110 likes | 223 Vues
This article explores the evolution of digital libraries (DLs), focusing on the significant advancements in access and visualization technologies as discussed in the Information Processing & Management special issue from May 1999. Key insights include the importance of sharable resources, multiple stakeholder involvement, and user interaction with journal components. It highlights user preferences for remote access, the effectiveness of meta-search engines, and the necessity for improved visualization techniques in DL environments. The Z39.50 standard for information retrieval systems is also examined.
E N D
Digital Library (DL) Source: Information Processing & Management, Special Issue, May 1999, by G. Marchionini of UNC at Chapel Hill, and Ed Fox of VT • Recap of “best of” phase I, and glimpses of phase II • Albeit the many aspects of research in DL, focus for this lecture is on Access and Visualization
Digital Library (DL) Def: Research/application of digital technology to the information problems addressed by institutions such as libraries, museums, schools, and publishers Common features • Sharable resources • Large/Integrating across DLs, “middleware” • Multiple stakeholders
Journal Components Source: Ann Peterson Bishop from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign • Typical Components are: Figures, Conclusions, References, Table of Content,. • Research focus on: Identify, retrieve, use, read • Prototype (DeLIver) searches by component • Learned from users: • Components help decide whether read/obtain FT • Components offer a synopsis/hints for content
Journal Components (cont.) • Conclusions • Nature of component use complex, and depends on user type • Is used during all stages of search/retrieval • Components act as “metadata” • Disassambly and reassambly is common practice • Extend search capabilities on components desirable
Requirements for Remote Access Source: Robert Downs of Montclair State University • Most scholars prefer text, and selective print • Prefer search terms boldfaced in retrieved doc. Like the “Find” feature of browser • Prefer natural language queries over Boolean/SQL • Work with small no. of docs, read and print
Meta-Search Engines • In principle, they would diagnose which sear-engine(s) to use based on the query/topic, user profile, search strategy,.. • March Chignell et.al., from The University of Toronto conducted an evaluation of them: • Performance of meta-search engines depends on a basic level of performance of search engines • Visualization of results obtained from meta-search engines needs to be improved
Visualization of DL Output • Latent Semantic Indexing • Pathfinder Network Scaling • Spatial maps • Author co-citation maps • More work is needed in evaluating the usability of such visualization paradigms in realistic digital library environments
Z39.50 • Def: A standard composed of specifications for computer-to-computer linkage between different information retrieval systems. • Purpose: Encode the messages required to communicate between two computers for information search and retrieval purposes • Beginnings: Exchange bibliographic information regardless of the structure of the underlying data
Z39.50 Services • Initialize • Create a Z39.50 association; e.g., defines how the origen must operate • Access control (pasw.) or Resource control (confirm) • Target negotiates these service parameters • Search • Type 0: requires private agreement on query form • Type 1: standard Boolean query • Present, Delete, and Release
Applications • Wide Area Information Servers (WAIS) • First full-text information retrieval architecture composed of the client, the server, the database, and the protocol • Added format types, s.a., gif and postscript • Library of Congress, OCLC, UC, Dartmouth • Weakness: Lack of help or instructions for searching the database • Zweb, CNIDR, OCLC, AIDS,..