Collection Description Focus, Workshop 5
Collection-Level Description and the Information Landscape
Users evaluate strategies for resource discovery
Thursday 30th January 2003
Hughes Hall, University of Cambridge
Collection Description Focus, Workshop 5
Collection-Level Description and the Information Landscape
Users evaluate strategies for resource discovery
Thursday 30th January 2003
Hughes Hall, University of Cambridge
|
Discussion Group 1 Usability and accessibility issues, David Owen and Ann Chapman [The approach adopted is intended to] integrate library services for visually impaired people into mainstream service provision wherever feasible, in line with the government's commitment to social inclusion and access to services. (Library services for visually impaired people: a manual of best practice. 2000) The REVIEL project (Brophy and Craven, 1999) report states "from the end user's perspective, the identification of resources is not a simple matter of 'anything on the subject' but includes the ability to define the characteristics of the content... the form is also important in some instances." Some areas to consider
Discussion While initial points in the discussion focused on accessibility and usability for users with impairments, it became increasingly apparent that much that supports them supports users without impairment. The later part of the discussion moved on to general issues of usability. Don't make assumptions. People with sensory impairments and physical disabilities are representative of the UK population as a whole. They can be of any age, intellectual ability, educational level and computer literacy level and interested in the full range of subject areas. So the only assumption we should make is that at some point, someone with a disability or impairment will be interested in your collection. Special Educational Needs and Disability Act (SENDA) 2001 There is now an onus on educational and academic institutions to make reasonable provision for access to services as well as physical access for people with impairments and disabilities. There is a need to review current provision, identify what increased provision can be made, and record and make easily available details of both provisions and limitations. If difficulties remain, identify a contact with whom a user with special needs can discuss options. With regard to buildings, listed building status and structural issues may limit what can be done to improve physical access. In these cases consider alternatives such as temporarily moving resources to a more accessible location for a pre-arranged visit. It is important to consider the nature of your materials in deciding on appropriate provision of assistive technology. Specialist software (e.g. speech synthesis and temporary Braille display) can be used with electronic documents and web pages. Closed circuit TV can be used with printed text but may not be suitable for some primary resource material (e.g. older manuscripts) which would be damaged by the process. Where such access is not possible, consider whether staff assistance can be offered. Where items within collections consist of objects and images some items may be suitable for hands-on exploration but others might not (it might damage the item or not be possible for safety reasons). However there are options for accessible representations - scale models, audio descriptions and tactile diagrams can be used singly or in combination. In such collections it is not necessary to reproduce every item but rather to identify representative items for accessible reproduction. In response to a query, it emerged that there were no known guidelines on how to structure an audio description or any standard terminology to be used, so it could be useful to contact one of the specialist schools or the National Centre for Tactile Diagrams at the University of Hertfordshire for guidance. Collection-level descriptions can contain these details. In the Location element identify and record what provision for access has been made, what assistive technology is available and who to contact regarding pre-arranged visits and additional assistance. In Physical Characteristics be specific about digital formats. The Notes element can contain additional information such as 'For those with visual impairment a number of images have been reproduced as tactile images with audio descriptions'. A follow-on from this is that the accessible reproductions merit an entry of their own in the item level catalogue or finding aid. Audience Irrespective of impairment or disability, not every collection is equally suitable for every user. Certain collections may only be accessible or appropriate to users who know specific languages (e.g. Anglo-Saxon or Norman French), have specific levels of subject knowledge (whether high level as in medical research or lower level as in resources for primary schools), or have specific expertise (for example in paleography or shorthand or dance notation or in Braille). The collection-level description should therefore contain simple factual statements, when appropriate, to assist the user. Equally collections of digital items should identify the format(s) in which they are held. Users of speech synthesis software know which formats their software can work with so need to know whether documents are in plain text, Word, Excel and so on. It is also useful to know whether the text includes diagrams. Vocabulary Free v controlled vocabulary. A controlled vocabulary aims to provide a consistent set of terms and cross searching resources can be facilitated when the resources use the same controlled vocabularies. However, in the larger vocabularies (such as Library of Congress Subject Headings) there may be inconsistency in application (e.g. how specific a term is used - literature, poetry or sonnets) and the preferred term may be one of several in use for a topic (detective stories, crime fiction, mystery novels). A pragmatic approach is probably to choose an appropriate controlled vocabulary and to supplement this with allowing free text searching in collection-level description elements such as Description. Entry of non-preferred terms should not simply display the preferred term - there should be a transparent process that moves the search on using the preferred term.
Interestingly, a recent article by Wilbert Kraan of CETIS concluded:
http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/website/research.cgi?item=1042911195 Language Increasingly collection-level descriptions will be accessed by people whose first language is not English. Some will live in the UK and others will be using the Internet from other countries. Two points should therefore be borne in mind. A collection-level description for a catalogue or a database of collection-level descriptions should include details of the language in which the item level records are held. When designing a database of collection-level descriptions, consideration should be given as to whether the database should be available in more than one language. The desirability of alternative language options will depend on the database. One which brings together collections relating to Canadian history is likely to attract a proportion of users whose first language is French, so providing both French and English access would be helpful. On the other hand a database identifying collections related to Shakespeare has a world-wide potential user base and therefore a number of languages could be candidates for additional provision. A deciding factor is always likely to be the cost of creating additional versions. Making web-based collection description databases accessible Follow the World Wide Web Consortium's Guidelines from the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at http://www.w3c.org/WAI. (A word of caution - take care over the wording of statements of level of compliance in policy documents: the systems you are using and the browsers you are designing for may not support all aspects of the highest level of compliance.) Good practice includes the use of alt text to explain images and links, not restricting users to your choice of text and background colour and font size, providing good contrast between text and background, avoiding colour combinations that are difficult for users with colour blindness, and using good simple design of the site with section lists to avoid working through long sections of text and 'back to top' buttons at appropriate points. An interesting point is that even people without impairment may prefer the text only version of a site as it is clearer and more easily navigable. To see how your web site appears to people with colour blindness try the vischeck tool from http://www.vischeck.com/. Check out the archive of the Museum Computer Group email list (mcg@jiscmail.ac.uk) where there have been recent discussion threads on accessibility issues. Do involve visually impaired people Think about the needs of people with impairment and disability at an early stage of collection description. Record current provision and policy and consider what improvements can be made. When designing a collection-level description database have their needs in mind from the start - don't design it first and then try to add on features. Bear in mind that visually impaired people are a big resource in this process - they are usually very willing to help and very generous with their time - so make contact with your local society for the blind and visually impaired. Best practice examples It was suggested that CD Focus consider adding to the Focus web-site a page of links to examples of good practice.
Further reading Craven,J and Brophy,P. Non-visual access to the Digital Library: the use of digital library interfaces by blind and visually impaired people.Centre for Research in Library and Information Management, the Manchester Metropolitan University, January 2003. This report is downloadable from http://www.cerlim.ac.uk/projects/nova.html |
Information
|