Literature Review: OPACs on Mobile Devices
Richard McNeal
Valdosta State University
6/6/14
Literature Review: OPACs on Mobile Devices
Ever since the debut of the first iPhone in 2007, library users have been increasingly turning to their smartphone to consume information. The entrance of Android based smartphones has further expanded mobile access, as well as the use of iPads and other tablet devices. The prevalence of these devices has required that libraries continue to integrate and develop mobile technologies. Libraries have done this either with vendor solutions designed specifically for mobile use, customizing HTML and CSS code, or utilizing third party apps that which make websites mobile friendly. Integration of library accessibility in the mobile realm includes not only providing information about library services, but the ability to search the catalog and access electronic resources. Accessing the online catalog is a core request by many mobile users. This literature review will address the ability of mobile users to access library OPACs. I will discuss LibAnywhere and Boopsie – two mobile applications that provide mobile access with catalog search capability – as well as vendor products and the customization of websites for mobile use. Additionally, I will discuss current applications of this technology, challenges, and thoughts moving forward.
Literature Review & Use in Libraries
Literature regarding mobile library websites and the ability to integrate OPACs is profuse in the last 5-7 years, reflecting the increase of mobile device usage. As Bridges, Gauscho, and Griggs describe (2010), many vendors came forward during the mobile device boom to provide OPAC solutions such as Innovative’s AirPac and WorldCat’s Mobile Search. These options provide catalog access for small screens and allows users to browse the catalog, request items, and view their library account (Bridges, et al., 2010, p.314). Though this may be the simplest solution, vendor options can be costly and do not provide adequate customization features. Some libraries elected to leverage programming knowledge among staff and produce a catalog with customized features. Some of these customization desires include filtering catalog search results, call number information, and searching by course reserves (Bridges, et al., 2010, p. 315).
In addition, there are third-party mobile applications that tailor OPACs to a variety of mobile devices and include additional features. Products such as LibAnywhere and Boopsie provide mobile applications with features that allow libraries to access their library account, search the catalog, and utilize virtual reference services with the ability to tailor images and colors consistent with the library’s brand. LibAnywhere provides either a native app or the ability to redirect users to the mobile version of the catalog and provide similar account and request options as a regular OPAC (LibAnywhere: Screencast). Boopsie offers similar capabilities, but is perhaps more robust in its access to electronic resources. Credo, EBSCO, and Gale are a few content provides integrated into Boopsie. They also claim to support a wide number of ILSs and can “…integrate with any ILS a library has requested! (Boopsie: Frequently Asked Questions).”
Increasingly, many libraries are electing to customize their OPACs – via HTML and CSS – for optimal mobile accessibility. Gillian Nowlan (2013) describes how the University of Regina implemented their mobile website and catalog. After conducting a survey with other libraries and students at their own institution, they ultimately decided to utilize existing IT staff that had experience with HTML and CSS (Nowlan, 2013, p. 148). Some of the data that drove their decision included the cost of a native app, lack of customization, and the ability to configure code for all mobile devices (Nowlan, 2013, p. 147). Ken Irwin (2012) argues some of the same points regarding the benefits of mobile OPACs built in house. Irwin notes that not only does this option save money and provide customization, it also helps web designers create a skill set that is crucial for an increasingly mobile environment (Irwin, 2012, p.45).
Rebecca Jackson (2013) surveyed 99 ARL libraries to determine the use of mobile websites. While surveying mobile sites, the author often encountered two scenarios: either the library website URL brought up the mobile version or a prompt appeared to download a native app. However, most library websites simply provided a mobile version without an app. In her survey, 84% of libraries had a mobile site. This number increased greatly from a 2010 study where only 22% had mobile website (Jackson, 2013, p. 175). Access to the library catalog was a part of about 53% of mobile sites surveyed (Jackson, 2013, p. 177). Though roughly half may seem like a small percentage, the library catalog was listed in top ten “must haves” of library mobile sites, including library hours, the main library site, and virtual reference services based on user feedback (Jackson, 2013, p. 176).
Challenges & Issues
Providing OPAC access via mobile devices does pose a few challenges related to authentication and content. When searching an OPAC on any device, many users come with the impression that they have access to all content. However, when it comes to accessing electronic journals, databases, and other resources, mobile OPACs do not provide such content access. Bridges, et al. (2010) note that “…what users typically want from a library is direct access to research materials. Offering a truly mobile catalog interface with links to mobile-friendly catalog records will make the library’s resources actually usable for mobile users (p. 315).” Authentication to access these resources also poses problems. Mobile apps which include OPAC access do not necessarily provide authentication for electronic resources. In his article on mobile authentication and access, Mark Williams (2012) notes the following with mobile library apps “…many apps sidestep the issue of having a genuine mobile authentication process to access resources by only allowing search and discovery and not content access, which has to be done via traditional browsers (p. 269).” The author goes on to describe how traditional browsers are often not much of a better solution. In some cases, logging in to authenticate involves institutional and vender logins, creating a long and confusing journey. Williams (2012) states that institutions could develop single sign-on portals to create a seamless authentication experience or a device-twinning as solution “…which effectively links an institutional user account with a specific device for a predetermined length of time (p. 271).”
Conclusions
As evident from the literature review, integration of mobile capabilities for library websites and OPACs has been on the upswing. Libraries can essentially be accessed anywhere by properly utilizing mobile applications or tailoring website coding and layout for smaller screens. Regarding how mobile accessibility is implemented, the trend seems to be to code library websites and OPACs rather than purchase mobile applications – a cheaper option which allows for mobile accessibility on various platforms (Android, iPhone, etc). I found this trend to be specifically true in the case of Innovative Interfaces’s AirPac product. Though it was mentioned extensively in some of the literature from 3-4 years ago, this product is actually no longer developed and maintained by Innovative – evidenced by its absence on their product page. Libraries increasingly have staff in place equipped to code websites for mobile devices and have no need to pay for native apps or third party products.
Moving forward, the demand for more comprehensive access to library resources via mobile OPACs will continue to be a challenge. Mobile device usage will increase and libraries must be committed to finding solutions to authentication access to electronic resources. Personally, I have found using apps such as Papership – which gives you mobile access to content (articles and PDFs) previously saved in Zotero and Mendeley– as one way to circumvent authentication issues with mobile OPACs. However, this app only provides access to content previously searched and saved. It is not a replacement for a fully capable OPAC that could provide full access and authentication. Until such an OPAC capability becomes a reality, libraries must develop or market immediate solutions – such as Papership – and work with content vendors in streamlining mobile authentication.
References
Boopsie: Frequently Asked questions. Retrieved June 4th, 2014 from http://www.boopsie.com/frequently-asked-questions/#library-mobile-strategy
Bridges, L., Rempel, H. G., & Griggs, K. (2010). Making the case for a fully mobile library web site: from floor maps to the catalog. Reference Services Review, 38(2), 309–320. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00907321011045061
Irwin, K. (2012). The Homegrown Mobile Catalog: A Quick, Inexpensive Approach to Expanding Access. Technical Services Quarterly, 29(1), 42–57. doi:10.1080/07317131.2012.624453
Jackson, R. (2013). Mobile Academic Libraries: A Snapshot. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 52(3), 174–178.
LibAnywhere: Screencast. Retrived June 4th, 2014 from http://www.libanywhere.com/
Nowlan, G. (2013). Going mobile: creating a mobile presence for your library. New Library World, 114(3/4), 142–150. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03074801311304050
Williams, M. (2012). Mobile Authentication and Access: Any Time, Any Place, Any Device? Insights, 25(3), 268–273.
No comments:
Post a Comment