Propuesta metodológica de evaluación de interfaces de OPACs. INNOPAC versus UNICORN.

Blanca Rodríguez Bravo; Mª Luisa Alvite Díez

doi:10.3989/redc.2004.v27.i1.147

Methodological proposal for OPACs interfaces evaluation: INNOPAC versus UNICORN

Authors

Blanca Rodríguez Bravo Área de Biblioteconomía y Documentación. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Universidad de León
Mª Luisa Alvite Díez Área de Biblioteconomía y Documentación. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Universidad de León

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2004.v27.i1.147

Keywords:

evaluation, interfaces, OPACs, academic libraries, INNOPAC, UNICORN

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to present a model of academic OPACs evaluation with the objective of sharing a procedure and some parameters and indicators established. There are two fundamental parameters, the interface searching services and the characteristics of the interface: design, ergonomics and user-friendliness. The present work provides also, the main results of the evaluations of ten OPACs implemented with INNOPAC and UNICORN previously accomplished. Now we will contrast both systems. We consider that universities are institutions that demand OPACs with better services to those of other informative units. The present evaluation has considered the users needs in academic libraries.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2004-03-30

How to Cite

Rodríguez Bravo, B., & Alvite Díez, M. L. (2004). Methodological proposal for OPACs interfaces evaluation: INNOPAC versus UNICORN. Revista Española De Documentación Científica, 27(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2004.v27.i1.147

Download Citation

Issue

Vol. 27 No. 1 (2004)

Section

Studies

License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.

All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.

Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.