Open AccessDialog with OPAC
Author(s) -
Э. Р. Сукиасян
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
naučnye i tehničeskie biblioteki
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2686-8601
pISSN - 1027-3689
DOI - 10.33186/1027-3689-2020-3-23-36
Subject(s) - dialog box , computer science , world wide web , process (computing) , library catalog , index (typography) , scheme (mathematics) , information retrieval , work (physics) , knowledge base , thesaurus , thematic map , artificial intelligence , engineering , mathematical analysis , mathematics , operating system , mechanical engineering , cartography , geography
The author raises the issue of dialogue between the OPAC and the user. The card catalog had a reference apparatus system that guided the reader's work and assisted in the search process. If OPAC came to replace card catalogs, we have the right to consider dialogue a tool of any OPAC. It is proved that the card systematic catalog possessed cognitive, developing functions. However, this cannot be said about OPAC. It was expected that the OPAC would have the Knowledge Base in the form of an easy-to-view hierarchical classification schedules with an alphabetical index. But neither the dialogue nor the Knowledge Base of OPAC in the libraries of the country have. If at the input stage employees have some opportunities to clarify their decisions, then at the search stage the user is completely deprived of them. He formulates the request using his own “thesaurus”, which the program may not accept. The problems of equipping OPAC with reference information for the user, the general principles of working with OPAC are considered. The features of forming the heading of the bibliographic record are shown. The conclusion is made: questions of a thematic search in the OPAC have remained unresolved so far. The rights and possibilities of the user related to the work of OPAC are significantly limited. Many shortcomings could be resolved through dialogue. However, a situation has arisen in the country when potential participants in such a dialogue (system developers, cataloguers and bibliographers in libraries, OPAC’s users) do not meet each other for joint analysis of OPAC. Then, perhaps, the dialogue would appear in the catalog itself, where it is not today.