The Search for a New OPAC: Selecting an Open Source Discovery Layer

References

• K., Bauer (2008, November 9) Yale University Library VuFind test—Undergraduates. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from http://tinyurl.com/3wvvgpd.
   Google Scholar
• C., Beer (2010, February 24) Media, Blacklight, and viewers like you. Presented at Code4Lib, Asheville, NC, Retrieved from http://code4lib.org/conference/2010/beer.
   Google Scholar
• M., Breeding (2007) The birth of a new generation of library interfaces. Computers in Libraries, 27(9), 34–37.
   Google Scholar
• M., Breeding (2007) Next-generation library catalogs. Library Technology Reports, 43(4).
   Google Scholar
• M., Collins (2010) Partnering for innovation: Interviews with OCLC and Kuali OLE. Serials Review, 36(2), 93–101 10.1016/j.serrev.2010.03.001.
   Google Scholar
• W., Denton & S. J., Coysh (2011) Usability testing of VuFind at an academic library. Library Hi Tech, 29(2), 301–319 10.1108/07378831111138189.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B., Dueber (2010, September 16) VuFind Midwest gathering. Retrieved September 12, 2011, fromRobot Librarian http://robotlibrarian.billdueber.com/vufind-midwest-gathering/.
   Google Scholar
• J., Emanuel (2011) Usability of the VuFind next-generation online catalog. Information Technology & Libraries, 30(1), 44–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falvey Memorial Library, Villanova University. (n.d.-a). VuFind documentation: Installation_status. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from http://vufind.org/wiki/installation_status
   Google Scholar
• Falvey Memorial Library, Villanova University. (n.d.-b). VuFind: Search home. Retrieved October 14, 2011, from https://library.villanova.edu/Find/Search/Home.
   Google Scholar
• C., GreeneB., GushrowskiR., LentC. E., LongM. B., MinickK. B., MooreG., Pershinget al (2011) IU Libraries Discovery Layer Task Force summary report and recommendation. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2022/13621 Indiana University Libraries.
   Google Scholar
• B., Ho, K., Kelley & S., Garrison (2009) Implementing VuFind as an alternative to Voyager's WebVoyage interface: One library's experience. Library Hi Tech, 27(1), 82–92 10.1108/07378830910942946.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J., Houser (2009) The VuFind implementation at Villanova University. Library Hi Tech, 27(1), 93–105 10.1108/07378830910942955.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C., Huckabee (2006, December 10) A marriage of open-source and commercial software. Retrieved September 27, 2011, fromWired Campus http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/a-marriage-of-open-sourcecommercial-software/2602.
   Google Scholar
• Indiana, University Bloomington Libraries (2009, July) IUB Libraries: Fact sheet. Retrieved July 31, 2011, from http://www.libraries.iub.edu/index.php?pageId=5430.
   Google Scholar
• IU, Digital Library Program (2010, October 24) Variations/FRBR: Variations as a testbed for the FRBR conceptual model. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from http://vfrbr.info/.
   Google Scholar
• D., Katz (2011, February 8) VuFind beyond MARC: Discovering everything else. Presented at Code4Lib, Bloomington, IN, Retrieved from http://code4lib.org/conference/2011/katz.
   Google Scholar
• Kuali Foundation. (n.d.-a). Kuali OLE founding partners. Retrieved September 14, 2011, from http://www.kuali.org/ole/partners.
   Google Scholar
• Kuali Foundation. (n.d.-b). Overview. Retrieved October 9, 2011, from http://www.kuali.org/ole/overview.
   Google Scholar
• Kuali Foundation. (n.d.-c). Frequently asked questions. Retrieved October 6, 2011, from http://www.kuali.org/faq/23
   Google Scholar
• B., Low (2011, January 21) Implementing faceted search user interface. Retrieved September 27, 2011, fromEnhancing User Interactions in Digital Libraries http://boonious.typepad.com/ux2/2011/01/implementing-faceted-search-ui.html#more.
   Google Scholar
• J., Luther & M. C., Kelly (2011) The next generation of discovery. Library Journal, 136(5), 66–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C., Martell (2008) The absent user: Physical use of academic library collections and services continues to decline 1995–2006. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(5), 400–407 10.1016/j.acalib.2008.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. L., Morgan (2006, July 7) A “next generation” library catalog—Conclusion (Part #5 of 5). Retrieved October 6, 2011, fromLITA Blog http://litablog.org/2006/07/a-next-generation-library-catalog-conclusion-part-5-of-5/.
   Google Scholar
• E. L., Morgan (2010, September 4) VuFind “Midwest” User's Group Meeting. Retrieved October 12, 2011, fromCatholic Research Resources Alliance (CRRA) Blog http://www.catholicresearch.net/blog/2010/09/vufind-midwest-users-group-meeting/.
   Google Scholar
• NINES. (n.d.). Collex. Retrieved September 27, 2011, from http://www.nines.org/about/software/collex.html.
   Google Scholar
• B., Nowviskie, E., Sadler & E., Hatcher (2007) Adapting an open-source, scholarly Web 2.0 system for findability in library collections. L. B. Cohen(Ed.), Library 2.0 initiatives in academic libraries, Association of College & Research Libraries, 58–72 Retrieved from http://goo.gl/Xg0M1.
   Google Scholar
• Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Mission. Retrieved September 27, 2011, from http://www.opensource.org/.
   Google Scholar
• A., Peterson-Hart & K., Bauer (2009, November 24) Yufind usability test report. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from http://tinyurl.com/3wvvgpd.
   Google Scholar
• Project Blacklight. (n.d.). Blacklight. Retrieved September 24, 2011, from http://projectblacklight.org/.
   Google Scholar
• E., Sadler (Bess). (2009). Project Blacklight: A next generation library catalog at a first generation university. Library Hi Tech, 27(1), 57–67. doi: 10.1108/07378830910942919.
   Google Scholar
• B., Sadler, J., Gilbert & M., Mitchell (2009) Library catalog mashup: Using Blacklight to expose collections. N. Engard(Ed.), Library mashups: Exploring new ways to deliver library data, 113–127Facet Retrieved from http://mashups.web2learning.net/toc/chapter-9.
   Google Scholar
• K. G., Schneider (2006, March 13) How OPACs suck, part 1: Relevance rank (Or the lack of It). Retrieved September 12, 2011, a fromALA TechSource http://www.alatechsource.org/blog/2006/03/how-opacs-suck-part-1-relevance-rank-or-the-lack-of-it.html.
   Google Scholar
• K. G., Schneider (2006, April 3) How OPACs suck, part 2: The checklist of shame. Retrieved August 20, 2011, b fromALA TechSource http://www.alatechsource.org/blog/2006/04/how-opacs-suck-part-2-the-checklist-of-shame.html.
   Google Scholar
• P., Shaughnessy (2007) Advocating for accessibility in the next generation catalog. Colorado Libraries, 33(4), 29–34.
   Google Scholar
• R., Tennant (2009, November 16) Shining a Blacklight on discovery. Retrieved September 27, 2011, from http://blog.libraryjournal.com/tennantdigitallibraries/2009/11/16/shining-a-blacklight-on-discovery/.
   Google Scholar
• University of Virginia Library. (n.d.). Virgo. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from http://search.lib.virginia.edu/catalog?portal=all.
   Google Scholar
• WGBH Educational Foundation (2011) WGBH Open Vault. Retrieved September 28, 2011, from http://openvault.wgbh.org/.
   Google Scholar
• S. Q., Yang & M. A., Hofmann (2011) Next generation or current generation?: A study of the OPACs of 260 academic libraries in the USA and Canada. Library Hi Tech, 29(2), 266–300 10.1108/07378831111138170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Q., Yang & K., Wagner (2010) Evaluating and comparing discovery tools: How close are we towards the next generation catalog?. Library Hi Tech, 28(4), 690–709 10.1108/07378831011096312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar