Challenges and Opportunities in Customizing Library Repository User Interfaces

@vacekrae @UMichLibrary
Challenges and Opportunities in
Customizing Library Repository
User Interfaces
Rachel Vacek, Head of Design & Discovery,
University of Michigan
Library As Publisher, Part Two:
UX and UI for the Library's Digital Collections
March 14, 2018

Hi! I’m Rachel.
I’m passionate
about improving
the user experience
across our
web presence.

Outline
Comparing Repositories
Challenges Impacting Repository UI
Opportunities for Improving Repository UI
Recap

Comparing Repositories

Comparing repository features and user interfaces
Out-of-the-Box Repositories
Advantages
● “Ready” to go after installation
● Customer support exists
● Discovery included
● Some handle 1 format type, but do it fairly well
Disadvantages
● Limited APIs
● Typically poor user interfaces
● Not scalable or extensible
Open Source Repositories
Advantages
● Modular design through APIs
● Large development communities
● Scalable, sustainable, and extensible
● Handle any file format
Disadvantages
● Steep learning curve
● Might need additional tools for discovery

So many content types / formats
● Images
● Maps
● Text
● Articles
● Ebooks
● Dictionaries
● Papyrus
● Video
● Audio
● Theses and Dissertations
● Newspapers
● Finding Aids
● Bibliographic Materials
● Scrolls
● Data
● So many more...

Challenges Impacting
Repository UI

Driving forces in digital scholarship
● Growing demand of digitized primary sources
● Researcher collaboration changes rapidly
● Lots of uncertainty and ambiguity around:
○ What future services might look like, and what tools are needed to support those services
○ Federal and state funding for grants, budgets, projects
● Longstanding norms in the library profession around privacy are being
challenged

Driving forces in digital scholarship, cont.
● An increase in researchers’ potential audience
● Standards for scholars to be considered successful are evolving
○ Altmetrics, publication practices, public engagement, non-monograph projects, etc.
● Researchers want easy connections to other related resources

“Research tools need to be flexible enough so
it ultimately does not matter whether
historians access materials online or in
person... it will become essential that they can
seamlessly integrate tools for organizing,
annotating, and analyzing primary source
materials into their workflows.”
Alexandra Chassanoff, "Historians and the Use of Primary Source Materials in
the Digital Age," American Archivist 76, no. 2 (2013): 472.
Alexandra Chassanoff,
University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill

“Historians … would like to have full text
search of digitized books, archival finding aids,
and non-textual sources ... as comprehensively
as possible through their main discovery
services. They would also like to have services
that help them not only find some items in
[response] to their query, but to ensure that
they have been comprehensive in their
research on a given topic.”
Jennifer Rumer and Roger C. Schonfeld, (2012) “Supporting the
Changing Research Practices of Historians: Final Report from
ITHAKA S+R”: 43.

Archival context implies hierarchy
Archivists’ need
for accuracy
vs.
User needs and
expectations

Changes in platforms and tools
● DSpace
● CONTENTdm
● Greenstone
● Omeka
● Fedora
● Hydra Samvera
● Islandora
● Rosetta
● bePress
● Digital Commons
● Spotlight
● CollectionSpace
● Fulcrum
● Avalon
● Blacklight
● IIIF
● So many more...

“Old” digital collections
● The older the repository (repositories), the more complicated it is to keep the
interfaces current, usable, and consistent
● Michigan’s digital library platform (DLXS) was creately over 20 years
○ Focus was on being a production service to create digital collections
● Today, people have higher expectations of systems
○ Shouldn’t need training on how to use or navigate the interface - it should be intuitive and
familiar
● Sometimes collections had more items added, but most became stagnant - the
interfaces were never updated
● Challenges in migrating old content and features to a new system

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/lib/colllist/

Example of a digital collection homepage
and one of its search pages within the
University of Michigan Digital Collections.

Example of a more
modern interface of a
digital collection
homepage within the
Digital Collections.

“...systems should be easy to learn, tolerant of
errors, flexible, adaptable, and appropriate and
effective for the task.”
Christine L. Borgman, "Designing Digital Libraries for Usability," in Digital
Library Use: Social Practice in Design and Evaluation, eds. Ann Peterson
Bishop, Nancy A. Van House, and Barbara P. Buttenfield (Cambridge, Mass.:
MIT Press, 2003): 109.
Christine Borgman,
University of California,
Los Angeles

“Large” digital collections
● Similarly, the bigger the repository (repositories) the more complicated it is to
keep the interfaces current, usable, and consistent
● Hard to communicate size and scope to users through the interface
● Perhaps visualizations could help explain large amounts of data (collections,
records, formats) to our users
● Discovery across collections is more challenging

Collections sizes at Michigan
Collections Records
Images 107 1,490,236
Text 164 37,045,804
Finding Aids 8 6,338
Bibliographic & Reference Collections 13 4,197,968
Total 292 42,740,346
https://www.lib.umich.edu/digital-library-platform-services-dlps/view-usage-size-statistics (updated daily)

Back to talking about format again...
● Images
● Maps
● Text
● Articles
● Ebooks
● Dictionaries
● Papyrus
● Video
● Audio
● Theses and Dissertations
● Newspapers
● Finding Aids
● Bibliographic Materials
● Scrolls
● Data
● So many more...

Opportunities for Improving
Repository UI

Increase in UX support and user research
● Libraries are paying more attention to users’ motivations
○ Data-driven research and learning analytics
○ Assessment and demonstrating impact
● More UX librarians and UX departments are showing up in libraries
○ Support user research and usability on website and digital library projects → expanding to all
applications integrated across a library’s web presence
○ Bring consistency and universal design principles to interfaces
○ Improve accessibility

“[Researchers] were frustrated by the lack of
general uniformity of interface presentation
related to search, both across types of
materials and across databases. One
researcher was bothered by a lack of
standardization in presentation due to content
being aggregated for multiple sources, noting
that the variation can be disorienting.”
Jody L. DeRidder and Kathryn G. Matheny, (2014) “What Do Researchers
Need? Feedback On Use of Online Primary Source Materials”, D-Lib Magazine,
Vol 20 Number: 7/8, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july14/deridder/07deridder.html
Jody DeRidder,
University of Alabama

Search and discovery is improving
● Library discovery systems are providing more open tools and APIs, enabling
libraries to customize or personalize their search experience for users
● Algorithms in search engines are becoming smarter, more intuitive, and
feature rich
● Tools like Blacklight, a discovery platform framework, let libraries customize
discovery interfaces
● More opportunities to improve discoverability across related items and
collections

“...it is still necessary for historians to locate
each collection independently. This lack of
collocation and collection presents efficiency
challenges and deepens scholars’ concerns
about comprehensiveness. The anxiety over
“missing something” was quite common
across interviews, and historians often
attributed this to the lack of comprehensive
search tools for primary sources.”
Jennifer Rumer and Roger C. Schonfeld, (2012) “Supporting the Changing
Research Practices of Historians: Final Report from ITHAKA S+R”: 16.
Roger Schonfeld, ITHAKA
S+R

Increase in cross-institutional partnerships
Indiana University,
Northwestern University
Stanford University,
University of Virginia,
So many more...
Over 40 founding members
University of Virginia
So many more...
Just a few
examples...

“We need more user testing like this, especially
from an accessibility standpoint, so we can
build Sufia to be user friendly to implement
and use.”
Mike Giarlo, in an email to Ben Howell, a University of Michigan Library’s User
Experience and Accessibility Specialist, about his usability testing of an early
version of Deep Blue Data with students and staff with disabilities
Mike Giarlo,
Stanford University,
works with Sufia, a
Samvera-based
repository front-end

Extensibility and providing just enough customization
● Focus UI development on major user features that won’t go away anytime
soon
● Build solutions that are flexible so systems and their components can evolve
at different rates
○ This lets interfaces be more flexible and able to be changed more frequently in response to
researcher’s needs
● Consider using format specific repositories to have more UI customizations
● Keep in mind the constraints on your environment
How far should libraries should go in providing customizations to meet
both stakeholder and user needs?

“Repositories need to be modular and
extensible. We said these things years ago, but
today there are different ways to achieve it.
Applications need to be more adaptable and
not constrained by system architecture
unnecessarily.”
Personal interview with John Weise, Head of Digital Library Applications,
University of Michigan Library, March 12, 2018.
John Weise,

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/data/

Fishrappr
● Browser for newspaper archives
● Available at https://github.com/mlibrary/fishrappr
● Developed for a particular project, but built so
it can potentially be used for additional
newspaper repositories
Fishrappr Logo

https://digital.bentley.umich.edu/midaily

Recap
● Challenges in customizing user interfaces still exist and will continue to exist,
but more solutions are being created and explored everyday
○ Better tools and platforms
○ Enhanced discovery
○ Growing interest in UX
○ Community sourced development projects
● It’s important to find balance between meeting user needs and meeting the
needs of your environment
● Building tools that are extensive is critical to keeping your UI adaptable with
rapid changes

Resources
Ali Shiri, (2003) "Digital library research: current developments and trends", Library Review, Vol. 52 Issue: 5, pp.198-202,
https://doi-org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/10.1108/00242530310476689
Harriett E. Green, Patricia Lampron, (2017) “User Engagement with Digital Archives for Research and Teaching: A Case Study of Emblematica
Online”, Libraries and the Academy, Vol. 17 Number 4, pp. 759-775, https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2017.0045
Paul Alonso Gaona-García, David Martin-Moncunill, Carlos Enrique Montenegro-Marin, (2017) "Trends and challenges of visual search interfaces in
digital libraries and repositories", The Electronic Library, Vol. 35 Issue: 1, pp. 69-98, https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-03-2015-0046
Jody L. DeRidder and Kathryn G. Matheny, (2014) “What Do Researchers Need? Feedback On Use of Online Primary Source Materials”, D-Lib
Magazine, Vol 20 Number: 7/8, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july14/deridder/07deridder.html
Jennifer Rumer and Roger C. Schonfeld, (2012) “Supporting the Changing Research Practices of Historians: Final Report from ITHAKA S+R”,
http://www.sr.ithaka.org/sites/default/files/reports/supporting-the-changing-research-practices-of-historians.pdf
NISO Framework Working Group with support from the Institute of Museum and Library Services, A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital
Collections (Baltimore, MD: National Information Standards Organization (NISO), 2007).

Resources, cont.
Christine L Borgman. "Designing digital libraries for usability", Cambridge, MA, Digital Library Use: Social Practice in Design and Evaluation (2003).
Georgios Gkoumas, Fotis Lazarinis, (2015) "Evaluation and usage scenarios of open source digital library and collection management tools",
Program, Vol. 49 Issue: 3, pp. 226-241, https://doi.org/10.1108/PROG-09-2014-0070
Dion Hoe‐Lian Goh, Alton Chua, Davina Anqi Khoo, Emily Boon‐Hui Khoo, Eric Bok‐Tong Mak, Maple Wen‐Min Ng, (2006) "A checklist for
evaluating open source digital library software", Online Information Review, Vol. 30 Issue: 4, pp. 360-379,
https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520610686283
Jennifer L. Marill and Edward C. Luczak, (May 2009) “Evaluation of Digital Repository Software at the National Library of Medicine,” D-Lib Magazine,
Vol. 15 Number: 5/6, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/may09/marill/05marill.html
Annie Wu, Santi Thompson, Rachel Vacek, Sean Watkins, and Andrew Weidner, (2016) “Hitting the Road Towards a Greater Digital Destination:
Evaluating and Testing DAMS at University of Houston Libraries”, Information Technology and Libraries, Vol. 35 Number: 2,
https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v35i2.9152

Thank you!
Questions? Contact me!
rvacek@umich.edu

Challenges and Opportunities in Customizing Library Repository User Interfaces

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Challenges and Opportunities in Customizing Library Repository User Interfaces (20)

More from Rachel Vacek (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Challenges and Opportunities in Customizing Library Repository User Interfaces