LIBRARY WEB PORTALS
Prepared by Richard W. Boss
An increasing number of libraries are specifying that their automated library systems include a portal, a single user interface for access to a wide variety of electronic resources both within and outside of the library. Portals were initially developed by large companies seeking to provide a single user interface for employees to access corporate information on multiple heterogeneous computer systems. While the first portals were developed by or for a specific company, commercially produced portal software soon became available.
A portal can be mounted either on a dedicated server or on a Web server that supports other applications. The software is generally described as a portal server product. Major vendors include BroadVision, Epicentric, iPlanet, Oracle, Plumtree, and Tibco. Plumtree is the market leader with a 39 percent share; none of the others have more than nine percent. There are also some smaller vendors that focus on the library market, among them Fretwell-Downing, MuseGlobal and WebFeat.
A portal typically contains the following:
Intuitive and customizable Web interface
A portal provides an easy-to-navigate interface that can be designed to
match the look and feel of an organization' s existing applications. While
most portals are implemented with Web browsers, it is possible to use
another client interface such as a GUI.
Personalized content presentation
A portal can be personalized using users-profile information to deliver
personalized content. Each user can gain a view that is tailored to his
or her access privileges. The personalization can be for an individual
or for a category of individuals. In most organizations, employees are
provided with their own personalized content; customers and suppliers
are provided content which has been personalized for a category.
Security
User profiles can be used to increase the security of the systems being
accessed because most portal servers use caching to improve performance.
The users access the cache, rather than the back-end server that is the
source of the information.
Patron authentication is another security feature, not only to determine rights to access that stored on the local system, but remote resources which require that access be limited to specific individuals or categories of people.
Communication and collaboration
A portal can be used to provide chat, e-mail, shared calendars, Web meetings,
etc.
One of the drawbacks of portals is that they can bring too much information to the user. The solution to that problem is relevancy ranking, filtering for relevancy and ranking the search results according to pre-determined criteria.
Sources for library portals
Only a very small minority of libraries have implemented portals. A majority
of those which have done so have relied on a vendor which serves libraries
to undertake the substantial tailoring of the portal so that it works
well with the automated library system; a minority have contracted directly
with a developer of a portal product specifically designed for the library
market.
Lexis-Nexis was a pioneer in developing portals with content management for use by libraries and law offices. It selected Plumtree's Corporate Portal 4.0 platform and added a structured taxonomy to enhance and simplify navigation across legal resources, Web sites, news feeds, and local documents. Westlaw, Lexis/Nexis' major competitor in the legal market, has also developed a similar portal.
Most vendors of automated library systems are now developing portals. Endeavor and Ex Libris, vendors that focus on the academic and special library markets, were among the first. Sirsi, a vendor with a significant share of the public library market, also was an early entrant. Its iBistro is the most widely installed portal with some 160 sites. Innovative Interfaces, TLC, and VTLS recently launched their products, and several other vendors are planning introductions in the first half of 2002.
Four vendors, including Innovative Interfaces, TLC, LIBIT of Germany, and one which does not wish to be identified, have selected MuseGlobal for incorporation into their systems as a portal. MuseGlobal is a portal server product specifically designed for retrieval of information by library users. At least one vendor, epixtech, has an agreement to use WebFeat, a major competitor to MuseGlobal. Fretwell-Downing also offers a portal product, but no library automation vendor appears to have contracted with the company as yet.
Since the portal product is positioned between the browser and the vendor’s patron access catalog, it is necessary to write an interface between the portal product and the patron access catalog so that features such as placing a hold and other patron empowerment features are not lost.
While there are advantages to working with the vendor of the automated library system because it assures better integration of the portal and the automated library system, a number of libraries have chosen to deal directly with the portal developer, especially when that is one which specializes in the library market. The University of Illinois at Chicago chose to work directly with WebFeat because it was planning to migrate from its NOTIS system to a new client/server system and because it wanted to limit the scope of WebFeat's use to searching only the online reference services to which the library subscribes. The King County Library also chose to work directly with WebFeat because epixtech, the vendor of its Dynix system, was not yet ready to offer a portal product. It is using it to access its own patron access catalog and online reference services to which it subscribes, but decided against using for searching of the Web. SEFLIN, a Florida consortium of libraries, chose to work directly with WebFeat because its 25 libraries have several different automated library systems. The portal accesses all of the patron access catalogs and a number of selected Web sites. SEFLIN also utilized TownSource Interactive, a turnkey solution for producing community portals. [The URL for SEFLIN's portal is www.My LibraryService.org]. The New York Public Library--Branch Libraries has chosen to work directly with MuseGlobal.
Of the 17 libraries using portals contacted by the author, all are limiting the scope of resources accessed through the portal. In most cases only the library’s own catalog and the online reference services to which it subscribes are available. The library which offers the broadest scope also includes selected Web sites--including the URLs of some other libraries' patron access catalogs. None envision facilitating access to the Web at large. The maximum number of links established by the libraries is usually fewer than 20.
Features of library portals
Portals are changing too rapidly to describe each vendor's offering. The
information would be out of date within a few months. Instead, the following
paragraphs describe a generic portal of the type that a library should
consider. It can then compare several vendors' latest general release
portal offerings against its requirements. Reference to particular vendors
is made only when that vendor appears to have been the first to introduce
a new feature.
Any library portal product can be used to simultaneously access not only the library’s own catalog, but also those of other libraries, online reference services, and Web sites using a Web browser. Broadcast searches across multiple Z39.50-conforming databases can also be undertaken. Some portals--those which utilize MuseGlobal, for example--support multi-protocol searching, including not only Z39.50, but also native mode (i.e., proprietary), SQL, and HTT. Canned searches can be stored for popular topics.
A common additional feature is content enhancement, the provision of links to tables of contents, book covers, etc. The most widely used content enhancement product is that of Syndetics Solutions. Links to a library calendar of events and to a chat room are also possible. Content enhancement is an extra-cost option that involves an annual subscription for content updates.
Sirsi has already chosen to incorporate a third-party content enhancement product into its iBistro. Rather than having a library purchase a content enhancement product and then creating a link to it in the portal, the vendor more fully integrates a content management product of its choice to increase the functionality available to the portal user.
Almost any library portal can be customized, either for an individual user or for a class of users. The most basic customization offers interfaces for advanced users, for adults, and for children. The interface choice can be made by the patron or can be encoded in the patron record.
A patron can further choose to customize the portal, although that requires more time and skill than most have. For libraries to undertake such customization for individual patrons would be a significant drain on staff time. Customization by, or for, library employees is more likely. That can be for all employees of a department, such as all those in acquisitions, or for each individual employee.
While many library portals do not use caching, all offer patron authentication, but it usually is priced separately. Another separately priced feature is a measurement of use.
Relevancy Ranking
One of the major problems with portals is that they often return too much
information. There is a need to manage the content to make it more relevant.
The simplest form of ranking is that which lists the results in order
of the percentage of the search terms that are matched. That is why entering
multiple terms is far more effective than entering a single term.
Another way of structuring heaps of unorganized information is to maintain a thesaurus to serve as a navigational tool as well as an organizational tool to filter search results. At this time, most vendors of library portals only provide the capability for building and maintaining a thesaurus.
Another of the major problems with portals is that most requires a library to create the linkages to electronic sources of information. That can be a time consuming task. Endeavor Information Systems is the first firm to extend basic portal capabilities by licensing software and a database from a vendor which provides already created links. It is using JournalSeek, a knowledge database developed by Openly Informatics, Inc., to link to over 7,700 electronic journals in the sciences and humanities, and Link.Openly, a system for generating links from bibliographic citation data. When the offering, to be known as LinkFinderPlus, becomes available in general release in early 2002, it will provide access to electronic resources with far less time required on the part of library staff to create linkages. It is likely that other vendors will incorporate third-party products of this type.
Cost
The cost of a library portal product can range from as little as $7,500
for a small library purchasing software only for mounting on an existing
server to more than $100,000 for a large library purchasing a system which
includes hardware, software, and third-party database and linking products.
The subscription for content enhancement, if one is wanted, is separately priced and usually is placed directly with the content provider. Its cost depends on the enhancements sought and the size of the library.
Specifying Portal and Content Management
A library interested in purchasing a portal product from the vendor of
its automated library system, or from another vendor, should develop requirements
and submit them to the vendor(s) for a proposal which sets forth what
is in general release, what is in development, and what is in planning.
Sample Request for Proposals for a Portal Interface Product
- The portal shall be a Web-based common user interface to information
in various electronic formats stored on a variety of systems
- a variety of clients shall be supported including:
- PC-based workstations with Web browsers on the library’s network
- Palm pilots on the library’s network
- Web browsers accessing via the Internet
- Z39.50 clients
- The portal shall provide access not only to the patron access catalog
on the automated library system, but also the catalogs of other libraries,
archives, and museum systems
- Access shall be provided to item level holdings and location
- Patrons shall be able to place holds and view their own records through
the portal interface at the library’s option.
- The portal shall also provide access to online reference services
and Web sites
- There shall be access to records for all material types, including,
but not limited to:
- monographs
- serials
- machine-readable data files
- 4 maps
- microforms
- vertical file
- audiovisual formats
- sound recordings
- manuscripts
- journals and diaries
- scores
- computer software
- URLs
- realia
- photographs
- slides
- prints
- paintings
- sculptures
- textiles
- glass
- ceramics
- amulets
- architectural elements
- archaeological artifacts
- ceremonial objects
- domestic objects
- clothing and accessories
- tools
- numismatics
- It shall be possible to access records in the following formats:
- MARC
- EAD
- Dublin Core
- Z39.50 clients shall be supported
- Multiple protocols in addition to Z39.50 shall be supported. Vendor
to identify the protocols its supports
- It shall be possible to broadcast a search to a number of target systems
and bring back a unified search result
- When a user begins a session, the system shall present a brief opening
message describing the system and providing a menu of beginning search
options and further help or information from the system.
- The portal shall provide user interfaces in languages in addition
to English, with the option of switching to English on each screen.
[Identify languages supported]
- Staff shall be able to modify access points available to patrons
- All diacritics in the source of the information shall be displayed
- The system shall support five levels of scoping that can be set by
staff so that the initial screen shows:
- all holdings of the location
- all holdings of the library
- all holdings of the library and online reference services to which it subscribes
- all holdings of the library, online reference services to which it subscribes
- library-selected URLs, including the patron access catalogs of other libraries.
- everywhere (i.e., including the Internet)
- It shall be possible to access all related records when accessing
any record. [e.g., to access a manuscript that is part of a collection
organized about a person or by a collector]
- It shall be possible to search by at least the following:
- author, maker, or artist
- title
- series
- publisher
- place of publication or production
- date of publication or production
- subject or iconography
- category
- material or object type
- medium
- call number
- accession number
- donor
- any other indexed field
- any of the 500 or so information categories in museum records
- It shall be possible to limit a search by:
- language
- country of origin
- geographic region
- year of creation
- range of years of creation
- The system shall allow users to refine a search based on previous
search results
- The system shall display the search strategy and number of hits retrieved
by each search
- The system shall merge and dedupe search results
- The portal shall provide one or more options for filtering search
results to increase the relevancy of the information retrieved
- Vendor shall describe how it filters citations to determine relevance
- Search results shall be listed in order of relevancy ranking
- It shall be possible, but not necessary, to maintain a thesaurus on
the portal platform
- It shall be possible to use an available online thesaurus to obtain
synonyms to add to the search statement
- Vendor shall identify any third-party thesaurus product(s) that it
offers
- Templates and graphical utilities shall be provided for setting up
user interfaces and tying them to back-end services
- Vendor shall indicate whether it can provide a collection of pre-loaded
linkages suitable for a library of its type
- It shall be possible to add external databases by merely keying the
URL into the system
- The system shall conform to the emerging Open URL standard
- The system shall provide content enhancement, including tables of
contents, jacket art, and reviews. [Provide name of third-party product
used, if any]
- Patron authentication shall be available to meet the requirements
of database providers
- The system shall be capable of suspending a potentially long search
at a predetermined point and providing the user with certain options:
narrow the search, terminate the search, examine a portion of the hits,
continue the search, etc.
- When the client has been inactive for a specified period of time,
it shall clear automatically
- Help messages shall be available to users at all times; menus or prompts
shall continually remind the user how to request these messages
- The system shall allow the user to retrieve help messages without
losing the search in progress
- The system shall display error messages selected on the basis of the
step in the search at which an error occurred
- Error messages shall briefly remind users of the nature of the error,
or of what the system is expected to receive at that point in the search
- Error messages shall include instruction for receiving additional
information, either by referring the user to the help messages, or by
allowing the user to request a follow-up to the error message which
contains further detail about the search being attempted
- If a search retrieves no records, the system shall refer the user
to a public service desk
- Portal use statistics shall be available for each source accessed,
including
- number of sessions
- length of sessions
- page views
- documents viewed
- It shall be possible to aggregate data for all statistical categories
- It shall be possible to group all statistics by the patron codes maintained
in the automated library system
- Statistics shall be available on the number of patrons
- successfully authenticated
- not successfully authenticated
- Vendor shall describe the process for adding, editing, and deleting
electronic resources
- Vendor shall build the page layouts for the initial user interface,
one which accesses not only all in-house applications, but also external
ones identified prior to initial installation
- Vendor shall indicate what other support services it provides and
on what terms
- Vendor shall indicate whether the portal and content management software
can be mounted on the same server as the library’s Web-based patron
access catalog or whether it requires a separate server
- Vendor shall provide maintenance and enhancement support for a fixed
annual fee
- Vendor shall quote all hardware, system software, application software,
installation, training, and maintenance costs for its portal/content
management product.