Federated Searching: Implementation Challenges October 14, 2005 Gretchen Hanson, MLS NFAIS Humanitie

1
Federated Searching Implementation
ChallengesOctober 14, 2005Gretchen Hanson,
MLSNFAIS Humanities Round Table IV
2

• The good news is that you can get over 1 billion
  hits on the Internet .

The bad news is that you can get over 1 billion
hits on the Internet .
How can we help our users find what is relevant
to them?
3
Someone has to Provide some Guidance here

• Reveal resources

• MLA Bibliography
• JSTOR
• Project Muse
• DYABOLA
• DAAI
• RIPM/RILM/RISM
• ATLA/ATLAS
• RAMBI

• Subtly lead users to the appropriate resource

4
The Players

• Libraries

• Content Providers

• Patrons

• Federated Search product vendors

5
Federated Searching

• Federated Search, MetaSearch, parallel search,
  broadcast search, and cross-database search are
  all terms to describe the same idea
• Searching multiple databases simultaneously
• About finding resources and records
• Brings all of your resources into a common look
  and feel, for easy discovery

6
The Problem starts

• Can it be all things to all people?
• Don't get me wrong. I love and embrace the
  rigidity of the MARC record. That being said, I
  want both authorities and friendly, loose and
  sloppy interfaces. I want Voyager and Amazon. I
  want Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar. And I
  want to be able to move around between simple and
  complex interfaces at will.
• Ross Singer, Georgia Tech University
• Can Librarians AND undergraduates love it?

7
The Problem continues

• Librarians
• Dumbing down the catalog
• Limited searching capabilities

• Content Providers
• Want to maintain their branding power
• Server strain

• Patrons
• Dont think in terms of databases with diverse
  materials
• Think in terms of stuff I want and expect to
  be able to get it in one location with one magic
  search term.

8
The Challenges the Data

• Bring diverse data into a standard template
• AI databases
• Full Text databases
• OPAC
• Image databases
• Institutional Repositories
• Preprints, Archives, Patents
• Web pages
• Audio, video
• Charts, Schematics
• Search Indexes
• Author Author, Author Affiliation, Creator,
  Artist, Performer, Company, Government etc

9
Interface

• Google has changed our world
• Uber-simplicity
• Speed, relevance, massive number of hits
• Do users really want a single search box, or are
  they more interested in speed and relevance?

10
Will we make them Think?

• Flexible Search Interface
• Undergraduates AND Faculty
• Librarians AND walk-in users
• Simple AND advanced
• Narrow searching scope or search it all
• On the homepage or on dept pages?

11
Maintenance

• Developing connectors
• Anticipating changes
• Most interfaces undergo changes at least 2-3
  times per year.
• Creating new services and features
• This is time consuming and expensive

12
The Solutions (?)
13
Advantages

• Common interface
• Library instruction
• Resource discovery
• Bring services to less developed databases
• OpenURL
• Bibliographic management
• Break down library walls
• Links for incorporation into Course Management
  Software
• Potential for diverse document types (a search
  for Mozart could conceivably bring back AI
  citations, full text journal articles,
  biographies, bibliographies, sound bites, music
  scores, images, movies, websites etc.)

14
Theres promise here

• Integration of records and media type
• Personalization
• Administration

15
Questions?
Gretchen Hanson ghanson_at_csa.com http//multisearc
h.csa.com/e_products/multisearch_login.php