When we think of libraries, we think of books. But really, the library is about more than just books. It’s about public access to resources, free of charge for all people in the community. It’s about getting what you need for school or work, but also discovery. Maybe you pick up a fantasy novel (when you normally read history) after browsing a corner of the library you never have before. Or you sign up for a free coding class after seeing the flyer on the library’s window. When I visit the library and pick up my books, I always end up wandering around. Last time I picked up an interesting cookbook and a graphic novel that I had no previous intention of choosing that day, just because I took the time to browse the stacks. Digital libraries are becoming more popular and necessary as time goes on, but while users are able to access e-books and other media beyond what many physical libraries can dream of offering, they can still lack that sense of community and exploration. One of the best things about going to the library is the exploration that occurs, but the demand for digital content only grows. OpenLibrary.org aims to create a more organic library experience by allowing users open access to thousands of books, and also the ability to work on their developer skills by tinkering the site. In my analysis, I explore the idea of how OpenLibrary could benefit from giving it's users more of an "organic" library experience. I propose adding "sections" or "rows" similar to a library that would allow users to browse freely, without focusing so much on the books that are the most popular on the website.
When you open the main page for OpenLibrary, you notice an red-orange banner that says “OpenLibrary is yours to borrow, read, & _______.” Those descriptive terms are what make OpenLibrary unique. This is an example of exergasia, which is when an idea is repeated over and over in different terms to make a point (Silva Rhetorica, 2017). This is how OpenLibrary amplifies the idea of it's "open" concept to the user. It’s not a place to copy & paste or memorize. OpenLibrary is built upon the belief that everyone deserves free access to data, and they also deserve the ability to contribute to and correct/manipulate that data.The project was started in 2007 by the team at Internet Archive and Aaron Swartz, the co-founder of Reddit who died by suicide in 2013. Swartz is still considered a hero in the “open internet” world and dedicated his life’s work to making documents, books, and data openly accessible for free. In his own words, “Our goal is to build the world’s greatest library, then put it up on the Internet free for all to use and edit. Books are the place you go when you have something you want to share with the world — our planet’s cultural legacy. And never has there been a bigger attempt to bring them all together” (Swartz, 2007). After Swartz’s death, the project was headed by people like librarian/activist Jessamyn West and Giovanni Damiola. West is the creator of Librarian.net and has been giving presentations on intersection of libraries, technology and politics since 2003 (Technologist, 2017). Damiola is a hacker/activist who was deeply inspired by Swartz’s work (Giovanni Damiola at Aaron Swartz Day 2015 – Giovanni Damiola, 2015). What they both have in common, despite their different paths, is that they are committed to Swartz’s vision to the open library as being a free, collaborative site for users (“AARON’S OPEN LIBRARY PROJECT LIVES ON” , 2015). What is particularly unique is the Developer Center. Here you can find pretty much anything you need that would help you make edits on the site…users can help fix bugs/code, and they openly encourage interested developers to join their mailing list to help with user issues and questions. As much as it’s a learning tool to all of those who benefit from the reading material and data made available, its also a learning tool for nearly anyone who is wanting to improve their own development skills and engage in their community.
OpenLibrary is already pretty unique in how it offers content compared to other digital libraries. As an attempt to explore what kind of sites OpenLibrary connected with on the internet, I completed a network analysis with IssueCrawler. IssueCrawler takes the data the user provides to create a "map" of all the the different site your artifact links back to, and the user can see how these sites relate and link back to each other through the way things connect on the map.
When doing a network analysis, I noticed that OpenLibrary doesn’t really connect with any other websites that are related to it, and that the websites in it’s network are only “kind of” like it. Sites like Creative Commons (another project that Aaron Swartz contributed to) and the American Library Association are understandably in the network web, but also some other academic libraries and library-type sites. What I noticed about the digital libraries is that none of them offer an organic library experience, where one can freely browse through content. It’s all very search engine based, which is helpful when looking for academic content but not as fun when a user wants to just explore content. OpenLibrary tries to address this issue, their format is much less “stiff” than other digital libraries. It’s cool and colorful, and the open source format allows for a lot of user interaction. However, the focus is really on the books that are popular on the site more, rather than an organic library experience.
What stuck out from the network analysis the most is that OpenLibrary is a very unique website, and since it's not linked to an large organization, they have the ability to create an experience truly based openness. OpenLibrary’s original intention was to be a library with a “page for every book” and access to those books, while also creating a place for people to work on the development and upkeep of the website. But it’s focus is on trendy Netflix-style scrolling bars and popularity based algorithms, with the developer info hiding underneath. There is a scrolling subject bar, but right underneath is a more scrolling bar of most popular books. I find these two messages to be completely contradictory. The purpose of a library is not to lead you to what's popular, it's to help you find what you need for a project, or to browse a variety of books based on your subject of interest...neither of which should necessarily based on popularity. The next two scrolling bars are for Classic Books and Most Recently Returned, and Worth The Wait, which also tend to focus on what other readers think is popular. Also, you don’t get to any of the developer information until you reach the bottom of the webpage. It’s fair to say that most people probably come to OpenLibrary for the books, and not to “hack”. But for those who do, it should be easily accessible and while not interrupting the flow or layout of the library’s style. What I propose is separating the library content and the developer content.
What stuck out from the network analysis the most is that OpenLibrary is a very unique website, and since it's not linked to an large organization, they have the ability to create an experience truly based openness. OpenLibrary’s original intention was to be a library with a “page for every book” and access to those books, while also creating a place for people to work on the development and upkeep of the website. But it’s focus is on trendy Netflix-style scrolling bars and popularity based algorithms, with the developer info hiding underneath. There is a scrolling subject bar, but right underneath is a more scrolling bar of most popular books. I find these two messages to be completely contradictory. The purpose of a library is not to lead you to what's popular, it's to help you find what you need for a project, or to browse a variety of books based on your subject of interest...neither of which should necessarily based on popularity. The next two scrolling bars are for Classic Books and Most Recently Returned, and Worth The Wait, which also tend to focus on what other readers think is popular. Also, you don’t get to any of the developer information until you reach the bottom of the webpage. It’s fair to say that most people probably come to OpenLibrary for the books, and not to “hack”. But for those who do, it should be easily accessible and while not interrupting the flow or layout of the library’s style. What I propose is separating the library content and the developer content.
The virtual library would be more like walking into a local library, you see shelves of books divided by subject and alphabetized. The user could use the search function (that already exists) to find exactly what they are looking for, or they can simply browse the "shelves". There can be a small section for what's new or recommended, but it shouldn't be the sole focus of OpenLibrary. The developers would have their own playground, so the speak, with the information and tools that already exist in Open Library at their fingertips.
I created a survey and mock-up of my proposed changes and posted it to my Facebook for feedback.In my mock-up, I suggested the separating of the library and developer elements into their own spaces, while also changing the library to a more open, adventurous style for browsing. My hope would be that this would allow the user to borrow, read, build, and explore as the website intends. Here is a snapshot of OpenLibrary's homepage:
I created a survey and mock-up of my proposed changes and posted it to my Facebook for feedback.In my mock-up, I suggested the separating of the library and developer elements into their own spaces, while also changing the library to a more open, adventurous style for browsing. My hope would be that this would allow the user to borrow, read, build, and explore as the website intends. Here is a snapshot of OpenLibrary's homepage:
This is the mock-up I proposed:
For reference, I shared my survey on Facebook and got 32 responses. In my survey, I wanted to see if people enjoy browsing openly, and if they really use or need suggestions on what’s popular. I also asked if any of them would use a site like this to practice web development skills, just to see if the website having its own “development center” is ever worthwhile. In general, it seems that people where interested in using a website like OpenLibrary, and more respondents than I expected said they would be interested in using it for practice development. I was honestly expected maybe 1-2. Also, about half of my respondents actively use e-books already.
I asked respondents if they ever browse the library and also if they like discovery/exploration. It seems as if most people do/enjoy those things, and they may respond more to an e-library that offers a more open and adventurous experience. For people who enjoy discovery and exploration, a website experience that limits that by focusing on popular selection might not be as interesting to those users.
One of the purposes of my new mock-up was to get rid of the bias of the “most popular” scrolling bar on the current OpenLibrary site.
My guess was that most people do use “most popular” suggestions to make choices about the books (or other media) they consume, which can skews the value of certain books on the OpenLibrary site, pushing them to the top of the page. According to my survey 50% were “somewhat likely” to use popular suggestions to make their decisions and 18.8% were “very likely”. Only 3 respondents were unlikely or somewhat unlikely to take those suggestions into account, and the rest were neutral. In my original mock-up, I had completely gotten rid of the popular suggestions but it seems that people do get some value out of it.
What I learned most from my results is that while people do like to explore and browse their books, they do like to at least look at what’s popular. While OpenLibrary’s current layout focus too much on that, there are ways to keep that feature without being the site’s main theme. In my final-mock up, I decided to keep the popular suggestion but I'm using them in a different way. It's based on the "suggestions" table in my own library, which is a table near the front that has new and/or recommended books from library staff or patrons. It's not the main focus of the library, but it's there for readers who'd like it. I wanted to find a way to give people access to suggestions without them taking up the whole page, so I decided to make a button for “new” and “recommended” books. This way they are not in the user’s face as soon as they open the site, but they could be available for people who want them or are curious. Also my final mock-up, I decided to keep the library and developer center separate. There seemed to be enough interest in the development-side of the site that it would be worthwhile to give it it’s own space. The current developer site on OpenLibrary is great and has so much information for even someone brand new to developing or coding, but it's just so hard to find on the site. Also, since this site runs on a tiny budget and requires volunteer efforts, it would be great to shine a light on the developer information.
OpenLibrary was built on the spirit of collaboration, sharing, and exploration. Refocusing the homepage to what makes it great, a grassroots built library and developer center would only strengthen that message. The flashy scrolling menus that focus on popular books don't add a lot of value to that concept. By letting users browse books organized by subject/author, it allows the users to truly flex their research muscles and discover books on their own. Also, by hiding the developer information under all of it, it may discourage some from exploring the developer portion of the site. Giving users interested in developing their own door to go through allows them to easily find the tools they need. I believe that this style would be more in line with OpenLibrary’s mission and would give the users a better learning, exploring, and hacking experience.
References:
“AARON’S OPEN LIBRARY PROJECT LIVES ON.” Aaron Swartz Day and International Hackathon. November 3, 2015. Accessed January 19, 2017. http://www.aaronswartzday.org/tag/open-library/.
“Giovanni Damiola at Aaron Swartz Day 2015 – Giovanni Damiola.” Open Transcripts. November 07, 2015. Accessed January 20, 2017. http://opentranscripts.org/transcript/giovanni-damiola-aaron-swartz-day-2015/.
Silva Rhetorica. "The Forest of Rhetoric." Silva Rhetoricae: The Forest of Rhetoric. Accessed March 12, 2017. http://rhetoric.byu.edu/.
Swartz, Aaron. “Raw Thought.” Announcing the Open Library (Aaron Swartz’s Raw Thought). July 16, 2007. Accessed January 20, 2017. http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/openlibrary.
Technologist, LibrarianRural. “Jessamyn West.” Jessamyn West – library technologist, author, public speaker. Accessed January 19, 2017. http://www.jessamyn.info/.
West, Jessamyn. “About Open Library.” About Open Library | Open Library. November 9, 2016. Accessed January 19, 2017. https://openlibrary.org/help/faq/about#what
cluster_map.svg | |
File Size: | 326 kb |
File Type: | svg |