WebCat "Enhancement" in Update D

[Elizabeth Thomsen <et@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Update D has a web catalog "enhancement" that we strongly believe should
be an option, not the hard-coded, like-it-or-lump-it change that it
seems to be.

For records with more than a screenful of items, we used to have a link
that said, "CLICK HERE to see additional copies/volumes of this item." 
Our users seemed to know what this meant.  Now, instead of a link, we
have a button and an input box, with the text on the button reading,
"View additional copies or search for a specific volume/copy."  

We just want the option to view the rest of the items-- there is no
circumstance in our system where a patron is going to benefit from the
search, and the confusing layout here is making it difficult for people
to see that all they need to do is ignore the box and click on the
button.  

I can understand how it might be useful in some systems for patrons to
be able to search the volume field for serial records and other records
that have volume fields.  (I have a harder time understanding why a
patron would ever want to search for a particular copy number.)  But in
our case, our converted serial record items do not have volume fields,
and only a few of our libraries have used the volume at all.  On a
serial record for Fodor's Florida, for example, it certainly might be
useful for someone to (in effect) limit their search to a particular
edition, but if they put "2000" or whatever in this field, they aren't
going to get anything, or they are going to get the one or two items
that possibly have this date in the volume field, not the many that
have  2000 as part of the call number.  

With 27 different libraries, including many public libraries who buy
multiple copies of popular title, we have a large number of titles that
exceed a single screenful of items, so this change really adds a new
element of confusion to practically anyone searching our catalog for
practically anything.  There's no way for the patron to know what
"search for a specific copy" might mean-- it would be just as logical
for them to try to type in the name of a particular library here as it
would be to enter a (useless) copy number or (non-existent) volume
number.

Maybe there are libraries whose inputting practices and usage patterns
make this change a real improvement...but for us, it's just a great
source of confusion and annoyance.  My question is-- why isn't a change
like this presented as an OPTION, so an improvement for one group of
users isn't a major step backward for the rest of us?

-- 
Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager
NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange
Danvers MA 01923
et@xxxxxxxxxx
--
This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC list.
Private replies:  Elizabeth Thomsen <et@xxxxxxxxxx>
Public replies:   INNOPAC@xxxxxxxxxx
Archives:  http://innopacusers.org/list/archives/