SOPAC: The Social, Web 2.0 Library Catalog

From LIS5313 Course Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

by Sarah Redmond

The SOPAC 2.0 logo

Contents

Introduction

A card catalog. We've already come a long way!

Library 2.0 has long been a phrase that represents the new focus for libraries as they begin to integrate their standard services with new Web 2.0 technologies that focus on connectivity and interaction. This connectivity can be seen in various social networking sites. Much of the interaction of Web 2.0 applications emphasizes the so-called “Wisdom of the Crowd” to showcase the ways in which everyday users can contribute to and benefit from collective knowledge. Wikipedia, for example, is the most compelling example of individuals coming together to demonstrate how users can collect and share knowledge. Furthermore, folksonomies, or user-generated tags that enable users to categorize information and content, are very successful on websites like Delicious and Flickr. Collecting and creating their own way to categorize and catalog photos, websites, or other information has generated valuable metadata—and it’s all thanks to individual users implementing Web 2.0!

While many libraries have taken advantage of Web 2.0 technologies by starting blogs or providing forums for users, the most imperative and important element of many library systems, the catalog, has yet to embrace many elements of Web 2.0. Library OPACs (or Open Public Access Catalogs) offer an online destination where numerous people come to search for information, but there have been few efforts to bring together this community or actively engage them in the processes of obtaining the information they seek. OPACs contain metadata on books, films, audio recordings, and more, but this data usually takes the form of Library of Congress subject headings. They lack ways to engage or tap in to the knowledge of their patrons. Catalogers work hard to learn specialized skills to create these subject headings, and have always had to strike a balance between the official AACR rules and the drive to choose subject headings and keywords that will be relevant to users. With so many library patrons used to Web 2.0 interaction, however, OPACs can often seem sterile and difficult to use. A library catalog that could collect additional data from users could tap in to this “Wisdom of the Crowd” and enhance the usability and value of the OPAC.

One such experimental system aims to do just that. SOPAC, or the Social Online Public Access Catalog, is a suite of open source software tools that brings the power of social media and Web 2.0 to the library catalog. It was developed and implemented by John Blyberg at the Darien Library in Connecticut, and recently won the ALA 2009 LITA/Brett Butler Entrepreneurship Award. SOPAC aims to bring together the order and standardized cataloging of the traditional OPAC, but enhance the experience for library patrons by giving them an opportunity to tag, rate, comment on, and review anything in the library's holdings. SOPAC is a next-generation catalog system that takes advantage of online, Web 2.0-style interaction to engage users in new and exciting ways. This article will look at the ways that SOPAC utilizes elements of folksonomies and social networking to create a unique experience for librarians and library patrons.

Folksonomies, Social Networking, and "Social Cataloging"

Outside of the library, patrons encounter numerous websites that rely on Web 2.0 applications to organize data. Amazon.com, for example, allows users to rate and review items, and this data can be important to consumers as they make decisions about products to purchase. Concepts surrounding folksonomies and social networking are rarely associated with the more stringent and rule bound order of library cataloging, yet the participatory nature of, and the personal touch associated with these Web 2.0 sites are undeniably popular with users.

Folksonomies

A tag cloud.

Folksonomies, or collective grouping of tags assigned by users of a particular site, have long been utilized by bloggers, social bookmarking websites, and other sites like LibraryThing. The advent of such interactive websites has “called into question the ways in which libraries provide access to their collections” (Rolla 2009). In the Web 2.0 universe, user-generated tags could make the catalog more relevant to users who are already accustomed to participatory websites that do allow user interaction. Folksonomies incorporated into traditional OPACs could provide the online catalogs with the edge needed to compete with sites like Amazon. Traditional library subject cataloging is based on rules and regulations. It is “restrictive rather than inclusive, because choices are made by an information specialist who assigns a limited number of relevant subject headings” (Peterson 2007). This tension between folksonomy and taxonomy can be frustrating for users, because the taxonomic descriptions may be very different than their own idea about a certain item. The infamous example of the Library of Congress’ Subject Heading “Cookery” highlights this point, and has only recently undergone the process of revision. Few patrons searching for recipe books would choose this particular word, and it has caused much confusion and frustration. With folksonomies working in concert with taxonomies, however, patron’s might search for tags like “recipes” and find the types of books they seek. This is because folksonomies are flexible and reflect the vocabulary of the users. Were works described by both the traditional and stable Library of Congress Subject Headings and a folksonomic tag cloud, library catalogs might be able to serve more patrons and reflect the plethora of tags that they feel are relevant. Making the catalogs more relevant to users accustomed to the Internet will undoubtedly improve access to the materials in library collections (Rolla 2009).

Elements of Social Networking

Social Networks: Connecting you to the world.

Social Networking websites have been exceedingly popular for many years, and often cater to specific groups of people who are interested in forming some sort of connection. Social interactions, however, are not limited to sites like Facebook. Numerous sites offer ways for users to comment on, communicate in forums, or offer opinions about certain content. The website LibraryThing, for example, allows users to create a profile and share their opinions about items in their personal library. They can also connect with other users in the system to interact with each other. Social networking elements enhance the experience and add a human touch. If we rely on popularity, people want to be able to interact with their websites, and they value the input of others. Why should a library’s OPAC be any different? And if a library could make their catalog more attractive to users without sacrificing much, why wouldn’t they?

Mixing in elements of folksonomies and social networking will create a kind of “social cataloging” that will work in tandem with the library’s traditional taxonomy. User tags and the option to add comments and reviews would permit patrons to personalize the library's website, thereby “bolstering a spirit of belonging and also fostering online communities organized around the library” (Rolla 2009). Encouraging interaction with the library catalog will only lead to a heightened and more enjoyable experience for both patrons and librarians. Luckily, a new OPAC software in interface will address these issues head on in an experiment that will blend social networking and the Open Public Access Catalog.

The History of SOPAC

Principles of Web 2.0

SOPAC, or the Social Online Public Access Catalog, incorporates all of these elements. Both a traditional catalog and an interface that supports user interaction, SOPAC was designed by John Blyberg, currently the Head of Technology and Digital initiatives at the Darien Library in Connecticut. The initial version of SOPAC was released in 2007, and recently won the ALA 2009 LITA/Brett Butler Entrepreneurship Award. According to their website, the purpose of SOPAC is to “build a cohesive community of users and developers around the SOPAC project suite.” Essentially, SOPAC allows users to be involved in the way the library communicates information about its collection. They can tag, rate, comment on, and review anything in the library's holdings. SOPAC is a next-generation catalog system that takes advantage of online, web 2.0-style interaction to engage users. John Blyberg stated in an interview with the ALA after winning the LITA award that “SOPAC 2.0 was created in response to requests from other libraries for a package that would easily enable them to implement social computing functions in their OPACs.” Again, according to the official website: “SOPAC (Social Online Public Access Catalog) is a module for the Drupal CMS that provides true integration of your library catalog system with the power of the Drupal content management system while allowing users to tag, rate, and review your holdings. User input is then incorporated into the discovery index so that SOPAC becomes a truly community-driven catalog system.” Blyberg’s innovative incorporation of social networking components into the workings of a library’s OPAC is truly unique. Even more exciting is the fact that Blyberg made his software completely open-source. Library's can download and customize the SOPAC application suite for their own needs from the Official SOPAC site. While other systems have incorporated social aspects into catalogs, they are quite expensive and require specialized knowledge. SOPAC, however, is held under a GNU license and was created as a module for the widely adopted Drupal OSS content management system. It provides a simple mechanism for integrating library catalog systems with the power of the Drupal content management system, while allowing users to tag, rate and review holdings. User input is then incorporated into the discovery index so that SOPAC becomes a truly community-driven catalog system. Other features include:

SOPAC software is all free and open source!
  • Faceted browsing
  • Saved searches
  • Integrated renewals, holds placement and fine payment
  • Ability to customize the user experience via the administrative control panel
  • Ability to create custom functionality via a Drupal sub-module
  • Ability to remove search limiters

The SOPAC application suite also includes Locum and Insurge. Locum is a PHP software library that creates a flexible communication layer between the ILS and PHP applications, as well as provides a bibliographic discovery layer and interface to the open source full-text indexing engine Sphinx (used by SOPAC).

John Blyberg created this Slideshare presentation, "An Introduction to SOPAC," that you can view to learn more about SOPAC and get an overview of the system:


SOPAC in Use

Screenshot of AADL catalog page, showing the novel "Twilight" (November 2009)

SOPAC claims to add value to the library’s existing catalog by adding more data (which can rarely be a bad thing), fostering a sense of community within the library, attracting more users, and hopefully making the library experience more fun. So far, three library systems are running on SOPAC 2.0, the latest version of the software: The Darien Public Library, the Ann Arbor District Library, and the Palos Verdes Library District. After looking at the SOPAC interface and how users are responding, I see it as a success. Each library’s OPAC has the same features, but they each look very different as SOPAC is customizable and can be presented in many different ways. The catalogs for each library also have many examples of user interaction. Blyberg notes that his system is individually social and user-direct, and SOPAC allows for registered users to not only tag, review, rate, and comment, but collect items they deem interesting in their account for future use. The user interface is very simple and similar to other Web 2.0 applications. SOPAC is also more conducive to browsing. The homepage offers links like “Hot Fiction” that lists books that are currently popular with patrons.

Let’s look at an example of SOPAC in action (see image). I went to the Ann Arbor District Library’s catalog and looked up the popular novel Twilight by Stephenie Meyer. Viewing the record, I noticed that the book has been rated nine times and boasts 4 ½ stars. The AADL catalog also includes the status of all copies of the novel, links to reviews, a summary, and the comments/reviews section that has been written by the SOPAC’s users. The publication information and the official subject headings are clearly listed, as is the tag cloud populated with user-generated material. We can see clearly in the image that the tags are accurate, with the two most popular being “Romance” and “Vampires.” In all, a friendly and useful interface that certainly seems more invested in interaction. In interviewed Jennifer Addington, a libarary manager with the Palos Verdes Library System, and she echoed many of the sentiments about the interactivity of the system. I did notice, however, that some tags were repetitive or idiosyncratic, the result of a user perhaps utilizing a tag for personal use (i.e., the “thumbs up” tag seen in the example). Ms. Addington noted this as well, and said that it certainly helped if a book or film was popular if it was to get any interaction from patrons. Overall, I was impressed by the interaction in this instance. However, when searching for less popular items, there is little or no interaction and the SOPAC resembles a traditional catalog, with the basic information included on the items’s page and little or nothing else.

Benefits of a Web 2.0 Catalog

Screenshop from the Palos Verdes Library SOPAC catalog.

Library 2.0 focuses on user participation and emphasizes ways in which a library might better match user expectations and improve the delivery of library services. The demand for the convergence of library bibliographic organization and the new Web infrastructure is reshaping the future of all library services (Chen).

Currently, SOPAC allows for much interaction from patrons, but it is, of course, dependent on the users. Using Web 2.0 tools to enhance performance in the cataloging department is the key behind it’s efficacy and success. Using folksonomies, SOPAC has begun the process of increasing user-friendliness and interactivity. User tags, as Spiteri has pointed out, also can adapt better and more quickly to changing terminologies and to new fields of study than LCSH or any controlled vocabulary can. In his recent study, Rolla looked at the folksonomic tagging of the website LibraryThing. He found that a comparison between the LibraryThing tags for a group of books and the library-supplied subject headings for the same books shows that users and catalogers approach these descriptors very differently.

He notes that “an attractive feature of folksonomies is their inclusiveness; they reflect the vocabulary of the users, regardless of viewpoint, background, bias, and so forth” (Rolla 2009). In the study, Rolla found that in every LibraryThing record, the user tags contained at least one concept not covered by the subject headings in the catalog record (2009). For example, a book with the subject heading “Africa -- History” was given tags for more specific concepts, such as "slavery," "colonialism," and "exploration” by LibraryThing’s users (Rolla 2009). Furthermore, approximately three-quarters of the time, catalogers and users agreed on at least part of what each book is about, even if the subjects used different vocabularies. The more complete records in LibraryThing do belong to the more popular books, which is a possible problems for user tags in libraries, yet even if the Web 2.0 style catalog has some records that go largely ignored by the public, the catalog will still function as a traditional OPAC. Essentially, a Web 2.0 catalog like SOPAC, as this study shows, will create more data that is usually fairly reliable and accurate. The social networking aspects of the system will draw users into the system and foster interactivity where there was none.

Conclusions

SOPAC: The Social OPAC

In our Web 2.0 world, people have certain expectations about how to search for information. Most people search by keyword rather than specialized subject heading on many library websites. SOPAC allows us to visualize a catalog where users freely assign tags to any work in a collection, comment or review items, and rate what they like best. They are engaged in the library and with each other. The folksonomy and the taxonomy work in concert with each other to provide both an accurate, professional record and a record that reflects the thoughts and opinions of actual users. Both systems are represented—the accurate yet rigid taxonomy and the fluid and flexible folksonomy. SOPAC represent the best of both worlds in balance, and will only get better as more libraries try out the system and it develops to meet the needs of both library and patron.

Multimedia Project

I used Vuvox collage for my project. It's called SOPAC: The Social, Web 2.0 Catalog and can be viewed below:


References

  • Chen, S. (2009). Can Blogging Help Cataloging? Using a Blog and Other Web 2.0 Tools to Enhance Cataloging Section Activities. Library Resources & Technical Services, 53(4), 251-60. Retrieved November 20, 2009, from OmniFile Full Text Mega database.
  • Hadro, J. (2008). SOPAC 2.0 Debuts in Darien. Library Journal (1976), 133(15), 19-20. Retrieved November 20, 2009, from OmniFile Full Text Mega database.
  • Peterson, E. (2008). Parallel Systems: The Coexistence of Subject Cataloging and Folksonomy. Library Philosophy and Practice(April), 1-5. Retrieved November 20, 2009.
  • Rolla, P. (2009). User Tags versus Subject Headings: Can User-Supplied Data Improve Subject Access to Library Collections?. Library Resources & Technical Services, 53(3), 174-84. Retrieved November 14, 2009, from Library Lit & Inf Full Text database.
  • Spiteri, L. (2007). The Structure and Form of Folksonomy Tags: The Road to the Public Library Catalog. Information Technology and Libraries, 26(3), 13-25. Retrieved November 15, 2009, from OmniFile Full Text Mega database.
  • Email interview with Jennifer Addington, Palos Verdes Library System, on December 2, 2009.
  • "2009 LITA/Brett Butler Entrepreneurship Award winner announced."(March 2009) American Library Association website. Retrieved November 12, 2009.

Resources

MEDIA CREDITS:

Retrieved from "http://lis5313.ci.fsu.edu/wiki/index.php/SOPAC:_The_Social,_Web_2.0_Library_Catalog"
Personal tools