for digital archives, which have > lock > > in issues and are way more expensive. > > > > Lock-in doesn't have to be absolute to be effective, it just has to has > raise the bar sufficiently high to make users think twice about migrating > away. > > This applies even if the data to be moved is transitory and constantly > changing. For example, if a library has been diligently updating their > pathfinders, but wants to switch platforms, if there were no way to export > them to load into the successor system, the effort of redoing them or doing > a lot of copy-and-pasting could be prohibitive. > > As a general statement -- and I know that this battle has been bitterly > fought in the ILS space -- I believe that *all* library software services, > whether based on F/LOSS software or proprietary software, should provide a > way for the library to obtain a full dump of their data, in an accessible > format, at no additional charge. > > I see that LibGuides advertises the ability to make local backups of > individual pages and also provides (via a paid add-on module) an XML export > function. I don't know if SpringShare will also provide free one-time > exports on request, but I would hope they do. > > Of course, even if one has the data in hand, data migrations can still take > a lot of time, effort, and expertise. > > Regards, > > Galen > -- > Galen Charlton > Manager of Implementation > Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts > email: g...@esilibrary.com > direct: +1 770-709-5581 > cell: +1 404-984-4366 > skype: gmcharlt > web:http://www.esilibrary.com/ > Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org & > http://evergreen-ils.org > -- Jimmy Ghaphery Head, Digital Technologies VCU Libraries 804-827-3551
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Hi, On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Wilhelmina Randtke wrote: > There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to host > pathfinders. Those are supposed to be periodically revisited. One of the > big problems is that librarians will start a guide and never finish, or > make one then never maintain it. Periodically deleting everything is a > good thing for pathfinders and subject guides, and people should do it > anyway. No one's talking about tools for digital archives, which have lock > in issues and are way more expensive. > Lock-in doesn't have to be absolute to be effective, it just has to has raise the bar sufficiently high to make users think twice about migrating away. This applies even if the data to be moved is transitory and constantly changing. For example, if a library has been diligently updating their pathfinders, but wants to switch platforms, if there were no way to export them to load into the successor system, the effort of redoing them or doing a lot of copy-and-pasting could be prohibitive. As a general statement -- and I know that this battle has been bitterly fought in the ILS space -- I believe that *all* library software services, whether based on F/LOSS software or proprietary software, should provide a way for the library to obtain a full dump of their data, in an accessible format, at no additional charge. I see that LibGuides advertises the ability to make local backups of individual pages and also provides (via a paid add-on module) an XML export function. I don't know if SpringShare will also provide free one-time exports on request, but I would hope they do. Of course, even if one has the data in hand, data migrations can still take a lot of time, effort, and expertise. Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton Manager of Implementation Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts email: g...@esilibrary.com direct: +1 770-709-5581 cell: +1 404-984-4366 skype: gmcharlt web:http://www.esilibrary.com/ Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org & http://evergreen-ils.org
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I'm not sure I understand the more-heat-than-light criticisms of LibGuides. It perfectly fits the needs of many libraries. The most valid criticism that has been lodged -- that the CMS is so easy to use that librarians create content which they then don't maintain -- could be said of any website or CMS (except for the "so easy" part). The counter-argument might be that library content is better maintained in LibGuides than in other systems because librarians are not buffaloed by the underlying technology and willingly (happily) use them as part of their everyday workflow. Has anybody done that research? There were also several comments that Springshare support is not responsive. That has never been my experience. Some things might take longer to implement because programming is involved, but the support staff have been exemplary and every feature request I've made has been implemented or explained (in no b.s. terms) why they were unable to fulfill it. And, yeah, what Wilhelmina said. Tom
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Well, see, there you've said that the technology skills for open source are all on the install/maintenance side. Duh. Install and maintenance needs to be done by someone. Writing a check to outsource install and maintenance is one way to get those skills. Writing a check to Springshare solves technology issues, because Springshare provides the same product across libraries. An open source community, where a variety of companies provide services, will have some companies that provide a better deal than others and even vendors who provide different service to different clients based on how savvy the client is. The answer to proprietary hosted is not files with tar.gz extension or coding. The functionality most libraries get from a LibGuides is to get away from some IT bottleneck, avoid hassles of running a server and backups, or even have political clout by using a CMS that is only used by libraries (ie. if IT has heard of the CMS before, that's a much more uphill battle to use it). My guess is about nobody cares about similar functionality in terms of boxes here, boxes there, widgets. A way to promote an open source alternative would be to identify reputable hosts who already provide services. Then be informed about those so that libraries know what they can outsource where, and to give an impression of library community around specific sets of outsourcing arrangements, so that libraries have political clout to present a chosen vendor as a "library issue" that can't be implemented in a one-size-fits all CMS provided by a parent institution. Making some tar.gz files is futile and misses the point. Does anyone really not get that? -Wilhelmina Randtke On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Andrew Darby wrote: > I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to try to > look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is relatively > cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? Maybe the vendor option > makes sense, maybe the open source option does. > > The "technology skills" for open source software are on the > install/maintenance side. It's not like the content creator has to do some > crazy programming if they want to create a guide in the open source option, > while in LibGuides a team of angels guides their every click and drag. > > And if technology skills are missing, how does writing a check to > Springshare remedy the situation? How does sending that check to > Springshare benefit the "small poorly resourced" libraries? > > I assume I'm preaching to choir when I say that we should all be open to > supporting our peers' open source efforts, rather than dismissing them out > of hand. > > Andrew > > > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Wilhelmina Randtke >wrote: > > > Technology tools are a non issue here. Straightforward documented open > > source technology is readily available. What is missing is technology > > skills. Someone can't buy those if they don't already have technology > > skills, or else they are a sitting duck for scammers. > > > > With a basic pricing of about $1000 a year, it's counter productive to > try > > look at open source alternatives. $1000 a year with more handholding is > > good. Even companies, like lishost, which do open source for libraries > > price in this same range, because they have to take on more handholding. > I > > also don't see vendor lock in issues in LibGuides, since the research > > guides concept includes routine change and replacing content. > > > > If you want libraries to operate better, what you should be doing is > having > > conversations with people from a variety of libraries, including small > > poorly resourced ones, recognizing that there is a spectrum of needs, and > > being available to provide realistic advice. (That advice would be > > different for different libraries.) > > > > Lack of access to technology skill creates the situations in which > > LibGuides is useful and beneficial. Lack of access to technology > > skill causes most situations in which LibGuides are a counter productive > > waste of time, whether that's a misguided administrator or poor > > interdepartmental communication (yes, even competent IT housed in a > library > > is sometimes not proactive and helpful at being in touch with IT-hostile > > reference departments). If you have technology skill, then by having > broad > > connections and being available to give advice or pointers, you can > assist > > libraries / departments that don't have the luxury of having access to > > technology skill. If all you do is drum on open source diy, when there > is > > a low cost alternative that works, then you harm things. > > > > -Wilhelmina Randtke > > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Andrew Darby > > wrote: > > > > > There are open source solutions created by librarians: SubjectsPlus > and > > > Library a la Carte. > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Cornel Darden Jr. < > > > corneldarde...@gmail.com > >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
There's not a lock-in issue with LibGuides, because it's used to host pathfinders. Those are supposed to be periodically revisited. One of the big problems is that librarians will start a guide and never finish, or make one then never maintain it. Periodically deleting everything is a good thing for pathfinders and subject guides, and people should do it anyway. No one's talking about tools for digital archives, which have lock in issues and are way more expensive. -Wilhelmina Randtke On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Thomas Krichel wrote: > Andrew Darby writes > > > I don't get this argument at all. > > I breathe a sigh of relief. I didn't understand it either, but > I blamed my brain fog. > > > Maybe the vendor option makes sense, maybe the open source option > > does. > > The vendor option may be based on it just hosting the open source > option. I do that sort of thing. LibGuides don't seem to do that, > as they appear to have their own proprietary software. > > Wilhelmina Randtke writes: > > > I also don't see vendor lock in issues in LibGuides, since the research > > guides concept includes routine change and replacing content. > > No lock in because you can rewrite everything? Hmm... > > Cheers, > > Thomas Krichel http://openlib.org/home/krichel > skype:thomaskrichel >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Describes my situation precisely. -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Lauren Magnuson Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 9:13 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I've worked at a small, under-resourced institution that had LibGuides, despite the fact that as a staff member I did have the technical know-how to install and maintain an open-source solution. So why didn't we? My existing job duties without an open-source guide project already demanded 120% of a full-time position. With no time to investigate and test an open-source solution, the value we got back for our LibGuides cost was my time as a staff member to do other things. We weren't going to be able to pay for additional staff support with $1000 / yr. Some small libraries at institutions also have very little say at the IT negotiation table - for examples, policies may exist that state that any campus department wishing to host software either ask to use the existing campus host or ask for (read: beg) permission to go with one's own host if there's a desire to use a code library that isn't supported by the campus host (and there are a lot of institutions with leadership that is VERY suspicious of open source, and therefore only use proprietary frameworks like ASP.NET). Either way, you're begging for permission to have access to something. I've been in this situation where the reaction to a request to pursue open-source is disbelief - how can those luddites in the library possibly have the skill/experience/interest in getting themselves into something like this? It can be very hard to justify when an administrator is also expecting the one person who would know how to manage the open-source project to leave at any tim! e, and IT certainly doesn't want to provide staff time to support some weirdo project librarians came up with. There are university libraries that are moving toward using LibGuides as their entire library web presence. In many cases this is because just to change a link on their university-provided library website they have to go through 6 layers of approval and wait two weeks. It's not an ideal situation, and may not be helping the big picture, but there are lots of libraries that are just trying to survive. Thus, LibGuides. FWIW, we got a lot of usage out of it, and cost per use was incredibly low (and much lower than cpu for our other subscriptions/databases). Lauren Magnuson On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Andrew Darby wrote: > I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to > try to look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is > relatively cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? Maybe > the vendor option makes sense, maybe the open source option does. > > The "technology skills" for open source software are on the > install/maintenance side. It's not like the content creator has to do > some crazy programming if they want to create a guide in the open > source option, while in LibGuides a team of angels guides their every click > and drag. > > And if technology skills are missing, how does writing a check to > Springshare remedy the situation? How does sending that check to > Springshare benefit the "small poorly resourced" libraries? > > I assume I'm preaching to choir when I say that we should all be open > to supporting our peers' open source efforts, rather than dismissing > them out of hand. > > Andrew > > > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Wilhelmina Randtke >wrote: > > > Technology tools are a non issue here. Straightforward documented > > open source technology is readily available. What is missing is > > technology skills. Someone can't buy those if they don't already > > have technology skills, or else they are a sitting duck for scammers. > > > > With a basic pricing of about $1000 a year, it's counter productive > > to > try > > look at open source alternatives. $1000 a year with more > > handholding is good. Even companies, like lishost, which do open > > source for libraries price in this same range, because they have to take on > > more handholding. > I > > also don't see vendor lock in issues in LibGuides, since the > > research guides concept includes routine change and replacing content. > > > > If you want libraries to operate better, what you should be doing is > having > > conversations with people from a variety of libraries, including > > small poorly resourced ones, recognizing that there is a spectrum of > > needs, and being available to provide
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I'm currently experimenting with and developing a new SubjectsPlus installation. I'm the only full-time librarian at my institution and it has been mostly a breeze to install, alter, and find help from other users through its Google Group. www.ctslibrary.org/subsplus/ Now if only I could devote the time to actually completing the subject guides, that would be great! Evan Evan Boyd | Assistant Librarian Chicago Theological Seminary | 1407 E. 60th St., Chicago, IL 60637 773-896-2452 | eb...@ctschicago.edu | commons.ctschicago.edu -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Julia Bauder Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 9:10 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it Hi Dave, There's a list of libraries using SubjectsPlus here: http://subjectsplus.com/wiki/index.php?title=Sites_using_SubjectsPlus Julia * Julia Bauder Social Studies and Data Services Librarian Grinnell College Libraries Sixth Ave. Grinnell, IA 50112 641-269-4431 On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:07 AM, davesgonechina wrote: > You guys are awesome, this is great stuff, really helpful. My > impression of libguides has been fairly negative for many of the > reasons mentioned, but Sean has a good point about content strategy > and training, and Wilhemina has a good point about the costs of open > source not always being appreciated. > > Has anyone tried the two platforms Andrew Darby mentioned, > SubjectsPlus and Library a la Carte? That's the sort of thing I've > been looking for but never found until now. > > Dave > > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Sean Hannan wrote: > > > Again, this not a technical issue. It's a content strategy issue. > > > > Believe me, I was where you were. I was using all kinds of > > javascript and CSS hacks to try to prevent people from getting > > creative with color. I > was > > getting to the point of setting up Capybara tests to run against the > guides > > to alert me to abusive uses of bold and italics. > > > > The folks creating guides are content people, not web people. Take > > the > web > > out of it. Focus on the content. Pick a couple heuristics to educate > > them on (we picked 7 +/- 2, above the fold/below the fold, and > > F-shaped reading patterns). Above all, show them statistics. And not > > the built-in > LibGuides > > stats, either. > > > > New vs. returning. Average time on page. Pageviews over the course > > of a year. Very, very, very quickly our librarians realized what > > content is important, what content is superfluous, and that the time > > the spend carefully manicuring and maintaining their guides would > > (and could) be better spent elsewhere. > > > > -Sean > > > > On 8/12/13 9:35 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: > > > > > I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about > > LibGuides > > > for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing > > > others > > feel > > > the same way. > > > > > > At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several > > > months, and > > I am > > > hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. > > > > > > LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about > > > every > > design > > > principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab > > blindness" > > > in LibGuides, and don't get me started on the sub-tab links that > > > are > > hiding > > > and require the user to mouse over a tab to even see what is there. > I've > > > tried telling people so many times to have just a few tabs and > > > always > to > > use > > > a table of contents for the main page, but they rarely do. And it > becomes > > > just about impossible to have a consistent look and feel across > > > your > > website > > > when LibGuides allows guide creators to modify every element on > > > the > page > > as > > > they see fit. People will do crazy things like putting page > > > content in > a > > > sidebar element, something you'd never ever ever see on any > > > website on > > the > > > Internet. I tried to enforce uniform colors and column sizes > > > across all > > the > > > guides, but I was told to let it go because my coworkers wanted to > > > be > > able > > > to decide th
[CODE4LIB] Subject guides in Drupal (was: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it)
to be > Bootstrapped, the content types are going to be pruned to just three, and I'm > remaining optimistic about our ability to theme it. > > Michael Schofield > // www.ns4lib.com > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > Joshua Welker > Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 9:36 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about LibGuides > for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing others feel > the same way. > > At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several months, and I am > hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. > > LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about every design > principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab blindness" > in LibGuides, and don't get me started on the sub-tab links that are hiding > and require the user to mouse over a tab to even see what is there. I've > tried telling people so many times to have just a few tabs and always to use > a table of contents for the main page, but they rarely do. And it becomes > just about impossible to have a consistent look and feel across your website > when LibGuides allows guide creators to modify every element on the page as > they see fit. People will do crazy things like putting page content in a > sidebar element, something you'd never ever ever see on any website on the > Internet. I tried to enforce uniform colors and column sizes across all the > guides, but I was told to let it go because my coworkers wanted to be able to > decide those things on a guide-by-guide basis. > > I've worked at two institutions that use LibGuides, and what inevitably > happens is that librarians create one Uber Guide for entire subject areas > (biology, religion, etc) and then create sub-pages for all the dozens of > specific disciplines within those subject areas. And then, assuming the user > somehow manages to find these pages, they are typically not much more than a > list of links that could have easily been included on the main library > website. > > Okay, sorry for the rant. It has been building up for several years and never > had a chance to voice out. > > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > Robert Sebek > Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 11:21 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use >> of them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's >> mouth is "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" >> >> Shudder >> >> This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping >> that eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides >> there. I can use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are >> bad" card and >> *maybe* I will be successful. >> >> Anyone fought this particular battle before? >> >> ~heather >> >> I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into >> which I > have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need to refer > to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That database just > changed platforms? No problem. I change the URL in one place and everything > automatically updates (hooray CMSs!). > > All of our subject guides (http://www.lib.vt.edu/subject-guides/) are in the > CMS using the exact same database entries. I converted from our failing, > home-grown system into the CMS and then gave training on how to maintain from > there (remove an entry, add an entry, create a parallel course guide)--using > the same skills as maintaining any other web page that librarian is > responsible for. But apparently that's too hard. > > So we have a trial of LibGuides. NO ONE here has created a guide from scratch > yet, but they all say this is going to be easy. No one will admit that > someone will have to recreate all those database entries (literally > hundreds) and then maintain those entries. When presented with this, several > librarians said--oh that won't be neces
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I've found the LibraryH3lp folks to be quite fantastic compared to Springshare in terms of support and responsiveness, and there is starting to be a good bit of overlap between their services. I think Springshare now offers a chat module (which is inferior IMO), and LibraryH3lp also offers a free FAQ module that does the same thing as LibAnswers. Interesting that LibraryH3lp is now developing an alternative to LibGuides proper. Josh Welker Information Technology Librarian James C. Kirkpatrick Library University of Central Missouri Warrensburg, MO 64093 JCKL 2260 660.543.8022 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Terrell, Trey Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 11:04 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it Regarding Library a La Carte, active development has been taken over by the folks over at LibraryH3lp. You can read their blog post at http://libraryh3lp.blogspot.com/2013/06/library-la-carte-resurrected-open. html. I'm not sure how much longer it'll be before it's a viable plug-in replacement again. Trey -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of davesgonechina Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 7:07 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it You guys are awesome, this is great stuff, really helpful. My impression of libguides has been fairly negative for many of the reasons mentioned, but Sean has a good point about content strategy and training, and Wilhemina has a good point about the costs of open source not always being appreciated. Has anyone tried the two platforms Andrew Darby mentioned, SubjectsPlus and Library a la Carte? That's the sort of thing I've been looking for but never found until now. Dave On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Sean Hannan wrote: > Again, this not a technical issue. It's a content strategy issue. > > Believe me, I was where you were. I was using all kinds of javascript > and CSS hacks to try to prevent people from getting creative with > color. I was getting to the point of setting up Capybara tests to run > against the guides to alert me to abusive uses of bold and italics. > > The folks creating guides are content people, not web people. Take the > web out of it. Focus on the content. Pick a couple heuristics to > educate them on (we picked 7 +/- 2, above the fold/below the fold, and > F-shaped reading patterns). Above all, show them statistics. And not > the built-in LibGuides stats, either. > > New vs. returning. Average time on page. Pageviews over the course of > a year. Very, very, very quickly our librarians realized what content > is important, what content is superfluous, and that the time the spend > carefully manicuring and maintaining their guides would (and could) be > better spent elsewhere. > > -Sean > > On 8/12/13 9:35 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: > > > I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about > LibGuides > > for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing > > others > feel > > the same way. > > > > At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several months, > > and > I am > > hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. > > > > LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about every > design > > principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab > blindness" > > in LibGuides, and don't get me started on the sub-tab links that are > hiding > > and require the user to mouse over a tab to even see what is there. > > I've tried telling people so many times to have just a few tabs and > > always to > use > > a table of contents for the main page, but they rarely do. And it > > becomes just about impossible to have a consistent look and feel > > across your > website > > when LibGuides allows guide creators to modify every element on the > > page > as > > they see fit. People will do crazy things like putting page content > > in a sidebar element, something you'd never ever ever see on any > > website on > the > > Internet. I tried to enforce uniform colors and column sizes across > > all > the > > guides, but I was told to let it go because my coworkers wanted to > > be > able > > to decide those things on a guide-by-guide basis. > > > > I've worked at two institutions that use LibGuides, and what > > inevitably happens is that librarians create one Uber Guide for > > entire subject areas (biology, religion, etc) and then create > > sub-pages for all the dozens of s
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Regarding Library a La Carte, active development has been taken over by the folks over at LibraryH3lp. You can read their blog post at http://libraryh3lp.blogspot.com/2013/06/library-la-carte-resurrected-open.html. I'm not sure how much longer it'll be before it's a viable plug-in replacement again. Trey -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of davesgonechina Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 7:07 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it You guys are awesome, this is great stuff, really helpful. My impression of libguides has been fairly negative for many of the reasons mentioned, but Sean has a good point about content strategy and training, and Wilhemina has a good point about the costs of open source not always being appreciated. Has anyone tried the two platforms Andrew Darby mentioned, SubjectsPlus and Library a la Carte? That's the sort of thing I've been looking for but never found until now. Dave On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Sean Hannan wrote: > Again, this not a technical issue. It's a content strategy issue. > > Believe me, I was where you were. I was using all kinds of javascript > and CSS hacks to try to prevent people from getting creative with > color. I was getting to the point of setting up Capybara tests to run > against the guides to alert me to abusive uses of bold and italics. > > The folks creating guides are content people, not web people. Take the > web out of it. Focus on the content. Pick a couple heuristics to > educate them on (we picked 7 +/- 2, above the fold/below the fold, and > F-shaped reading patterns). Above all, show them statistics. And not > the built-in LibGuides stats, either. > > New vs. returning. Average time on page. Pageviews over the course of > a year. Very, very, very quickly our librarians realized what content > is important, what content is superfluous, and that the time the spend > carefully manicuring and maintaining their guides would (and could) be > better spent elsewhere. > > -Sean > > On 8/12/13 9:35 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: > > > I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about > LibGuides > > for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing > > others > feel > > the same way. > > > > At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several months, > > and > I am > > hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. > > > > LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about every > design > > principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab > blindness" > > in LibGuides, and don't get me started on the sub-tab links that are > hiding > > and require the user to mouse over a tab to even see what is there. > > I've tried telling people so many times to have just a few tabs and > > always to > use > > a table of contents for the main page, but they rarely do. And it > > becomes just about impossible to have a consistent look and feel > > across your > website > > when LibGuides allows guide creators to modify every element on the > > page > as > > they see fit. People will do crazy things like putting page content > > in a sidebar element, something you'd never ever ever see on any > > website on > the > > Internet. I tried to enforce uniform colors and column sizes across > > all > the > > guides, but I was told to let it go because my coworkers wanted to > > be > able > > to decide those things on a guide-by-guide basis. > > > > I've worked at two institutions that use LibGuides, and what > > inevitably happens is that librarians create one Uber Guide for > > entire subject areas (biology, religion, etc) and then create > > sub-pages for all the dozens of specific disciplines within those > > subject areas. And then, assuming the > user > > somehow manages to find these pages, they are typically not much > > more > than a > > list of links that could have easily been included on the main > > library website. > > > > Okay, sorry for the rant. It has been building up for several years > > and never had a chance to voice out. > > > > Josh Welker > > Information Technology Librarian > > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > > University of Central Missouri > > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > > JCKL 2260 > > 660.543.8022 > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf > > Of Rob
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
We are a large library with a savvy staff and while we have an established Wordpress Network, LibGuides still plays an important role in our web presence - and if Springshare lives up to its latest promises I think it's one I'll begrudge less and less. Honestly, the reason LibGuides is still around is because before we established a solid web team in the last year or so, LibGuides was our institution's primary CMS - specifically because my predecessors didn't want to dole out FTP privs [we still play those close to the chest]. And while, yes, I agree that a fundamental understanding of HTML and CSS should be a criterion for employment--just like we expect a fundamental understanding of MS Office--the reality is that we're not quite there yet. Since I'm not expected to be a copyright guru or a subject specialist--and I can comprehend the time to acquire that knowledge--I'm not sure I can similarly expect copyright gurus and subject specialists, reference folk, and instructional librarians to devote the time it really takes to get comfortable with a platform. Transitioning a large staff from one established system to another requires a lot of TLC, and since I actually have to make shit as well as provide training, I am perfectly happy reconciling the existence of LibGuides in our presence - because here's the thing: Users don't give a shit what platform the content lives on. What's important to me is that first and foremost there is a content strategy, and the needs of the content will determine the platform. Here's some musing: 1.) No matter what I think, our staff find LibGuides much more intuitive to use - and when you really look at the WordPress admin panel you can't blame them. We are doing a lot to streamline the dashboard by removing, renaming, we even jacked up the default post-editor so that posting becomes a step-by-step process: once you write the content, then you draft the excerpt, then you assign the categories, etc. It is going to take time to find the right mix of customization and training - and this, for instance, may be a reason an out-of-the-box Drupal or WordPress install may prove more problematic than something like LG. No matter what you expect of staff, hands will need to be held. 2.) LibGuides tend to be disorderly. We found a need to establish a sitewide--Wordpress, LibGuides, and anything else in the future--strictly controlled taxonomy for categories/subjects, as well as consistent URL naming conventions (/finding-articles instead of /findingarticles, etc.). You can also publish an LG without a description and all that, which sucked. While it took awhile to retroactively get all the content to adhere to these rules, the upshot was that between platforms there was some basic organizational consistency. It also helped with our SEO. 3.) We're still in the head-scratching phase of determining the criteria for what becomes part of the WPN and what becomes a LibGuide. Our biggest argument has been a semantic one: all of our staff refer people to "Library Guides," and really any content that doesn't feel like a guide or a tutorial is flagged to transition. We also think that the LG feeds are rubbish, so we figure any content where updates need to be broadcast may make for a WP candidate, or content that would benefit from the extensibility of Wordpress, a custom layout, or something like that. Currently we also add that any content that will be syndicated sitewide--because we don't believe in duplicating content!--[such as policies, or whatever] will be on the WPN, because we use the JSON API and a few in-house plugins that make the replication of content [and keeping that content updated] painless. I mention this aspect in passing because LibGuides has promised a more robust API. If Springshare lives up to it, it may be equally as painless to syndicate from libguides. Um. What else. Well, the look is a big deal: but the new libguides is going to be Bootstrapped, the content types are going to be pruned to just three, and I'm remaining optimistic about our ability to theme it. Michael Schofield // www.ns4lib.com -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Joshua Welker Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 9:36 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about LibGuides for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing others feel the same way. At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several months, and I am hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about every design principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab blindness" in LibGuid
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Hi Dave, There's a list of libraries using SubjectsPlus here: http://subjectsplus.com/wiki/index.php?title=Sites_using_SubjectsPlus Julia * Julia Bauder Social Studies and Data Services Librarian Grinnell College Libraries Sixth Ave. Grinnell, IA 50112 641-269-4431 On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:07 AM, davesgonechina wrote: > You guys are awesome, this is great stuff, really helpful. My impression of > libguides has been fairly negative for many of the reasons mentioned, but > Sean has a good point about content strategy and training, and Wilhemina > has a good point about the costs of open source not always being > appreciated. > > Has anyone tried the two platforms Andrew Darby mentioned, SubjectsPlus and > Library a la Carte? That's the sort of thing I've been looking for but > never found until now. > > Dave > > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Sean Hannan wrote: > > > Again, this not a technical issue. It's a content strategy issue. > > > > Believe me, I was where you were. I was using all kinds of javascript and > > CSS hacks to try to prevent people from getting creative with color. I > was > > getting to the point of setting up Capybara tests to run against the > guides > > to alert me to abusive uses of bold and italics. > > > > The folks creating guides are content people, not web people. Take the > web > > out of it. Focus on the content. Pick a couple heuristics to educate them > > on > > (we picked 7 +/- 2, above the fold/below the fold, and F-shaped reading > > patterns). Above all, show them statistics. And not the built-in > LibGuides > > stats, either. > > > > New vs. returning. Average time on page. Pageviews over the course of a > > year. Very, very, very quickly our librarians realized what content is > > important, what content is superfluous, and that the time the spend > > carefully manicuring and maintaining their guides would (and could) be > > better spent elsewhere. > > > > -Sean > > > > On 8/12/13 9:35 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: > > > > > I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about > > LibGuides > > > for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing others > > feel > > > the same way. > > > > > > At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several months, and > > I am > > > hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. > > > > > > LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about every > > design > > > principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab > > blindness" > > > in LibGuides, and don't get me started on the sub-tab links that are > > hiding > > > and require the user to mouse over a tab to even see what is there. > I've > > > tried telling people so many times to have just a few tabs and always > to > > use > > > a table of contents for the main page, but they rarely do. And it > becomes > > > just about impossible to have a consistent look and feel across your > > website > > > when LibGuides allows guide creators to modify every element on the > page > > as > > > they see fit. People will do crazy things like putting page content in > a > > > sidebar element, something you'd never ever ever see on any website on > > the > > > Internet. I tried to enforce uniform colors and column sizes across all > > the > > > guides, but I was told to let it go because my coworkers wanted to be > > able > > > to decide those things on a guide-by-guide basis. > > > > > > I've worked at two institutions that use LibGuides, and what inevitably > > > happens is that librarians create one Uber Guide for entire subject > areas > > > (biology, religion, etc) and then create sub-pages for all the dozens > of > > > specific disciplines within those subject areas. And then, assuming the > > user > > > somehow manages to find these pages, they are typically not much more > > than a > > > list of links that could have easily been included on the main library > > > website. > > > > > > Okay, sorry for the rant. It has been building up for several years and > > > never had a chance to voice out. > > > > > > Josh Welker > > > Information Technology Librarian > > > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > > > University of Central Missouri > > > Warrensburg,
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
You guys are awesome, this is great stuff, really helpful. My impression of libguides has been fairly negative for many of the reasons mentioned, but Sean has a good point about content strategy and training, and Wilhemina has a good point about the costs of open source not always being appreciated. Has anyone tried the two platforms Andrew Darby mentioned, SubjectsPlus and Library a la Carte? That's the sort of thing I've been looking for but never found until now. Dave On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Sean Hannan wrote: > Again, this not a technical issue. It's a content strategy issue. > > Believe me, I was where you were. I was using all kinds of javascript and > CSS hacks to try to prevent people from getting creative with color. I was > getting to the point of setting up Capybara tests to run against the guides > to alert me to abusive uses of bold and italics. > > The folks creating guides are content people, not web people. Take the web > out of it. Focus on the content. Pick a couple heuristics to educate them > on > (we picked 7 +/- 2, above the fold/below the fold, and F-shaped reading > patterns). Above all, show them statistics. And not the built-in LibGuides > stats, either. > > New vs. returning. Average time on page. Pageviews over the course of a > year. Very, very, very quickly our librarians realized what content is > important, what content is superfluous, and that the time the spend > carefully manicuring and maintaining their guides would (and could) be > better spent elsewhere. > > -Sean > > On 8/12/13 9:35 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: > > > I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about > LibGuides > > for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing others > feel > > the same way. > > > > At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several months, and > I am > > hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. > > > > LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about every > design > > principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab > blindness" > > in LibGuides, and don't get me started on the sub-tab links that are > hiding > > and require the user to mouse over a tab to even see what is there. I've > > tried telling people so many times to have just a few tabs and always to > use > > a table of contents for the main page, but they rarely do. And it becomes > > just about impossible to have a consistent look and feel across your > website > > when LibGuides allows guide creators to modify every element on the page > as > > they see fit. People will do crazy things like putting page content in a > > sidebar element, something you'd never ever ever see on any website on > the > > Internet. I tried to enforce uniform colors and column sizes across all > the > > guides, but I was told to let it go because my coworkers wanted to be > able > > to decide those things on a guide-by-guide basis. > > > > I've worked at two institutions that use LibGuides, and what inevitably > > happens is that librarians create one Uber Guide for entire subject areas > > (biology, religion, etc) and then create sub-pages for all the dozens of > > specific disciplines within those subject areas. And then, assuming the > user > > somehow manages to find these pages, they are typically not much more > than a > > list of links that could have easily been included on the main library > > website. > > > > Okay, sorry for the rant. It has been building up for several years and > > never had a chance to voice out. > > > > Josh Welker > > Information Technology Librarian > > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > > University of Central Missouri > > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > > JCKL 2260 > > 660.543.8022 > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > > Robert Sebek > > Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 11:21 AM > > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use > >> of them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's > >> mouth is "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" > >> > >> Shudder > >> > >> This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping > >> that eventually I c
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Again, this not a technical issue. It's a content strategy issue. Believe me, I was where you were. I was using all kinds of javascript and CSS hacks to try to prevent people from getting creative with color. I was getting to the point of setting up Capybara tests to run against the guides to alert me to abusive uses of bold and italics. The folks creating guides are content people, not web people. Take the web out of it. Focus on the content. Pick a couple heuristics to educate them on (we picked 7 +/- 2, above the fold/below the fold, and F-shaped reading patterns). Above all, show them statistics. And not the built-in LibGuides stats, either. New vs. returning. Average time on page. Pageviews over the course of a year. Very, very, very quickly our librarians realized what content is important, what content is superfluous, and that the time the spend carefully manicuring and maintaining their guides would (and could) be better spent elsewhere. -Sean On 8/12/13 9:35 AM, "Joshua Welker" wrote: > I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about LibGuides > for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing others feel > the same way. > > At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several months, and I am > hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. > > LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about every design > principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab blindness" > in LibGuides, and don't get me started on the sub-tab links that are hiding > and require the user to mouse over a tab to even see what is there. I've > tried telling people so many times to have just a few tabs and always to use > a table of contents for the main page, but they rarely do. And it becomes > just about impossible to have a consistent look and feel across your website > when LibGuides allows guide creators to modify every element on the page as > they see fit. People will do crazy things like putting page content in a > sidebar element, something you'd never ever ever see on any website on the > Internet. I tried to enforce uniform colors and column sizes across all the > guides, but I was told to let it go because my coworkers wanted to be able > to decide those things on a guide-by-guide basis. > > I've worked at two institutions that use LibGuides, and what inevitably > happens is that librarians create one Uber Guide for entire subject areas > (biology, religion, etc) and then create sub-pages for all the dozens of > specific disciplines within those subject areas. And then, assuming the user > somehow manages to find these pages, they are typically not much more than a > list of links that could have easily been included on the main library > website. > > Okay, sorry for the rant. It has been building up for several years and > never had a chance to voice out. > > Josh Welker > Information Technology Librarian > James C. Kirkpatrick Library > University of Central Missouri > Warrensburg, MO 64093 > JCKL 2260 > 660.543.8022 > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of > Robert Sebek > Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 11:21 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use >> of them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's >> mouth is "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" >> >> Shudder >> >> This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping >> that eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides >> there. I can use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are >> bad" card and >> *maybe* I will be successful. >> >> Anyone fought this particular battle before? >> >> ~heather >> >> I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into >> which I > have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need to > refer to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That database > just changed platforms? No problem. I change the URL in one place and > everything automatically updates (hooray CMSs!). > > All of our subject guides (http://www.lib.vt.edu/subject-guides/) are in the > CMS using the exact same database entries. I converted from our failing, > home-grown system into the CMS and then gave training on how to maintain > from there (remove an entry, add an entry, create a parallel course
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
What I don't understand is that many large and mid-sized libraries also make very extensive use of LibGuides. These are libraries that usually have a few dozen librarians and twice as many staff. You'd think that with 90+% of library resources being in electronic format now that these libraries would have a whole team of people with very good IT skills for managing technology and servers and online resources, but most libraries are lucky to have even *one* of those people. I do definitely see the appeal of using LibGuides in an environment where campus IT has very strict policies, but that seems like taking the lesser of two evils. At least being locked into a campus IT system provides a consistent look and feel (if little else). Josh Welker Information Technology Librarian James C. Kirkpatrick Library University of Central Missouri Warrensburg, MO 64093 JCKL 2260 660.543.8022 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Ross Singer Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 9:00 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I don't think the remedy to a lack of technology skills is to make librarians into shade tree sysadmins. *That's* the expense that gets swept under the rug in the open source argument. Most advocates have systems administrators and infrastructure to support implementing things themselves and grossly underestimate the cost when that environment doesn't exist. -Ross. On Sunday, August 11, 2013, Cornel Darden Jr. wrote: > Hi, > > Lack of technology skills seems to be a recurring theme here. 21st > century Librarians shouldn't lack any technology skills. Those that do > need to get them or look for another career.; or they are just hurting > the patrons and institutions they serve. > > Thanks, > > Cornel Darden Jr. > MSLIS > Librarian > Kennedy-King College > City Colleges of Chicago > Work 773-602-5449 > Cell 708-705-2945 > > > On Aug 11, 2013, at 8:10 PM, stuart yeates > > > > wrote: > > > >> On 12/08/13 12:20, Andrew Darby wrote: > >> I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to > >> try > to > >> look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is > >> relatively cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? > > > > If you have no in-house technical capability, the cost of looking at > > an > open source alternative can easily outweigh the multi-year licensing fee. > > > > cheers > > stuart > > -- > > Stuart Yeates > > Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/ >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I just have to say I have been thinking the exact same thing about LibGuides for the two years I've been using it. I feel vindicated knowing others feel the same way. At UCMO, we will be migrating to Drupal in the next several months, and I am hoping very much that I can convince people to use less LibGuides. LibGuides is great in its ease of use, but fails on just about every design principle I can think of. There have been several studies on "tab blindness" in LibGuides, and don't get me started on the sub-tab links that are hiding and require the user to mouse over a tab to even see what is there. I've tried telling people so many times to have just a few tabs and always to use a table of contents for the main page, but they rarely do. And it becomes just about impossible to have a consistent look and feel across your website when LibGuides allows guide creators to modify every element on the page as they see fit. People will do crazy things like putting page content in a sidebar element, something you'd never ever ever see on any website on the Internet. I tried to enforce uniform colors and column sizes across all the guides, but I was told to let it go because my coworkers wanted to be able to decide those things on a guide-by-guide basis. I've worked at two institutions that use LibGuides, and what inevitably happens is that librarians create one Uber Guide for entire subject areas (biology, religion, etc) and then create sub-pages for all the dozens of specific disciplines within those subject areas. And then, assuming the user somehow manages to find these pages, they are typically not much more than a list of links that could have easily been included on the main library website. Okay, sorry for the rant. It has been building up for several years and never had a chance to voice out. Josh Welker Information Technology Librarian James C. Kirkpatrick Library University of Central Missouri Warrensburg, MO 64093 JCKL 2260 660.543.8022 -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert Sebek Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 11:21 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use > of them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's > mouth is "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" > > Shudder > > This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping > that eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides > there. I can use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are > bad" card and > *maybe* I will be successful. > > Anyone fought this particular battle before? > > ~heather > > I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into > which I have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need to refer to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That database just changed platforms? No problem. I change the URL in one place and everything automatically updates (hooray CMSs!). All of our subject guides (http://www.lib.vt.edu/subject-guides/) are in the CMS using the exact same database entries. I converted from our failing, home-grown system into the CMS and then gave training on how to maintain from there (remove an entry, add an entry, create a parallel course guide)--using the same skills as maintaining any other web page that librarian is responsible for. But apparently that's too hard. So we have a trial of LibGuides. NO ONE here has created a guide from scratch yet, but they all say this is going to be easy. No one will admit that someone will have to recreate all those database entries (literally hundreds) and then maintain those entries. When presented with this, several librarians said--oh that won't be necessary, we'll just create individual entries as needed on individual guides. WHAT?! If implemented, we'll have hundreds and hundreds of entries, any of which could be out of date and nonfunctional, with no easy way to find and fix, other than waiting for patrons to complain that the link doesn't work. Ugh. All for several thousand dollar a year (as opposed for free in the CMS). And yes, those librarians' favorite example libguides have a dozen tabs with hundreds of links on each tab. Overwhelm the patron with links--who cares! Just let me recreate the Yahoo Directory I so miss with every possible resource I can find online. Half those links don't work next semester? Doesn't matter, as no one will ever maintain that page again (and no patron will use it, since they will just Google these resources anyway). -- Robert Sebek Webmaster, Virginia Tech Libraries (http://www.lib.vt.edu/)
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
no one has mention the integration of LibGuides into other packages. Anyone here involved with Summon 2.0? it is integrating libguides... but we are not a libguide site. curious if others would put that into the consideration bucket. Sent from New Gadget On Aug 11, 2013, at 9:13 PM, Lauren Magnuson wrote: > I've worked at a small, under-resourced institution that had LibGuides, > despite the fact that as a staff member I did have the technical know-how > to install and maintain an open-source solution. So why didn't we? My > existing job duties without an open-source guide project already demanded > 120% of a full-time position. With no time to investigate and test an > open-source solution, the value we got back for our LibGuides cost was my > time as a staff member to do other things. We weren't going to be able to > pay for additional staff support with $1000 / yr. > > Some small libraries at institutions also have very little say at the IT > negotiation table - for examples, policies may exist that state that any > campus department wishing to host software either ask to use the existing > campus host or ask for (read: beg) permission to go with one's own host if > there's a desire to use a code library that isn't supported by the campus > host (and there are a lot of institutions with leadership that is VERY > suspicious of open source, and therefore only use proprietary frameworks > like ASP.NET). Either way, you're begging for permission to have access to > something. I've been in this situation where the reaction to a request to > pursue open-source is disbelief - how can those luddites in the library > possibly have the skill/experience/interest in getting themselves into > something like this? It can be very hard to justify when an administrator > is also expecting the one person who would know how to manage the > open-source project to leave at any time, and IT certainly doesn't want to > provide staff time to support some weirdo project librarians came up with. > There are university libraries that are moving toward using LibGuides as > their entire library web presence. In many cases this is because just to > change a link on their university-provided library website they have to go > through 6 layers of approval and wait two weeks. > > It's not an ideal situation, and may not be helping the big picture, but > there are lots of libraries that are just trying to survive. Thus, > LibGuides. FWIW, we got a lot of usage out of it, and cost per use was > incredibly low (and much lower than cpu for our other > subscriptions/databases). > > Lauren Magnuson > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Andrew Darby wrote: > >> I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to try to >> look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is relatively >> cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? Maybe the vendor option >> makes sense, maybe the open source option does. >> >> The "technology skills" for open source software are on the >> install/maintenance side. It's not like the content creator has to do some >> crazy programming if they want to create a guide in the open source option, >> while in LibGuides a team of angels guides their every click and drag. >> >> And if technology skills are missing, how does writing a check to >> Springshare remedy the situation? How does sending that check to >> Springshare benefit the "small poorly resourced" libraries? >> >> I assume I'm preaching to choir when I say that we should all be open to >> supporting our peers' open source efforts, rather than dismissing them out >> of hand. >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Wilhelmina Randtke >> wrote: >> >>> Technology tools are a non issue here. Straightforward documented open >>> source technology is readily available. What is missing is technology >>> skills. Someone can't buy those if they don't already have technology >>> skills, or else they are a sitting duck for scammers. >>> >>> With a basic pricing of about $1000 a year, it's counter productive to >> try >>> look at open source alternatives. $1000 a year with more handholding is >>> good. Even companies, like lishost, which do open source for libraries >>> price in this same range, because they have to take on more handholding. >> I >>> also don't see vendor lock in issues in LibGuides, since the research >>> guides concept includes routine change and replacing content. >>> >>> If you want libraries to operate better, what you should be doing is >> having >>> conversations with people from a variety of libraries, including small >>> poorly resourced ones, recognizing that there is a spectrum of needs, and >>> being available to provide realistic advice. (That advice would be >>> different for different libraries.) >>> >>> Lack of access to technology skill creates the situations in which >>> LibGuides is useful and beneficial. Lack of access to technology >>> s
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I don't think the remedy to a lack of technology skills is to make librarians into shade tree sysadmins. *That's* the expense that gets swept under the rug in the open source argument. Most advocates have systems administrators and infrastructure to support implementing things themselves and grossly underestimate the cost when that environment doesn't exist. -Ross. On Sunday, August 11, 2013, Cornel Darden Jr. wrote: > Hi, > > Lack of technology skills seems to be a recurring theme here. 21st century > Librarians shouldn't lack any technology skills. Those that do need to get > them or look for another career.; or they are just hurting the patrons and > institutions they serve. > > Thanks, > > Cornel Darden Jr. > MSLIS > Librarian > Kennedy-King College > City Colleges of Chicago > Work 773-602-5449 > Cell 708-705-2945 > > > On Aug 11, 2013, at 8:10 PM, stuart yeates > > > > wrote: > > > >> On 12/08/13 12:20, Andrew Darby wrote: > >> I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to try > to > >> look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is relatively > >> cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? > > > > If you have no in-house technical capability, the cost of looking at an > open source alternative can easily outweigh the multi-year licensing fee. > > > > cheers > > stuart > > -- > > Stuart Yeates > > Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/ >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I've worked at a small, under-resourced institution that had LibGuides, despite the fact that as a staff member I did have the technical know-how to install and maintain an open-source solution. So why didn't we? My existing job duties without an open-source guide project already demanded 120% of a full-time position. With no time to investigate and test an open-source solution, the value we got back for our LibGuides cost was my time as a staff member to do other things. We weren't going to be able to pay for additional staff support with $1000 / yr. Some small libraries at institutions also have very little say at the IT negotiation table - for examples, policies may exist that state that any campus department wishing to host software either ask to use the existing campus host or ask for (read: beg) permission to go with one's own host if there's a desire to use a code library that isn't supported by the campus host (and there are a lot of institutions with leadership that is VERY suspicious of open source, and therefore only use proprietary frameworks like ASP.NET). Either way, you're begging for permission to have access to something. I've been in this situation where the reaction to a request to pursue open-source is disbelief - how can those luddites in the library possibly have the skill/experience/interest in getting themselves into something like this? It can be very hard to justify when an administrator is also expecting the one person who would know how to manage the open-source project to leave at any time, and IT certainly doesn't want to provide staff time to support some weirdo project librarians came up with. There are university libraries that are moving toward using LibGuides as their entire library web presence. In many cases this is because just to change a link on their university-provided library website they have to go through 6 layers of approval and wait two weeks. It's not an ideal situation, and may not be helping the big picture, but there are lots of libraries that are just trying to survive. Thus, LibGuides. FWIW, we got a lot of usage out of it, and cost per use was incredibly low (and much lower than cpu for our other subscriptions/databases). Lauren Magnuson On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Andrew Darby wrote: > I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to try to > look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is relatively > cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? Maybe the vendor option > makes sense, maybe the open source option does. > > The "technology skills" for open source software are on the > install/maintenance side. It's not like the content creator has to do some > crazy programming if they want to create a guide in the open source option, > while in LibGuides a team of angels guides their every click and drag. > > And if technology skills are missing, how does writing a check to > Springshare remedy the situation? How does sending that check to > Springshare benefit the "small poorly resourced" libraries? > > I assume I'm preaching to choir when I say that we should all be open to > supporting our peers' open source efforts, rather than dismissing them out > of hand. > > Andrew > > > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Wilhelmina Randtke >wrote: > > > Technology tools are a non issue here. Straightforward documented open > > source technology is readily available. What is missing is technology > > skills. Someone can't buy those if they don't already have technology > > skills, or else they are a sitting duck for scammers. > > > > With a basic pricing of about $1000 a year, it's counter productive to > try > > look at open source alternatives. $1000 a year with more handholding is > > good. Even companies, like lishost, which do open source for libraries > > price in this same range, because they have to take on more handholding. > I > > also don't see vendor lock in issues in LibGuides, since the research > > guides concept includes routine change and replacing content. > > > > If you want libraries to operate better, what you should be doing is > having > > conversations with people from a variety of libraries, including small > > poorly resourced ones, recognizing that there is a spectrum of needs, and > > being available to provide realistic advice. (That advice would be > > different for different libraries.) > > > > Lack of access to technology skill creates the situations in which > > LibGuides is useful and beneficial. Lack of access to technology > > skill causes most situations in which LibGuides are a counter productive > > waste of time, whether that's a misguided administrator or poor > > interdepartmental communication (yes, even competent IT housed in a > library > > is sometimes not proactive and helpful at being in touch with IT-hostile > > reference departments). If you have technology skill, then by having > broad > > connections and being available to give advice
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
stuart yeates writes > If you have no in-house technical capability, the cost of looking at > an open source alternative can easily outweigh the multi-year > licensing fee. Yeah, but if you don't have an in-house technical capability you condemn yourself to history. I bet that in the middle of the 21st century, no in-house technical capability will be the same thing as having no space for books in the middle of the twentieth century. Cheers, Thomas Krichel http://openlib.org/home/krichel skype:thomaskrichel
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Hi, Lack of technology skills seems to be a recurring theme here. 21st century Librarians shouldn't lack any technology skills. Those that do need to get them or look for another career.; or they are just hurting the patrons and institutions they serve. Thanks, Cornel Darden Jr. MSLIS Librarian Kennedy-King College City Colleges of Chicago Work 773-602-5449 Cell 708-705-2945 > On Aug 11, 2013, at 8:10 PM, stuart yeates wrote: > >> On 12/08/13 12:20, Andrew Darby wrote: >> I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to try to >> look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is relatively >> cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? > > If you have no in-house technical capability, the cost of looking at an open > source alternative can easily outweigh the multi-year licensing fee. > > cheers > stuart > -- > Stuart Yeates > Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Andrew Darby writes > I don't get this argument at all. I breathe a sigh of relief. I didn't understand it either, but I blamed my brain fog. > Maybe the vendor option makes sense, maybe the open source option > does. The vendor option may be based on it just hosting the open source option. I do that sort of thing. LibGuides don't seem to do that, as they appear to have their own proprietary software. Wilhelmina Randtke writes: > I also don't see vendor lock in issues in LibGuides, since the research > guides concept includes routine change and replacing content. No lock in because you can rewrite everything? Hmm... Cheers, Thomas Krichel http://openlib.org/home/krichel skype:thomaskrichel
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
On 12/08/13 12:20, Andrew Darby wrote: I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to try to look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is relatively cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? If you have no in-house technical capability, the cost of looking at an open source alternative can easily outweigh the multi-year licensing fee. cheers stuart -- Stuart Yeates Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I don't get this argument at all. Why is it "counter productive to try to look at open source alternatives" if the vendor's option is relatively cheap? Why wouldn't you investigate all options? Maybe the vendor option makes sense, maybe the open source option does. The "technology skills" for open source software are on the install/maintenance side. It's not like the content creator has to do some crazy programming if they want to create a guide in the open source option, while in LibGuides a team of angels guides their every click and drag. And if technology skills are missing, how does writing a check to Springshare remedy the situation? How does sending that check to Springshare benefit the "small poorly resourced" libraries? I assume I'm preaching to choir when I say that we should all be open to supporting our peers' open source efforts, rather than dismissing them out of hand. Andrew On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Wilhelmina Randtke wrote: > Technology tools are a non issue here. Straightforward documented open > source technology is readily available. What is missing is technology > skills. Someone can't buy those if they don't already have technology > skills, or else they are a sitting duck for scammers. > > With a basic pricing of about $1000 a year, it's counter productive to try > look at open source alternatives. $1000 a year with more handholding is > good. Even companies, like lishost, which do open source for libraries > price in this same range, because they have to take on more handholding. I > also don't see vendor lock in issues in LibGuides, since the research > guides concept includes routine change and replacing content. > > If you want libraries to operate better, what you should be doing is having > conversations with people from a variety of libraries, including small > poorly resourced ones, recognizing that there is a spectrum of needs, and > being available to provide realistic advice. (That advice would be > different for different libraries.) > > Lack of access to technology skill creates the situations in which > LibGuides is useful and beneficial. Lack of access to technology > skill causes most situations in which LibGuides are a counter productive > waste of time, whether that's a misguided administrator or poor > interdepartmental communication (yes, even competent IT housed in a library > is sometimes not proactive and helpful at being in touch with IT-hostile > reference departments). If you have technology skill, then by having broad > connections and being available to give advice or pointers, you can assist > libraries / departments that don't have the luxury of having access to > technology skill. If all you do is drum on open source diy, when there is > a low cost alternative that works, then you harm things. > > -Wilhelmina Randtke > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Andrew Darby > wrote: > > > There are open source solutions created by librarians: SubjectsPlus and > > Library a la Carte. > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Cornel Darden Jr. < > > corneldarde...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > Hello? > > > > > > Soringshre's link-rot tool has gotten much better. Even at alerting > > admins > > > about broken links. I think $999 a year for the basic package is worth > it > > > since most librarians aren't coders like we 'ALL' should be! Maybe an > > open > > > source solution created by librarians is needed. However database > > > management will still require librarians to pick up those skills like > SQL > > > that we too often think isn't or shouldn't be a skill that a librarian > > must > > > have. It's the 21st century > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Cornel Darden Jr. > > > MSLIS > > > Librarian > > > Kennedy-King College > > > City Colleges of Chicago > > > Work 773-602-5449 > > > Cell 708-705-2945 > > > > > > > On Aug 11, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Robert Sebek wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive > use > > of > > > >> them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's > mouth > > > is > > > >> "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" > > > >> > > > >> Shudder > > > >> > > > >> This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm > hoping > > > that > > > >> eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides > there. I > > > can > > > >> use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card > and > > > >> *maybe* I will be successful. > > > >> > > > >> Anyone fought this particular battle before? > > > >> > > > >> ~heather > > > >> > > > >> I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into > > which > > > I > > > > have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need > to > > > > refer to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That > > database > > > > just changed platforms? No problem. I change th
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Technology tools are a non issue here. Straightforward documented open source technology is readily available. What is missing is technology skills. Someone can't buy those if they don't already have technology skills, or else they are a sitting duck for scammers. With a basic pricing of about $1000 a year, it's counter productive to try look at open source alternatives. $1000 a year with more handholding is good. Even companies, like lishost, which do open source for libraries price in this same range, because they have to take on more handholding. I also don't see vendor lock in issues in LibGuides, since the research guides concept includes routine change and replacing content. If you want libraries to operate better, what you should be doing is having conversations with people from a variety of libraries, including small poorly resourced ones, recognizing that there is a spectrum of needs, and being available to provide realistic advice. (That advice would be different for different libraries.) Lack of access to technology skill creates the situations in which LibGuides is useful and beneficial. Lack of access to technology skill causes most situations in which LibGuides are a counter productive waste of time, whether that's a misguided administrator or poor interdepartmental communication (yes, even competent IT housed in a library is sometimes not proactive and helpful at being in touch with IT-hostile reference departments). If you have technology skill, then by having broad connections and being available to give advice or pointers, you can assist libraries / departments that don't have the luxury of having access to technology skill. If all you do is drum on open source diy, when there is a low cost alternative that works, then you harm things. -Wilhelmina Randtke On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Andrew Darby wrote: > There are open source solutions created by librarians: SubjectsPlus and > Library a la Carte. > > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Cornel Darden Jr. < > corneldarde...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > Hello? > > > > Soringshre's link-rot tool has gotten much better. Even at alerting > admins > > about broken links. I think $999 a year for the basic package is worth it > > since most librarians aren't coders like we 'ALL' should be! Maybe an > open > > source solution created by librarians is needed. However database > > management will still require librarians to pick up those skills like SQL > > that we too often think isn't or shouldn't be a skill that a librarian > must > > have. It's the 21st century > > > > Thanks, > > > > Cornel Darden Jr. > > MSLIS > > Librarian > > Kennedy-King College > > City Colleges of Chicago > > Work 773-602-5449 > > Cell 708-705-2945 > > > > > On Aug 11, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Robert Sebek wrote: > > > > > >> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > > >> I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use > of > > >> them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's mouth > > is > > >> "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" > > >> > > >> Shudder > > >> > > >> This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping > > that > > >> eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides there. I > > can > > >> use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card and > > >> *maybe* I will be successful. > > >> > > >> Anyone fought this particular battle before? > > >> > > >> ~heather > > >> > > >> I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into > which > > I > > > have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need to > > > refer to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That > database > > > just changed platforms? No problem. I change the URL in one place and > > > everything automatically updates (hooray CMSs!). > > > > > > All of our subject guides (http://www.lib.vt.edu/subject-guides/) are > in > > > the CMS using the exact same database entries. I converted from our > > > failing, home-grown system into the CMS and then gave training on how > to > > > maintain from there (remove an entry, add an entry, create a parallel > > > course guide)--using the same skills as maintaining any other web page > > that > > > librarian is responsible for. But apparently that's too hard. > > > > > > So we have a trial of LibGuides. NO ONE here has created a guide from > > > scratch yet, but they all say this is going to be easy. No one will > > admit > > > that someone will have to recreate all those database entries > (literally > > > hundreds) and then maintain those entries. When presented with this, > > > several librarians said--oh that won't be necessary, we'll just create > > > individual entries as needed on individual guides. WHAT?! > > > > > > If implemented, we'll have hundreds and hundreds of entries, any of > which > > > could be out of date and nonfunctional, with no easy way to find and > f
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
There are open source solutions created by librarians: SubjectsPlus and Library a la Carte. On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Cornel Darden Jr. wrote: > Hello? > > Soringshre's link-rot tool has gotten much better. Even at alerting admins > about broken links. I think $999 a year for the basic package is worth it > since most librarians aren't coders like we 'ALL' should be! Maybe an open > source solution created by librarians is needed. However database > management will still require librarians to pick up those skills like SQL > that we too often think isn't or shouldn't be a skill that a librarian must > have. It's the 21st century > > Thanks, > > Cornel Darden Jr. > MSLIS > Librarian > Kennedy-King College > City Colleges of Chicago > Work 773-602-5449 > Cell 708-705-2945 > > > On Aug 11, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Robert Sebek wrote: > > > >> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use of > >> them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's mouth > is > >> "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" > >> > >> Shudder > >> > >> This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping > that > >> eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides there. I > can > >> use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card and > >> *maybe* I will be successful. > >> > >> Anyone fought this particular battle before? > >> > >> ~heather > >> > >> I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into which > I > > have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need to > > refer to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That database > > just changed platforms? No problem. I change the URL in one place and > > everything automatically updates (hooray CMSs!). > > > > All of our subject guides (http://www.lib.vt.edu/subject-guides/) are in > > the CMS using the exact same database entries. I converted from our > > failing, home-grown system into the CMS and then gave training on how to > > maintain from there (remove an entry, add an entry, create a parallel > > course guide)--using the same skills as maintaining any other web page > that > > librarian is responsible for. But apparently that's too hard. > > > > So we have a trial of LibGuides. NO ONE here has created a guide from > > scratch yet, but they all say this is going to be easy. No one will > admit > > that someone will have to recreate all those database entries (literally > > hundreds) and then maintain those entries. When presented with this, > > several librarians said--oh that won't be necessary, we'll just create > > individual entries as needed on individual guides. WHAT?! > > > > If implemented, we'll have hundreds and hundreds of entries, any of which > > could be out of date and nonfunctional, with no easy way to find and fix, > > other than waiting for patrons to complain that the link doesn't work. > Ugh. > > All for several thousand dollar a year (as opposed for free in the CMS). > > > > And yes, those librarians' favorite example libguides have a dozen tabs > > with hundreds of links on each tab. Overwhelm the patron with links--who > > cares! Just let me recreate the Yahoo Directory I so miss with every > > possible resource I can find online. Half those links don't work next > > semester? Doesn't matter, as no one will ever maintain that page again > (and > > no patron will use it, since they will just Google these resources > anyway). > > > > > > > > -- > > Robert Sebek > > Webmaster, Virginia Tech Libraries > > (http://www.lib.vt.edu/) > -- Andrew Darby Head, Web & Emerging Technologies University of Miami Libraries
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Hello? Soringshre's link-rot tool has gotten much better. Even at alerting admins about broken links. I think $999 a year for the basic package is worth it since most librarians aren't coders like we 'ALL' should be! Maybe an open source solution created by librarians is needed. However database management will still require librarians to pick up those skills like SQL that we too often think isn't or shouldn't be a skill that a librarian must have. It's the 21st century Thanks, Cornel Darden Jr. MSLIS Librarian Kennedy-King College City Colleges of Chicago Work 773-602-5449 Cell 708-705-2945 > On Aug 11, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Robert Sebek wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use of >> them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's mouth is >> "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" >> >> Shudder >> >> This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping that >> eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides there. I can >> use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card and >> *maybe* I will be successful. >> >> Anyone fought this particular battle before? >> >> ~heather >> >> I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into which I > have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need to > refer to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That database > just changed platforms? No problem. I change the URL in one place and > everything automatically updates (hooray CMSs!). > > All of our subject guides (http://www.lib.vt.edu/subject-guides/) are in > the CMS using the exact same database entries. I converted from our > failing, home-grown system into the CMS and then gave training on how to > maintain from there (remove an entry, add an entry, create a parallel > course guide)--using the same skills as maintaining any other web page that > librarian is responsible for. But apparently that's too hard. > > So we have a trial of LibGuides. NO ONE here has created a guide from > scratch yet, but they all say this is going to be easy. No one will admit > that someone will have to recreate all those database entries (literally > hundreds) and then maintain those entries. When presented with this, > several librarians said--oh that won't be necessary, we'll just create > individual entries as needed on individual guides. WHAT?! > > If implemented, we'll have hundreds and hundreds of entries, any of which > could be out of date and nonfunctional, with no easy way to find and fix, > other than waiting for patrons to complain that the link doesn't work. Ugh. > All for several thousand dollar a year (as opposed for free in the CMS). > > And yes, those librarians' favorite example libguides have a dozen tabs > with hundreds of links on each tab. Overwhelm the patron with links--who > cares! Just let me recreate the Yahoo Directory I so miss with every > possible resource I can find online. Half those links don't work next > semester? Doesn't matter, as no one will ever maintain that page again (and > no patron will use it, since they will just Google these resources anyway). > > > > -- > Robert Sebek > Webmaster, Virginia Tech Libraries > (http://www.lib.vt.edu/)
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I've found that librarians gravitate towards tools like LibGuides and WordPress because they want to use what they've seen other libraries using, putting me in a strange position when try to explain that we (with more tech resources) can actually do better. Several times I've had the experience of proposing something like: we could have a blog built right into our Drupal website with the same theme, even incorporate it into our homepage! "But that doesn't look like a blog." After some digging, I found that these particular librarians/administrators thought what a blog looked like was something not integrated with the rest of the website, at a separate URL, using an off the shelf WordPress theme that didn't match anything else. Like they couldn't tell the difference between a compromise and a feature! Sigh. Same thing with LibGuides--someone saw them and got gung-ho to subscribe right away. I offered, "We have some basic subject guides in Drupal, but we never embellished the content type because no one was creating them." But they thought a subject guide *should* have a too-small font, lots of RSS feeds for not-necessarily-important content, and of course a dozen tabs across the top. (And that having those features available would magically inspire librarians to spend lots of time creating and maintaining subject guides, despite the fact that no one did before.) I'm with Robert--why spend money *encouraging* a "Big List o' Links" style of library service? And in case anyone missed it when it was going around Twitter a few days ago: http://guides.temple.edu/general-internet My Content Strategy/IA nightmare. On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Robert Sebek wrote: > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use of > > them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's mouth is > > "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" > > > > Shudder > > > > This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping > that > > eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides there. I > can > > use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card and > > *maybe* I will be successful. > > > > Anyone fought this particular battle before? > > > > ~heather > > > > I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into which I > have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need to > refer to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That database > just changed platforms? No problem. I change the URL in one place and > everything automatically updates (hooray CMSs!). > > All of our subject guides (http://www.lib.vt.edu/subject-guides/) are in > the CMS using the exact same database entries. I converted from our > failing, home-grown system into the CMS and then gave training on how to > maintain from there (remove an entry, add an entry, create a parallel > course guide)--using the same skills as maintaining any other web page that > librarian is responsible for. But apparently that's too hard. > > So we have a trial of LibGuides. NO ONE here has created a guide from > scratch yet, but they all say this is going to be easy. No one will admit > that someone will have to recreate all those database entries (literally > hundreds) and then maintain those entries. When presented with this, > several librarians said--oh that won't be necessary, we'll just create > individual entries as needed on individual guides. WHAT?! > > If implemented, we'll have hundreds and hundreds of entries, any of which > could be out of date and nonfunctional, with no easy way to find and fix, > other than waiting for patrons to complain that the link doesn't work. Ugh. > All for several thousand dollar a year (as opposed for free in the CMS). > > And yes, those librarians' favorite example libguides have a dozen tabs > with hundreds of links on each tab. Overwhelm the patron with links--who > cares! Just let me recreate the Yahoo Directory I so miss with every > possible resource I can find online. Half those links don't work next > semester? Doesn't matter, as no one will ever maintain that page again (and > no patron will use it, since they will just Google these resources anyway). > > > > -- > Robert Sebek > Webmaster, Virginia Tech Libraries > (http://www.lib.vt.edu/) >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use of > them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's mouth is > "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" > > Shudder > > This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping that > eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides there. I can > use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card and > *maybe* I will be successful. > > Anyone fought this particular battle before? > > ~heather > > I'm fighting that battle right now. We have an excellent CMS into which I have set up all our database URLs, descriptions, etc.Anytime we need to refer to a database on a page, we use one of those entries. That database just changed platforms? No problem. I change the URL in one place and everything automatically updates (hooray CMSs!). All of our subject guides (http://www.lib.vt.edu/subject-guides/) are in the CMS using the exact same database entries. I converted from our failing, home-grown system into the CMS and then gave training on how to maintain from there (remove an entry, add an entry, create a parallel course guide)--using the same skills as maintaining any other web page that librarian is responsible for. But apparently that's too hard. So we have a trial of LibGuides. NO ONE here has created a guide from scratch yet, but they all say this is going to be easy. No one will admit that someone will have to recreate all those database entries (literally hundreds) and then maintain those entries. When presented with this, several librarians said--oh that won't be necessary, we'll just create individual entries as needed on individual guides. WHAT?! If implemented, we'll have hundreds and hundreds of entries, any of which could be out of date and nonfunctional, with no easy way to find and fix, other than waiting for patrons to complain that the link doesn't work. Ugh. All for several thousand dollar a year (as opposed for free in the CMS). And yes, those librarians' favorite example libguides have a dozen tabs with hundreds of links on each tab. Overwhelm the patron with links--who cares! Just let me recreate the Yahoo Directory I so miss with every possible resource I can find online. Half those links don't work next semester? Doesn't matter, as no one will ever maintain that page again (and no patron will use it, since they will just Google these resources anyway). -- Robert Sebek Webmaster, Virginia Tech Libraries (http://www.lib.vt.edu/)
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
For Wordpress versus LibGuides, both are kind of miserable and unsatisfying unless you are with a large library with in-house systems staff. LibGuides was clunky and extremely limited when I used it a few years ago. I also found Springshare tech support was not at all responsive to questions or requests, but perhaps that has changed. Nevertheless, LibGuides removes a technology bottleneck just by virtue of being hosted. A library using LibGuides does not need anyone with server administration background, etc. Small libraries don't. The pricing is also relatively flat, and a library will get the same pricing quoted to it, even if no one there knows tech. Wordpress is not a good option for a small library, where there are no or only one staff with technology background. A simple Wordpress install is easy for a novice to configure by picking colors for a theme, and then to make accounts to update content. But also, even a one click install is difficult for many people. And once there is an install, getting to the added functionality is not necessarily possible. The same libraries that LibGuides is made for (small libraries without in-house IT) may have limited technical support to the point where they aren't going to be able to go shopping for a plugin and extend functionality. Me, I wouldn't move to Wordpress. I know tech but no one else in my library has background in SQL. So, no one could be trained to do a backup, reinstall, and reload of a Wordpress without putting a huge amount of time into training. LibGuides is also going to by default handle things like electronic resource links. Wordpress will not, and if there is ever a problem with cut-and-pasting something into Wordpress and it getting reformatted, suddenly you have moved from easy to hard in terms of fixing that problem. It is not possible for someone with no IT background to hire a Wordpress developer. Wordpress get a lot of quacks. If you look at small businesses using Wordpress, and find how they got their developer, what they paid, and what charges are for specific services, you will seen some terrible rip offs. Just really terrible. And the quacks seem to out number the legitimate Wordpress developers. Not just on Craigslist, but businesses that do Wordpress and have Yellow Pages listings and offices and have been around for years. Sometimes the Wordpress developers will even buy the URL for you, and then hold the URL hostage. Sales for Wordpress skills can be very unethical, to the point of shocking, and the clients often feel uncomfortable but do not realize how badly they have been taken until years later. LibGuides at least has a vendor who is used to dealing with libraries and will provide fair pricing for basic services, including no charge for things that should not require a charge. And, if you are in a large library, you probably have high enough traffic to your site, that Wordpress becomes more complicated in order to avoid performance issues from high traffic and too many database calls. You as an individual cannot experiment with a site that get 5,000 visits per day. Do you really have experience configuring Wordpress or any other CMS in that environment? -Wilhelmina Randtke On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:23 PM, davesgonechina wrote: > I've not had an opportunity to use LibGuides, but I've seen a few and read > the features list on the SpringShare. All I see is a less flexible > WordPress at a higher price point. What advantages am I not seeing? If > there aren't any, is it the case that once signed up, migration to an open > source platform is just not worth it for most institutions? >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
If you look at the subject guides plugin for Drupal, you will see that mimicking LibGuides is possible. That might be a way to appease, however the biggest issue I saw with LibGuides was too many librarians making something and never updating, or starting a guide, publishing it, then never finishing. So, maybe you want to go back to some kind of structured control. You aren't saving money, unless LibGuides has drastically raised prices in the last 2 years. When I worked with it up through 2011, pricing was comparable to running a Wordpress or Drupal install on lishost or other more "full service" host - low four digits per year. -Wilhelmina Randtke On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Heather Rayl <23e...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use of > them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's mouth is > "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" > > Shudder > > This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping that > eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides there. I can > use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card and > *maybe* I will be successful. > > Anyone fought this particular battle before? > > ~heather > > On Sunday, August 11, 2013, Sean Hannan wrote: > > > All of this, plus SpringShare has great support. Like, the best of any > > library vendor I've dealt with. I've had them implement features within > an > > hour of me sending the email suggesting it. > > > > The big downside of LibGuides is that it's ease of use (and ease if > reuse) > > leads to content sprawl like you wouldn't believe. The new version has a > > publishing workflow that can help mitigate this, but it's better to go > into > > a LibGuides project with a content strategy firmly in place. > > > > -Sean > > ____ > > From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU ] on > > behalf of Sullivan, Mark V [mars...@uflib.ufl.edu ] > > Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:44 PM > > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > > > First, SpringShare has great marketing. > > > > Secondly, it is a very simple CMS that was offered at a time that many > > libraries were not getting good web support from IT. LibGuides became > the > > easiest way to edit web pages for many people. It is certainly true at > my > > institution, where we have had whole departments and units move their > > official website to LibGuides, rather than deal with Adobe Contribute and > > loose HTML files. I am now in the midst of trying to fix that problem by > > rolling out an enterprise-level web cms, but I am finding many pages that > > have quietly moved to LibGuides. > > > > There IS the one compelling thing about sharing a module between > different > > institutions on LibGuides. If one of our faculty members generates a > list > > of special resources for a topic, another faculty member in another > > institution can just insert that module into their page. Of course, the > > worldwide web solved pretty much the same problems ages ago with the > > invention of links, so I'm not sure that is really that compelling > anymore. > > > > Just my two cents.. > > > > Mark > > > > > > From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU ] on > > behalf of davesgonechina [davesgonech...@gmail.com ] > > Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:23 PM > > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > > Subject: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > > > I've not had an opportunity to use LibGuides, but I've seen a few and > read > > the features list on the SpringShare. All I see is a less flexible > > WordPress at a higher price point. What advantages am I not seeing? If > > there aren't any, is it the case that once signed up, migration to an > open > > source platform is just not worth it for most institutions? > > >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
Your best bet is to get a clear mandate from administration on what should go where. i.e., "Writing a subject guide for faculty and students to use? Put it in a LibGuide. Creating a departmental, unit, or committee site? Use the new fancy, shiny web content management system!" Barring that, you are left to fight each battle one at a time. If your system is simple and straightforward enough, though, you will likely win those battles. It certainly helps if you have a very clean look in your own sites, since I find that LibGuides are harder to customize for a nice clean look, especially one that varies by department, etc.. Mark From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of Heather Rayl [23e...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2013 9:54 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use of them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's mouth is "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" Shudder This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping that eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides there. I can use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card and *maybe* I will be successful. Anyone fought this particular battle before? ~heather On Sunday, August 11, 2013, Sean Hannan wrote: > All of this, plus SpringShare has great support. Like, the best of any > library vendor I've dealt with. I've had them implement features within an > hour of me sending the email suggesting it. > > The big downside of LibGuides is that it's ease of use (and ease if reuse) > leads to content sprawl like you wouldn't believe. The new version has a > publishing workflow that can help mitigate this, but it's better to go into > a LibGuides project with a content strategy firmly in place. > > -Sean > > From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU ] on > behalf of Sullivan, Mark V [mars...@uflib.ufl.edu ] > Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:44 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > First, SpringShare has great marketing. > > Secondly, it is a very simple CMS that was offered at a time that many > libraries were not getting good web support from IT. LibGuides became the > easiest way to edit web pages for many people. It is certainly true at my > institution, where we have had whole departments and units move their > official website to LibGuides, rather than deal with Adobe Contribute and > loose HTML files. I am now in the midst of trying to fix that problem by > rolling out an enterprise-level web cms, but I am finding many pages that > have quietly moved to LibGuides. > > There IS the one compelling thing about sharing a module between different > institutions on LibGuides. If one of our faculty members generates a list > of special resources for a topic, another faculty member in another > institution can just insert that module into their page. Of course, the > worldwide web solved pretty much the same problems ages ago with the > invention of links, so I'm not sure that is really that compelling anymore. > > Just my two cents.. > > Mark > > ____ > From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU ] on > behalf of davesgonechina [davesgonech...@gmail.com ] > Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:23 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I've not had an opportunity to use LibGuides, but I've seen a few and read > the features list on the SpringShare. All I see is a less flexible > WordPress at a higher price point. What advantages am I not seeing? If > there aren't any, is it the case that once signed up, migration to an open > source platform is just not worth it for most institutions? >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I have to say that I loathe LibGuides. My library makes extensive use of them, too. Need a web solution? The first thing out of someone's mouth is "Let's put it in a LibGuide!" Shudder This fall, I'll be moving our main site over to Drupal, and I'm hoping that eventually I can convince people to re-invent their LibGuides there. I can use the "saving money" card, and the "content silos are bad" card and *maybe* I will be successful. Anyone fought this particular battle before? ~heather On Sunday, August 11, 2013, Sean Hannan wrote: > All of this, plus SpringShare has great support. Like, the best of any > library vendor I've dealt with. I've had them implement features within an > hour of me sending the email suggesting it. > > The big downside of LibGuides is that it's ease of use (and ease if reuse) > leads to content sprawl like you wouldn't believe. The new version has a > publishing workflow that can help mitigate this, but it's better to go into > a LibGuides project with a content strategy firmly in place. > > -Sean > > From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU ] on > behalf of Sullivan, Mark V [mars...@uflib.ufl.edu ] > Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:44 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > First, SpringShare has great marketing. > > Secondly, it is a very simple CMS that was offered at a time that many > libraries were not getting good web support from IT. LibGuides became the > easiest way to edit web pages for many people. It is certainly true at my > institution, where we have had whole departments and units move their > official website to LibGuides, rather than deal with Adobe Contribute and > loose HTML files. I am now in the midst of trying to fix that problem by > rolling out an enterprise-level web cms, but I am finding many pages that > have quietly moved to LibGuides. > > There IS the one compelling thing about sharing a module between different > institutions on LibGuides. If one of our faculty members generates a list > of special resources for a topic, another faculty member in another > institution can just insert that module into their page. Of course, the > worldwide web solved pretty much the same problems ages ago with the > invention of links, so I'm not sure that is really that compelling anymore. > > Just my two cents.. > > Mark > > ____ > From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU ] on > behalf of davesgonechina [davesgonech...@gmail.com ] > Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:23 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it > > I've not had an opportunity to use LibGuides, but I've seen a few and read > the features list on the SpringShare. All I see is a less flexible > WordPress at a higher price point. What advantages am I not seeing? If > there aren't any, is it the case that once signed up, migration to an open > source platform is just not worth it for most institutions? >
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
All of this, plus SpringShare has great support. Like, the best of any library vendor I've dealt with. I've had them implement features within an hour of me sending the email suggesting it. The big downside of LibGuides is that it's ease of use (and ease if reuse) leads to content sprawl like you wouldn't believe. The new version has a publishing workflow that can help mitigate this, but it's better to go into a LibGuides project with a content strategy firmly in place. -Sean From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of Sullivan, Mark V [mars...@uflib.ufl.edu] Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:44 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it First, SpringShare has great marketing. Secondly, it is a very simple CMS that was offered at a time that many libraries were not getting good web support from IT. LibGuides became the easiest way to edit web pages for many people. It is certainly true at my institution, where we have had whole departments and units move their official website to LibGuides, rather than deal with Adobe Contribute and loose HTML files. I am now in the midst of trying to fix that problem by rolling out an enterprise-level web cms, but I am finding many pages that have quietly moved to LibGuides. There IS the one compelling thing about sharing a module between different institutions on LibGuides. If one of our faculty members generates a list of special resources for a topic, another faculty member in another institution can just insert that module into their page. Of course, the worldwide web solved pretty much the same problems ages ago with the invention of links, so I'm not sure that is really that compelling anymore. Just my two cents.. Mark From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of davesgonechina [davesgonech...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:23 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I've not had an opportunity to use LibGuides, but I've seen a few and read the features list on the SpringShare. All I see is a less flexible WordPress at a higher price point. What advantages am I not seeing? If there aren't any, is it the case that once signed up, migration to an open source platform is just not worth it for most institutions?
Re: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
First, SpringShare has great marketing. Secondly, it is a very simple CMS that was offered at a time that many libraries were not getting good web support from IT. LibGuides became the easiest way to edit web pages for many people. It is certainly true at my institution, where we have had whole departments and units move their official website to LibGuides, rather than deal with Adobe Contribute and loose HTML files. I am now in the midst of trying to fix that problem by rolling out an enterprise-level web cms, but I am finding many pages that have quietly moved to LibGuides. There IS the one compelling thing about sharing a module between different institutions on LibGuides. If one of our faculty members generates a list of special resources for a topic, another faculty member in another institution can just insert that module into their page. Of course, the worldwide web solved pretty much the same problems ages ago with the invention of links, so I'm not sure that is really that compelling anymore. Just my two cents.. Mark From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of davesgonechina [davesgonech...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:23 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: [CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it I've not had an opportunity to use LibGuides, but I've seen a few and read the features list on the SpringShare. All I see is a less flexible WordPress at a higher price point. What advantages am I not seeing? If there aren't any, is it the case that once signed up, migration to an open source platform is just not worth it for most institutions?
[CODE4LIB] LibGuides: I don't get it
I've not had an opportunity to use LibGuides, but I've seen a few and read the features list on the SpringShare. All I see is a less flexible WordPress at a higher price point. What advantages am I not seeing? If there aren't any, is it the case that once signed up, migration to an open source platform is just not worth it for most institutions?
