View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Use of Supporting Documentation for Information Architecture by Australian Libraries

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Use of Supporting Documentation for Information Architecture by Australian Libraries
Language: English
Authors: Hider, Philip, Burford, Sally, Ferguson, Stuart
Source: Journal of Web Librarianship. Jan 2009 3(1):55-70.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2009
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Web Sites, Information Management, Libraries, Guidelines, Foreign Countries, Documentation, Surveys, Librarians, Check Lists
Geographic Terms: Australia
DOI: 10.1080/19322900802660326
ISSN: 1932-2909
Abstract: This article reports the results of an online survey that examined the development of information architecture of Australian library Web sites with reference to documented methods and guidelines. A broad sample of library Web managers responded from across the academic, public, and special sectors. A majority of libraries used either in-house or external documents or both, but the nature of these documents varied greatly. Most external documents were guidelines handed down by libraries' parent bodies, though some documents produced by independent organizations were used. More general guides on best IA practice were also consulted. The extent of libraries' control over their own Web sites also varied widely, from minimal control to complete autonomy. Although guiding documentation was considered useful in some ways, respondents were more interested in developing the necessary IA skills and competencies than in cross-site standardization. The lack of these skills and resource and management issues were a greater concern than a lack of documentation. The influence of parent bodies and the diverse purpose and context of library Web sites suggest that a generic set of guidelines for libraries would not be particularly helpful. Instead, librarians with greater IA skills would be in a better position to apply the most appropriate standards and guidelines according to their local contexts. (Contains 12 tables.)
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 22
Entry Date: 2009
Accession Number: EJ836575
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEK50XzlfWCx2IslpeCx2ezAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDPAjtDNxeFqWyUmVYgIBEICBmnesJF9M0kYkt2ncz49bkdEfEjwQKH5MzBc1O9GKRhpzrHWKXvqNy7ZJgojkhE8LWq5HH4wl50roLjBK_ZGNw1f56pWI7JWGYz0U6cJSAdLxK9lSG-dCiw0mc7VHGpbjWDX_Cg0BbphxazPhVvkcxGSeDOZ46SN0m-RoFZvjrw6yIdL7Cw2KBMNH3-uvGfDXTt1SNgL6Sk4Lp08=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0037185938;[31rh]01jan.09;2019Mar25.12:58;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0037185938-1">The Use of Supporting Documentation for Information Architecture by Australian Libraries. </title> <sbt id="AN0037185938-2">INTRODUCTION</sbt> <p>This article reports the results of an online survey that examined the development of information architecture of Australian library Web sites with reference to documented methods and guidelines. A broad sample of library Web managers responded from across the academic, public, and special sectors. A majority of libraries used either in-house or external documents or both, but the nature of these documents varied greatly. Most external documents were guidelines handed down by libraries' parent bodies, though some documents produced by independent organizations were used. More general guides on best IA practice were also consulted. The extent of libraries' control over their own Web sites also varied widely, from minimal control to complete autonomy. Although guiding documentation was considered useful in some ways, respondents were more interested in developing the necessary IA skills and competencies than in cross-site standardization. The lack of these skills and resource and management issues were a greater concern than a lack of documentation. The influence of parent bodies and the diverse purpose and context of library Web sites suggest that a generic set of guidelines for libraries would not be particularly helpful. Instead, librarians with greater IA skills would be in a better position to apply the most appropriate standards and guidelines according to their local contexts.</p> <p>Many librarians are aware of the importance of sound information architecture (IA) to enable the effective use of their libraries' Web sites, portals, and intranets—that is, organizing and structuring their sites' content so it can be readily navigated and retrieved by users. However, it is unclear to what extent librarians are implementing IA through documented design methods and guidelines that provide a framework for best practice. Such documentation is well established at a general level, although the development of guidelines for libraries as a specific type of institution has been limited. Whether in-house methods and guidelines are being developed for specific libraries is also unclear.</p> <p>Indeed, it is not only unclear whether documentation is playing a significant role in the design of library Web sites but also what need there is for such documentation and what types of written resources best support library Web IA. It is worth examining whether librarians are doing the designing, with or without documentation, or whether they are heavily constrained by templates, policies, regulations, etc., handed down by parent bodies and external authorities.</p> <p>This article attempts to shed some light on these issues, at least with respect to Australian libraries, through the results of a survey administered to a broad sample of libraries across the country. It should be noted that the subject of the survey was limited to IA design and that the graphical design of Web sites (images, fonts, colors, etc.) was not covered. IA design was thus defined in terms of structural design—i.e., the way the pages and sections in a site are linked and arranged and the provision of navigational and retrieval tools.</p> <hd id="AN0037185938-3">LITERATURE REVIEW</hd> <p>According to the literature, attempts to guide the work of IA in libraries and other organizations through guidelines and documented design processes are complex and not always pitched to the needs of those responsible for the Web IA. Sue [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref1">2</reflink>] considered the work of Web IA for information professionals and suggested two approaches to Web IA. First, from a traditional librarianship perspective, she considered the core information management functions of indexing, categorizing, classifying, recording, and organizing information. The second aspect of IA that Batley identified is one of design—user-centered design that enables easy and intuitive access to information for users of Web sites. Batley suggested librarians are well positioned to apply their traditional skills sets to the organization of the information on their Web sites.</p> <p>Earl [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref2">12</reflink>], Peter Morville and Louis Rosenfeld (2006), and Jakob [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref3">15</reflink>] supported Batley's assertions that IA is largely a design activity. Morrogh said the focus of IA is the design of information environments and that "information architecture design problems are complex" ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref4">12</reflink>], p. 109). Design processes that may begin as skills-based craft traditions can be supported by evolving design methods. Morrogh defined a design method as:</p> <p>a structured design process—a method—introduces control or discipline into the design process. Design methods are concerned with principles and processes of design based on the nature of design and how designers identify problems and generate and evaluate solutions. The overarching goal of a design method is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of design activities (2002, p. 110).</p> <p>The practice of IA has been guided by the development of a structured design process that was pioneered by [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref5">16</reflink>]. Since then, the design methods of IA have been reviewed, refined, updated, and rephrased, to the extent that a mature documented method for the activity of designing Web information structures now exists ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref6">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref7">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref8">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref9">8</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref10">2</reflink>]). This solid and detailed body of knowledge is in need of simplification for the average IA practitioner. Established design methods have been encapsulated and promulgated by the [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref11">1</reflink>] in the form of checklists such as <emph>Information Architecture for Websites</emph> for Australian government organizations. The challenge continues for further refinement and articulation of the complex IA design process as a form of support for IA practitioners inclusive of those responsible for the Web IA in Australian libraries.</p> <p>A further approach to guiding the work of IA is the development and use of guidelines, standards, and style guides. Unlike checklists, which are process oriented, these are results oriented. Tom Stewart and David Travis (2003) distinguished between the three terms, describing guidelines as "recommendations of good practice that rely on the credibility of their authors for their authority"; standards as "formal documents published by standards-making bodies that are developed through some form of consensus and formal voting process"; and style guides as sets of agreed recommendations to increase consistency of design outcomes and good design practice. In common use, the terms are frequently used interchangeably. Web design guidelines and standards, argued [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref12">14</reflink>] and Stewart and Travis, are essential for creating a usable environment consistent with user expectations. The quality and consistency of a Web site's IA can be improved, and good practice and a shared understanding can emerge as a result of the use of guidelines.</p> <p>An example of published Web guidelines that are inclusive of IA are the <emph>Research-Based Web Design and Usability Guidelines</emph> developed by the [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref13">20</reflink>]. These guidelines, which are comprehensive and grounded in research, contain elements of IA but do not distinguish them from other aspects of Web design, such as visual design. The question remains: are guidelines for IA usefully employed in the development of the information structures on library Web sites?</p> <p>Cline Mariage, Jean Vanderdonckt, and Costin Pribeanu (2005) discussed the role of Web site development guidelines, in particular for usability. Documented advice for those practicing IA varied from general in-principle objectives to unambiguous rules with no latitude for interpretation. Mariage, Vanderdonckt, and Pribeanu pointed out that guidelines are important for consolidating bodies of knowledge but noted that the existence of and adherence to guidelines does not ensure a usable Web site. In creative problem-solving design processes, guidelines are interpretive and inexact. The quality of the guidelines, the degree of precision, and their ability to meet the needs of a varied audience dictate their usefulness.</p> <p>Joan M. Cherry, Paul Muter, and Steve J. Szigeti (2006) warned that the use of design guidelines in human-computer interaction is a difficult challenge, "particularly because of the intractably large number of potential interactions among guidelines." One or more interactions occur if the usefulness of a guideline is in some way dependent on whether other guidelines are being followed. Scott [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref14">11</reflink>] stressed "a designer is unlikely to derive the best solution for a particular scenario from a generalized guideline in isolation," and that guidelines for Web design should "be complemented by a deeper understanding of the issues, rather than simple rules or instructions that should be followed blindly." This raises the question of exactly how dependent the development of a library Web site should be on published IA guidelines without a strong conceptual understanding of the IA process.</p> <p>Jakob [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref15">14</reflink>] distinguishes between surface or Web interface design and deep design—deep design being a Web site's information organization and structure. Elements of IA occur at the surface or interface level of Web sites—e.g., the positioning of company logos and the accompanying link to the homepage or the horizontal positioning of breadcrumbs. These aspects of IA, Nielsen said, are the simplest and most localized design features to standardize, and many Web design guidelines fall into this category ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref16">15</reflink>]). However, "the confusing design elements are the bigger issues that contribute more strongly to users' ability to master the whole site" ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref17">15</reflink>], para. 11). [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref18">14</reflink>] claimed a Web site's deep and important information structures cannot be standardized, since they are individual and contextual and require dedicated and creative information design activity. The suggestion is that developers of library Web sites may need to use both guidelines and documented design methods to achieve an effective IA. This article goes some way to testing Nielsen's claims by examining the documented support used in the practice of Web IA development in libraries.</p> <p>Looking to solve this complexity, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref19">15</reflink>] and Svetlana [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref20">19</reflink>] offered another category of guidance for Web IA—they both proposed the use of design patterns. Nielsen claimed high-level design patterns for the IA of sites in a particular domain should be possible, and has developed three similar but distinct information architectures for investor relations Web sites that can be used as patterns or starting points. Design patterns are known and tested solutions to Web design problems that have a particular context. They capture a proven and insightful solution for reuse as need arises ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref21">21</reflink>]). Symonenko's (2006) preliminary research revealed that patterns exist in the visible information structure within Web sites of similar types (e.g., university, government, libraries) and that user expectations of these patterns also exist. While this research does not focus on the possible use of design patterns in library Web site construction, it remains a maturing approach to IA, and further research as to its efficacy is needed.</p> <p>Jo Golding, Alison Carter, and Cathie Koina (2000) called for the use of guidelines in library Web site development and management, stating that a clear direction for the type of information provided by the site is a key benefit of in-house Web guidelines. Although Golding, Carter, and Koina make reference to page layout in their schema for guidelines, their guidance falls short of supporting the practice of IA. Philip Hider and Stuart Ferguson (2006) considered the use of IA principles in the development of Australian library Web sites by evaluating the outcome: the Web site itself. Using a constructed set of IA heuristics, Hider and Ferguson found evidence that Australian libraries were generally adhering to the principles of Web IA.</p> <p>Krisellen Maloney and Paul J. Bracke (2004), however, insisted library Web sites must move beyond the general approach to Web IA proposed by [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref22">16</reflink>]. A library's Web site is a display platform for many disparate systems and services. Maloney and Bracke believed integration of the multiple legacy systems that expose information to library users required a new framework. Much of the information sought on a library Web site is provided by external sources, and libraries are not in full control of the format of this content. Internal legacy systems, such as catalogues, are also an integral part of the library's Web site and may not have been designed for Web access. Maloney and Bracke proposed an extended IA framework with the general Web site as the coordinating structure that relates iteratively with embedded services, "with service elements constraining the coordinating structure and the coordinating structure informing the design of the service elements"(<reflink idref="bib147" id="ref23">147</reflink>). Those responsible for library Web sites are poised to lead the IA design method to new heights.</p> <p>Much of the scholarly literature pertaining to library Web sites suggests best practice or reports on lessons learned from particular cases. As Sandra [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref24">17</reflink>] noted, "The literature is comprised of interpretation of general design guidelines taken from the popular literature and their subsequent application within a library setting." To date, few papers report on the actual practice of IA across libraries, both specific to Australia and elsewhere. Two notable papers that examined Web management practice in general (not just IA) focus on North American academic libraries. Shropshire identified key issues surrounding the ongoing management of four university Web sites, though these are mainly organizational and contextual in nature, rather than methodological; Arthur [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref25">6</reflink>] surveyed the policies and processes pertaining to Web management at 60 academic libraries. Hendricks reported two-thirds of libraries were guided by a written Web policy, and more than half followed institutional policies.</p> <hd id="AN0037185938-4">Research Design</hd> <p>An online questionnaire was created with the aim of revealing Australian libraries' use of Web IA documentation—in particular, written policies, guidelines, and checklists. IA was defined, in contrast to graphic design, as "the way in which the content of the site is organized, including how content is organized across different pages, the layout of pages, the headings and menus used, the navigation and search systems, etc." A structured sample of 107 library Web sites was derived from the Australian Libraries Gateway on the National Library of Australia Web site at <ulink href="http://www.nla.gov.au/libraries">http://www.nla.gov.au/libraries</ulink>. The libraries represented included national/state, university, public, and special. Personnel with responsibility for managing and developing the Web sites were identified and invited by e-mail to participate in the survey on behalf of their respective libraries. In total, 58 libraries responded (54.2%) in August–September 2007. The questions in the survey are contained in Appendix A.</p> <hd id="AN0037185938-5">RESULTS</hd> <p>Of the 58 respondents, 51 (87.9%) are staff of the libraries. This ties in quite well with the responses to the question of how responsible the library is for its own Web site, as shown in Table 1. Most libraries have at least partial responsibility for their Web sites' IA, but there is a wide range of degrees of responsibility, with a quarter of libraries enjoying complete control, but more than 60% being subject to external decisions.</p> <p>TABLE 1 Libraries' Information Architecture Responsibility</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Responses</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>%</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>It is entirely in the hands of the library</td><td>14</td><td>26.4</td></tr><tr><td>It is basically in the hands of the library, though the parent/external body may make recommendations</td><td>6</td><td>11.3</td></tr><tr><td>It is mostly in the hands of the library, but there are some guidelines set out by the parent/external body</td><td>11</td><td>20.8</td></tr><tr><td>It is partly in the hands of the library, but there are templates that the library has to use</td><td>11</td><td>20.8</td></tr><tr><td>It is mostly out of the library's control; the library can only organize content within particular pages, etc.</td><td>9</td><td>17.0</td></tr><tr><td>It is entirely out of the library's control</td><td>2</td><td>3.8</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Although about equal numbers of university, public, and special libraries were invited to participate, and responses were most forthcoming from the universities, as Table 2 shows. The response rates for public and special libraries were nevertheless reasonable (about half).</p> <p>TABLE 2 Respondents by Library Type</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Type</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>%</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>State/National</td><td>4</td><td>7.0</td></tr><tr><td>University</td><td>23</td><td>40.4</td></tr><tr><td>Public</td><td>16</td><td>28.1</td></tr><tr><td>Special/other</td><td>14</td><td>24.6</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Table 3 indicates many Australian libraries are applying written guidelines and other documentation in their IA—almost three-quarters (72%) of responding libraries apply either internal or external/parental documentation or both. About half follow guidelines or checklists handed down from within their parent organization, and about half have developed internal documentation. Table 4 shows that a considerable number of libraries following guidelines and checklists from the parent body supplement them with in-house documentation—11 of 26 in the survey—and around a third (36%) use both internal and external/parental documentation.</p> <p>TABLE 3 Adherence to Documentation by Source</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td /><td>From parent body</td><td>From outside the organization</td><td>Within library</td><td>From <italic>any</italic> source</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Documentation followed</td><td>26 (55.3%)</td><td>10 (20%)</td><td>24 (47.1%)</td><td>36 (72%)</td></tr><tr><td>No documentation followed</td><td>21 (44.7%)</td><td>40 (80%)</td><td>27 (52.9%)</td><td>14 (28%)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>TABLE 4 Adherence to Documentation from Multiple Sources</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Sources</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>%</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>From parent body and from outside the organization only</td><td>2</td><td>4.0</td></tr><tr><td>From parent body and within library only</td><td>11</td><td>22.0</td></tr><tr><td>From outside the organization and within library only</td><td>3</td><td>6.0</td></tr><tr><td>From parent body, outside the organization, and within library</td><td>4</td><td>8.0</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The sample sizes are too small to make categorical assertions, but it appears from Table 5 that university and state libraries use written guidelines and checklists more than other libraries. Table 6 shows, unsurprisingly, the more involved the library is in the IA of its Web site, the more likely it is to follow IA guidelines and other forms of documentation; however, this tendency is not as pronounced as it might be. The 44.4% of libraries with little control over their Web site nevertheless follow IA documentation. Of the 49 libraries with some responsibility for IA that responded to the question, 36 (73.5%) followed some documentation, whether internal or external.</p> <p>TABLE 5 Proportion Adhering to Documentation by Library Type</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Type</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>Percentage of type</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>State/national</td><td>3</td><td>75.0</td></tr><tr><td>University</td><td>21</td><td>95.5</td></tr><tr><td>Public</td><td>7</td><td>43.8</td></tr><tr><td>Special/other</td><td>5</td><td>50.0</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>TABLE 6 Proportion Adhering to Documentation by Library Involvement</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Responses</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>Percentage of level</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>It is entirely in the hands of the library</td><td>9</td><td>64.3</td></tr><tr><td>It is basically in the hands of the library, though the parent/external body may make recommendations</td><td>3</td><td>60.0</td></tr><tr><td>It is mostly in the hands of the library, but there are some guidelines set out by the parent/external body</td><td>11</td><td>100.0</td></tr><tr><td>It is partly in the hands of the library, but there are templates that the library has to use</td><td>9</td><td>81.8</td></tr><tr><td>It is mostly out of the library's control, the library can only organize content within particular pages, etc.</td><td>4</td><td>44.4</td></tr><tr><td>It is entirely out of the library's control</td><td>0</td><td>0.0</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Published external documents include standards handed down by state governments (e.g., South Australian Government Web Site Standards), W3C standards and guidelines (e.g., Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0), and metadata standards such as Dublin Core, the Education Network Australia (EdNA) metadata set, and the Australian Government Locator Service (AGLS) metadata standard. However, these standards are applied by just a handful of libraries, at most.</p> <p>The topics this documentation covers are listed in Table 7. Much of it covers Web page layout; it also often covers new site construction, site structure, labeling, and navigation. In-house documentation tends to cover a wider range of topics than external documentation. Libraries appear to pay particular attention to external metadata standards.</p> <p>TABLE 7 Information Architecture Topics Covered by Documentation</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Topics</td><td>Parental</td><td>External</td><td>Internal</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Constructing new Web sites</td><td>55.6%</td><td>40.0%</td><td>62.5%</td></tr><tr><td>User research prior to information architecture design/redesign</td><td>18.5%</td><td>20.0%</td><td>12.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Ongoing evaluation of Web site</td><td>33.3%</td><td>20.0%</td><td>41.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Structure of Web site</td><td>51.9%</td><td>50.0%</td><td>70.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Labeling of menus and links</td><td>63.0%</td><td>60.0%</td><td>75.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Search systems for the Web site (e.g., search engines)</td><td>37.0%</td><td>20.0%</td><td>37.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Metadata for the Web pages</td><td>48.2%</td><td>70.0%</td><td>45.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Controlled vocabularies for headings, labels, and keywords</td><td>18.5%</td><td>20.0%</td><td>29.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Navigation around the Web site</td><td>55.6%</td><td>70.0%</td><td>62.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Layout of Web pages (sections, headings, images, etc.)</td><td>85.2%</td><td>90.0%</td><td>83.3%</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Although only a fifth of libraries are following external documentation, a much larger number—38.3%—refer to IA publications in general, which include guides and guidelines, offering broader advice on approaches, methods, usability, etc. However, a majority of libraries do not refer to any IA publications. Documents cited include those listed below:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> • Papers and case studies on the Step Two Designs Web site (http://www.steptwo.com.au),</item> <p></p> <item> • W3C standards (see http://www.w3.org/TR),</item> <p></p> <item> • Works by Jakob Nielsen (see http://www.useit.com),</item> <p></p> <item> • Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO) Web site (see http://www.agimo.gov.au/practice/delivery/checklists),</item> <p></p> <item> • John Kupersmith, "Library Terms That Users Understand" (http://www.jkup.net/terms.html),</item> <p></p> <item> • Mary Frances Theofanos and Janice Redish, "Guidelines for Accessible and Usable Web Sites" (http://redish.net/content/papers/interactions.html),</item> <p></p> <item> • Dublin Core standard (see http://dublincore.org),</item> <p></p> <item> • EdNA metadata standard (http://www.edna.edu.au/edna/go/resources/metadata).</item> <p></p> <item> • Shirley Kaiser, <emph>Deliver First Class Web Sites</emph> (Collingwood, Australia: SitePoint 2006),</item> <p></p> <item> • National Library of Australia, <emph>Guidelines for the Content of Library Web Sites</emph> (http://www.nla.gov.au/libraries/resource/guidelines.html),</item> <p></p> <item> • Guidelines and checklists on the usability.gov Web site (http://www.usability.gov),</item> <p></p> <item> • Peter Morville and Louis Rosenfeld, <emph>Information Architecture for the World Wide Web,</emph> 3rd ed. (Sebastopol: O'Reilly and Associates 2006),</item> <p></p> <item> • "Boxes and Arrows" Web site (http://www.boxesandarrows.com),</item> <p></p> <item> • Steve Krug, <emph>Don't Make Me Think!</emph> 2nd ed. (Berkeley, CA: New Riders Publishing 2006).</item> </ulist> <p>This list represents many of the most consulted resources in IA and a mix of standards, guidelines, checklists, and guides. No document was cited by more than two or three respondents.</p> <p>Almost two-thirds of respondents (64.4%) believe some documentation, whether internal or external, should be used. Interestingly, this is less than the number of responding library Web sites who use documentation (70.6%). Reasons why they thought so are listed in Table 8. Providing consistency and standardization is clearly seen as an important function, but there were a variety of other reasons. Documentation could set the purpose of the Web site, in the context of the library's goals, user needs, and so on. It could serve as a summary of IA principles for the uninitiated, and it could help systematize the design process.</p> <p>TABLE 8 Reasons for Documentation</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Reason</td><td><italic>n</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Site-wide consistency</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Best practice</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Accessibility</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Defines function and purpose of site</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Summarizes information architecture principles</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Integrity of site</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Knowledge management</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Sector-wide consistency</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Systematic design process</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Avoids subjective decisions</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Defines user/stakeholder needs</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Holistic view of site</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Justifies policy</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Promotes importance of information architecture</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Readability</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Simplifies process</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Site governance</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Tables 9 and 10 show the level of perceived IA expertise and commitment on the part of library Web site developers. Although more than half of Web site development teams give IA high or very high priority, more than half also rated their level of expertise as moderate or worse. A similar level of commitment on the part of the libraries as a whole was reported (see Table 11).</p> <p>TABLE 9 Information Architecture Expertise of Web Site Developers</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Level</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>%</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Expert</td><td>0</td><td>0.0</td></tr><tr><td>Advanced</td><td>15</td><td>32.6</td></tr><tr><td>Moderate</td><td>23</td><td>50.0</td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>7</td><td>15.2</td></tr><tr><td>Minimal</td><td>1</td><td>2.2</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>TABLE 10 Information Architecture Commitment of Web Site Developers</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Level</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>%</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Very high</td><td>12</td><td>26.7</td></tr><tr><td>High</td><td>15</td><td>33.3</td></tr><tr><td>Moderate</td><td>13</td><td>28.9</td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>5</td><td>11.1</td></tr><tr><td>Very low</td><td>0</td><td>0.0</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>TABLE 11 Information Architecture Commitment of Libraries</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Level</td><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>%</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Critical</td><td>8</td><td>17.8</td></tr><tr><td>High</td><td>17</td><td>37.8</td></tr><tr><td>Moderate</td><td>11</td><td>24.4</td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>8</td><td>17.8</td></tr><tr><td>Nil</td><td>1</td><td>2.2</td></tr><tr><td>Don't know</td><td>0</td><td>0.0</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Finally, respondents were asked to list the main problems the library has with the ongoing development of its Web site. Table 12 summarizes these problems. Web site development was mostly limited because of resource issues. Several libraries also reported a lack of autonomy. Management issues were also quite often cited. Only one respondent mentioned a lack of guidelines as a major problem.</p> <p>TABLE 12 Problems Facing Ongoing Web Site Development</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Problem</td><td><italic>n</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Lack of staff time</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Lack of skills development</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>System/technological limitations</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Lack of content creation/ownership</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Lack of funds</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>External policy restrictions</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Content issues</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Lack of management support</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Poor governance</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Diversity of stakeholders, users</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Lack of usability testing</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Poor IT support</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Lack of support from parent body</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Personal views imposed</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Lack of guidelines</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Scheduling difficulties</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Anti-IT culture</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Comparison of responses between university, state, public, and special libraries indicates university and state libraries use documentation more, as noted earlier, and are more likely to develop internal guidelines and checklists. They are, correspondingly, especially supportive of the use of documentation and prioritize IA issues more. Interestingly, the proportion of public libraries with complete control over their Web site (37.5%) is higher for libraries overall, and the percentage that has to work with externally issued templates (6.3%) is significantly less.</p> <hd id="AN0037185938-6">DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS</hd> <p>The survey results show libraries' apparent commitment to IA, which suggest many Australian libraries are taking IA seriously but perhaps not quite as seriously as might be expected, given that information provision is their central function. Almost half of the libraries sampled assign IA a moderate priority or less. Even among their Web site developers, 40% gave IA moderate priority or less. It is also worth noting that these results are likely to paint a slightly rosier picture of IA activities and attitudes than might be the case overall, as respondents may well be more pro-IA than non-respondents.</p> <p>Libraries' Web IA is supported by documentation from a wide variety of sources, covering a range of IA issues. Although some libraries use external guidelines, there is little sign of standardization across Australian libraries. No publication is anywhere near to becoming a <emph>de facto</emph> standard, though some metadata schemas are used by certain groups of libraries. Indeed, the results suggest cross-library guidelines and "design patterns" may not be particularly effective, with libraries enjoying quite different levels of control over their Web sites, from complete autonomy to complete dependence. Library-specific standards might not be useful when standards issued by parent bodies—in some cases based on standards for another type of institution—take precedence. It is also clear that different types of libraries have Web sites for different purposes, with different types of users and stakeholders.</p> <p>Many library Web managers read IA literature that is readily available on the Internet and in popular book stores. However, a majority of Web managers do not refer to this literature, despite IA being acknowledged as an important activity. The survey suggested one reason for this was lack of time. Apart from their libraries' Web sites, many Web managers may have other responsibilities. Other reasons may include the fragmented nature of the IA literature and a lack of an introduction to it through appropriate professional development.</p> <p>Specific guidelines and checklists are both used and considered worth using by many libraries. In most cases, documentation is considered results oriented; that is, it improves the end-user's experience of the site by ensuring consistency, accessibility, navigation, searchability, etc. However, in other cases, IA documentation is aimed at improving the design process by focusing design on overall purpose, user needs, etc. It is the process that appears to be pivotal for many Web managers and where problems occur. Although some site-development problems pertain to content and might be alleviated by the adoption of written standards, many were about a lack of skills<emph>,</emph> which can only be addressed by more time and funds for professional development and more management support.</p> <p>As a design activity, IA can be usefully supported by both documented methods and guidelines, but it can also be constrained by them. Fewer respondents wanted documentation than were actually using it. What they wanted more of, it would seem, is a deeper understanding of best practice and the skills to move their Web sites beyond the rigidities of imposed guidelines. To achieve this, more general guides may be more helpful than detailed standards. One respondent commented, "A list outlining a selection of resources is probably sufficient for a Web team to keep abreast of ideas and principles of information architecture. ... The bigger the team, then perhaps a more formal document agreeing on which resource is required to assist with consistency." Documentation was sometimes used in lieu of skills development, acting as a summary of best IA practice for the uninitiated. As another respondent commented, "While no replacement for ongoing reading and professional development, some written guidelines for developing information architecture may be of benefit for people new to Web administration."</p> <p>It appears a lack of documentation or standards is not the main problem facing developers of Australian library Web sites. Rather, it is the lack, in some cases at least, of high-level IA design skills. Only as their IA skills mature will librarians be in a position to effectively apply guidelines and standards to those aspects of IA that might benefit from them. The sort of documentation that best supports the maturation of IA design skills is likely to be more general in nature, focussing on process as much as on specific output.</p> <p>While for pragmatic reasons this research was conducted in Australia it is worth considering its transferability to other countries. In the course of this project, no previous research in any country was uncovered that specifically examined the use of IA documentation in libraries. Yet, a similar lack of design skills and training in North American academic libraries was noted by both [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref26">17</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref27">6</reflink>]. Shropshire found a majority of Web librarians in her study were self-taught and made good use of the professional and scholarly library literature; a fifth of the librarians surveyed by Hendricks also indicated they were self-taught. It appears the Australian case may not be particularly different from elsewhere, with library Web staff often following the best practices described in the library literature as far as they can, which are themselves born of contextual and practical interpretations and applications of general design guidelines. The extent and nature of written Web policies, as reported by Hendricks, also corresponds quite closely with the findings from this survey.</p> <p>Finally, it is worth noting that some libraries appear to have staff with far more advanced IA skills than other libraries and are correspondingly far more IA-focused. The question remains why this is so—it may be because of a number of factors other than money—and is worthy of further research. Furthermore, it would be interesting to see whether this range of self-assessed skill and commitment levels was actually borne out by the quality of IA found on the Web sites: in other words, whether the range of IA best practice implementation found by [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref28">7</reflink>] in their earlier study correlated with the range of skill and commitment levels found in this survey.</p> <hd id="AN0037185938-7">APPENDIX—SURVEY QUESTIONS</hd> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. Are you a member of the library's staff?</item> <p></p> <item> 2. What type of library is it?</item> <p></p> <item> 3. How much of the information architecture design (and redesign) of the library Web site is in the hands of the library, rather than a separate Web unit, parent body or external authority?</item> <p></p> <item> 4. Does the library follow any written policies, guidelines, or checklists for information architecture issued by its parent body (e.g., from a central Web unit)?</item> <p></p> <item> 5. Please check all the topics below that these policies/guidelines/checklists cover.</item> <p></p> <item> 6. Does the library follow any written policies, guidelines, or checklists for information architecture issued by an external body (outside of any parent body)?</item> <p></p> <item> 7. Please check all the topics below that these policies/guidelines/checklists cover.</item> <p></p> <item> 8. Does the library follow any internal policies, guidelines, or checklists for information architecture written by and for its staff within the library?</item> <p></p> <item> 9. Please check all the topics below that these policies/guidelines/checklists cover.</item> <p></p> <item> 10. In the process of designing or redesigning its Web site, has the library referred to any published guidelines, checklists, or guides (including online ones) on information architecture?</item> <p></p> <item> 11. Do you see any need for written policies, guidelines, etc., to assist in the information architecture of the library's Web site?</item> <p></p> <item> 12. Please indicate the level at which the library Web site development team understands information architecture principles.</item> <p></p> <item> 13. Please indicate the level of priority the library Web site development team gives to information architecture issues.</item> <p></p> <item> 14. Please indicate the level of importance the library as a whole attaches to the information architecture of its website.</item> <p></p> <item> 15. Please indicate the main problems the library has with the ongoing development of its Web site.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0037185938-8">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>This paper was originally presented at VALA2008, Melbourne, on February 7, 2008. The authors wish to thank Ms. Carole Gerts for her assistance in administering the questionnaire survey described in the paper.</p> <p>Stuart Ferguson is now a member of the Faculty of Arts and Design, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia.</p> <ref id="AN0037185938-9"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref11" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Australian Government Information Management Organization. 2004. Information architecture for websites: Better practice checklisthttp://<ulink href="http://www.agimo.gov.au/%5fdata/assets/file/0003/33933/BPC15.pdf">www.agimo.gov.au/%5fdata/assets/file/0003/33933/BPC15.pdf</ulink> (accessed February 19, 2008)</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref1" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Batley, Sue. 2007. Information architecture for information professionals, Oxford: Chandos Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Cherry, JoanM., Muter, Paul and Szigeti, SteveJ.2006. Bibliographic displays in Web catalogs: Does conformity to design guidelines correlate with user performance?. Information Technologies and Libraries, 25(3): 154–62.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref7" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Garrett, Jesse James. 2003. The elements of user experience: User-centered design for the Web, Indianapolis: New Riders Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Golding, Jo, Carter, Alison and Koina, Cathie. 2000. Library Website management guidelines: What you need to know. Australian Library Journal, 49(1): 51–56.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref25" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Hendricks, Arthur. 2007. Webmasters, Web policies, and academic libraries: A survey. Library Hi Tech, 25(1): 136–46.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref28" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Hider, Philip and Ferguson, Stuart. 2006. "An evaluation of the information architectural qualities of Australian library Websites". In ALIA 2006 Biennial Conference, Perth, 19–22 September 2006: Conference paperhttp://conferences.alia.org.au/alia2006/Papers/Philip%5fHider.pdf (accessed February 19, 2008)</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref9" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Lynch, Patrick and Horton, Sarah. 2002. Web style guide. , 2nd ed.<ulink href="http://www.webstyleguide.com">http://www.webstyleguide.com</ulink> (accessed February 19, 2008)</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Maloney, Krisellen and Bracke, PaulJ.2004. Beyond information architecture: A systems integration approach to Web-site design. Information Technologies and Libraries, 23(4): 145–52.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mariage, Cline, Vanderdonckt, Jean and Pribeanu, Costin. 2005. "State of the art of Web usability guidelines". In Handbook of human factors in Web design, Edited by: Proctor, RobertW. and Vu, Kim-PhuonL.688–700. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Milne, Scott, Anna, Dickinson, Alex, Carmichael, David, Sloan, Roos, Eisma and Peter, Gregor. 2005. Are guidelines enough? An introduction to designing Web sites accessible to older people. IBM Systems Journal, 44(3): 565</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morrogh, Earl. 2002. Information architecture: An emerging 21st century profession, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morville, Peter and Rosenfeld, Louis. 2006. Information architecture for the World Wide Web 3rd ed, Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly and Associates.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielsen, Jakob.1999. "Do interface standards stifle design creativity?". <ulink href="http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990822.html">http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990822.html</ulink> (accessed February 19, 2008)</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielsen, Jakob.2004. "The need for Web design standards". <ulink href="http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040913.html">http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040913.html</ulink> (accessed February 19, 2008).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rosenfeld, Louis and Morville, Peter. 1998. Information architecture for the World Wide Web 1st ed, Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly and Associates.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shropshire, Sandra. 2003. Beyond the design and evaluation of library Web sites: An analysis and four case studies. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 29(2): 95–101.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stewart, Tom and Travis, David. 2003. "Guidelines, standards, and style guides". In The human-computer interaction handbook: Fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications, Edited by: Jacko, JulieA. and Sears, Andrew. 992–1005. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Symonenko, Svetlana. 2006. "Exploring patterns in Web site content structure". In 7th Information Architecture Summithttp://iasummit.org/2006/files/177%5fPresentation%5fDesc.pdf (accessed February 19, 2008)</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2006. Research-based Web design and usability guidelines 2nd ed., Washington, DC: Health and Human Services Department. <ulink href="http://usability.gov/pdfs/guidelines%5fbook.pdf">http://usability.gov/pdfs/guidelines%5fbook.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> van Duyne, Douglas, Landay, James and Hong, Jason. 2007. The design of sites: Patterns for creating winning Web sites , 2nd ed, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wodtke, Christina. 2003. Information architecture: Blueprints for the Web, Boston: New Riders.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Philip Hider; Sally Burford and Stuart Ferguson</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib147" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref24"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ836575
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Use of Supporting Documentation for Information Architecture by Australian Libraries
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hider%2C+Philip%22">Hider, Philip</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Burford%2C+Sally%22">Burford, Sally</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ferguson%2C+Stuart%22">Ferguson, Stuart</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Web+Librarianship%22"><i>Journal of Web Librarianship</i></searchLink>. Jan 2009 3(1):55-70.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2009
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Web+Sites%22">Web Sites</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+Management%22">Information Management</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Libraries%22">Libraries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Guidelines%22">Guidelines</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Documentation%22">Documentation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Surveys%22">Surveys</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Librarians%22">Librarians</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Check+Lists%22">Check Lists</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/19322900802660326
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1932-2909
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This article reports the results of an online survey that examined the development of information architecture of Australian library Web sites with reference to documented methods and guidelines. A broad sample of library Web managers responded from across the academic, public, and special sectors. A majority of libraries used either in-house or external documents or both, but the nature of these documents varied greatly. Most external documents were guidelines handed down by libraries' parent bodies, though some documents produced by independent organizations were used. More general guides on best IA practice were also consulted. The extent of libraries' control over their own Web sites also varied widely, from minimal control to complete autonomy. Although guiding documentation was considered useful in some ways, respondents were more interested in developing the necessary IA skills and competencies than in cross-site standardization. The lack of these skills and resource and management issues were a greater concern than a lack of documentation. The influence of parent bodies and the diverse purpose and context of library Web sites suggest that a generic set of guidelines for libraries would not be particularly helpful. Instead, librarians with greater IA skills would be in a better position to apply the most appropriate standards and guidelines according to their local contexts. (Contains 12 tables.)
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 22
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2009
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ836575
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ836575
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/19322900802660326
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 55
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Web Sites
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Information Management
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Libraries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Guidelines
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Documentation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Surveys
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Librarians
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Check Lists
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Australia
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Use of Supporting Documentation for Information Architecture by Australian Libraries
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hider, Philip
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Burford, Sally
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ferguson, Stuart
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2009
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1932-2909
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 3
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Web Librarianship
              Type: main
ResultId 1