Mary E. Brown, Ph.D., Professor
Information Science

Southern Connecticut State University
501 Crescent Street, New Haven, CT 06515

Department of Information and Library Science
Fax: 1.203.392-5780 / Phone: 1.203.392-5781
Toll Free: 1-888-500-SCSU, then press 4

In this unit we ask four questions: Will libraries be replaced? How does the public view libraries? Are there different types of digital libraries? What can digital libraries add to traditional libraries? In answering these questions we consider the implications of a study which reported attitudes toward libraries and their digital counterpart, the home-based library user, printing on demand, and digital delivery of film, sound, and images.

WILL LIBRARIES BE REPLACED?

It has already been pointed out that current technologies focus on conversion of paper to digital formats and not conversion of the library in toto to a digital format. In this way, digitization is comparable to the technology of microforms. It is probably more accurate to discuss the concept of digital libraries in terms of digital coherence and its application to library collections than to discuss the replacement of libraries in general with digital incarnations. Throughout this work, the term digital libraries will be used as a synonym for digital coherence.

Digital coherence can become a new tool with which the library can provide value added information serves to users--but first, those who apply digital coherence to libraries must understand the function and purpose of libraries. Too many researchers seem to share the perception expressed in Wiederhold (1995) and believe "the functions of a library are to acquire works, store them, make the works available to the reader, and reimburse the author and the publisher for their efforts" (p. 95). The role of the librarian seems to be little understood as well. In a recent study, frequent users of libraries stated that the professionally trained librarian could be replaced by volunteers, such as retirees in the community (Benton Foundation, 1996). With segments of the literature reducing the library to a second-hand shop and librarians to clerks, it is easy to understand how the current rush to raze the library arose. It is imperative that librarians take collaborative, if not leading,] roles in the digital library movement and bring other fields and participants into understanding of and appreciation for the knowledge and practices which have congealed over the past five or six millennia into what we know today as librarianship.

Historically, digitalization or automation in the library has emphasized the computerization of bibliographic tools such as catalogs, indexes, and other finding aids (Saffady, 1995). An area of current, and sometimes emotional, discussion is the fulltext computerized storage and retrieval of books and journals. However, some researchers see to major distinctions between digital retrieval of information and digital use (reading) of that information. Further it is suggested by other researchers that as digital libraries develop, and particularly as issues surrounding intellectual property and fair use evolve, that digital libraries will be location aids for documents stored off the internet. Of particular interest is the work of David Levy on reading, discussed later.

If we step far enough back in our survey of the history to view the methods people have used to store their thoughts, recollections, and impressions, we will see a linage which begin with the single memory and moves on to include the human voice (such as griots, bards, and minstrels), clay, wood, papyrus leaves, reeds, animal skins, and eventually paper. The medium used depended on the local raw resources, available technology, and the cost of preparing the materials to store information. In this continuum, digital media can be viewed as another in a long list of materials upon which civilization has depended to carry the knowledge of one generation forward to further generations. Like the other materials, we can expect that it will be utilized in proportion to its local availability, supporting technology, its cost, and its reliability for storing and delivering knowledge to current and future generations.

HOW DOES THE PUBLIC VIEW LIBRARIES?

The Benton Report

The Benton Foundation, commissioned by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation, surveyed the public to determine the extent of their support of libraries as libraries and their communities confront the digital world.

As a backdrop to this support, the Benton Foundation asked participants about their current access to computers. Forty-two percent of those surveyed had access to a computer at home; 35% had access to a computer for personal use at work; and 40% had no access to a computer. Despite the perception that computers are ubiquitous, nearly half the population surveyed lack access to computers and presumably needs a central (and we may infer free) location where they can learn about and have access to computers and newer information technologies.

Thirty percent of those surveyed mentioned (10% first mention; 20% second mention) the library as one of the first two places they would go to learn more about using a computer to find information through the internet and to learn about online services. Sixty four percent (41% first mention; 23% second mention) would ask somebody they know. Twenty-three percent (7% first mention; 16% second mention) would buy a book or manual. Thirty-four percent (17% first mention; 17% second mention) would take a class. Clearly, a well-planned and promoted information technology facility within a library could serve as an educational and information-gathering center for a community, particularly for the large numbers in the community without other access to computers.

In terms of future importance, forty percent of those surveyed felt libraries would become more important (opposed to 19% who felt they would become less important) in the future due to the availability of information via computers. Thirty-seven percent felt it would be most important for public libraries to be a place where people can use computers to find information and to use online computer services (versus 35% who felt it is most important for public libraries to be a place where people can read and borrow books). Certainly, it is not unreasonable to look to libraries to fulfill both of these functions.

While some libraries seem to be hard-pressed for patrons who browse their shelves and use their reading rooms, some bookstores are doing a thriving business in this area. In comparing visits to a bookstore and to a public library for the purposes of browsing or purchasing of books, the bookstore was more frequented, notwithstanding a significant number who never visited either (22% did not visit a bookstore in the past year; 32% did not visit a library in the past year). One study (Brown, 1997) sheds some light on reasons why a bookstore may be more inviting than a library. Brown found non-library users preferred to read or purchase books in a bookstore because the clerks were more helpful in finding the needed material and the reading areas were more comfortable. This enhanced customer focus by bookstores is understandable, given the direct relationship between a bookstore's survival and the movement of customers and books through the store. Perhaps libraries need to consider at their service in terms of a cost-benefit relationship. That is, placing a dollar value on each circulation and on each reference answer and measuring the volume of circulation and information given against the cost of operation of the circulating collection and reference desk.

Not withstanding the found preference for bookstores, libraries are valued as [potential] hubs for community activity. Fifty-six percent of those surveyed felt it was very important and 26% felt it was moderately important for the library to serve as a neighborhood or community activity center, as a place for organizational or club meetings, and as a place to present concerts or lectures. Yet, the local school and community recreation center where named as the places which most often served these functions (combined first and second mentions: school, 56%; community recreation center, 50%; public library, 37%). Recall, the library took on more of a broader social function in ancient times, in some of the Carnegie Libraries in the United States, and in design of the Pompidou Center in Paris. Additional functions in these facilities have included a bath, a fitness center, game rooms, a reading garden, and a theater. Perhaps today's libraries need to view--and plan for servicing--information and information gathering in a broader social context as well as re-consider the social function of the public library in the community.

Funding computers and computer-based services for a library, however, can be somewhat problematic. When queried about sources of funding for libraries, forty-three percent favored increasing taxes to cover the necessary costs; 39% favored charging user fees; only 9% favored reducing services offered to the public. When asked how much a year in user fees the survey participant was willing to pay for library services, 35% responded 'nothing,' and 27% responded $10 and 27% responded $25.

One question has an interesting application to the funding problem. When asked 'Now, imagine that you have a personal computer at home. Which would you prefer: * Spending $20 a year to buy disks or information to install on your computer OR * Spending $20 a year in taxes that enable your public library to have an information service that you could access from your home computer,' 52% preferred to use the library, against 33% who preferred to buy disks. [In areas where it is difficult to find public sympathy for funding computer access, perhaps a shift in focus to funding information access via digital media would be more successful in raising bond and other monies for a public library-based technology center.]

In rating the importance of various library services for making difficulty budget decisions, the following services were ranked as most important (to the individual respondent, for the community): reading hours and programming for children (83%, 84%); purchasing new books and printed materials (72%, 68%); maintaining, repairing, building libraries (65%, 62%); providing computers and online services to children and adults who don1t have their own computers (60%, 60%); providing a place where librarians help people find information through computers and online services (58%, 59%); making access to library information possible from home computers (46%, 47%); purchasing computers and providing access to information and online services through computers (42%, 47%).

The Benton Report also looked at how library leaders viewed the library in the digital age. Though some voices in the field of library and information science envision a future of libraries without paper or walls, the Benton Report found library leaders in general want a hybrid institution that contains both digital and book collections (Benton Foundation, 1996). Library leaders and the public generally agree on the role of the library in the, at least near, future. There is an exception to this agreement: the 18-24 year olds, Generation X, were less interested in maintaining and building library buildings, are the least= enthusiastic about the importance of libraries in a digital future, and voted to spend their money on personal computer disks rather than contribute the same amount in tax dollars to the library for purchasing digital information for home use. Men were less supportive than women on most aspects of the library. [One challenge for libraries is to finds ways of reaching these two groups (Generation X and male patrons) and providing information services which they value.]

The Benton Group also conducted a focussed group study with frequent library users. While focus group participants expressed many of the same ideas as did participants in the survey, there were some discrepancies. The frequent library user did not see the library as a leader, especially in technology. In looking into the future, the focus group saw the library in thirty years as a museum of historical archives. (It is interesting that the U.S. Department of Education just transferred funding of libraries to the organization that handles funding for museums. As the first calls for proposals under this reorganization begin to unfold this year, it will be interesting to see what types of library activities will be funded, that is, if the focus will bend toward libraries as museums.) The focus group saw the large bookstore chains, such as Borders and Barnes and Noble as competition for library services, including collection development and atmosphere as a reading and browsing room. Further, this group of frequent library users felt the trained library professional could be replaced with community volunteers. This group of frequent library users was also unwilling to increase taxes to support public libraries.

This study suggests that in the future the support for public libraries will come not from the current regular patron, but from those to whom the library is still a frontier. Most certainly, the library cannot afford to look past the needs of any group. Further, catering the faithful could prove fatal in the end. This study and comments from the spring 1996 conference of library and information management leaders suggests that the library must re purpose itself as a process rather than a structure, enter into creative and collaborative ventures with other organizations, participate more actively in the learning process, and most certainly, strive to embrace and respond to the needs of the currently non-faithful and under-served patron.

ARE THERE DIFFERENT TYPES OF DIGITAL LIBRARIES?

Digital coherence and the home-based user

For the home-based user, digital coherence affords increased access to a libraryUs collection, from an online catalog which can be accessed remotely to fulltext which can turn a home or office into a reading room. Digital coherence, as pointed out by Sloane (1995), permits a broader range of information to open up to those who are disadvantaged in access to information by locality or disability.

Sloane (1995) looks at the ways networks and multimedia are organized and at the problems encountered by home-based (and library-based) users of digital libraries. Sloane presents three models of multimedia information provision: communications complex, media complex, and hybrid models The typical example of the media-complex model is the CD-ROM: All the media is stored on one device and there is no need to communicate with other servers. For the home-based user, this would require physical distribution of the CD-ROM, including updates, to the user. An example of the communications-complex model is the user, without a specific multimedia storage device, linking to one or many media databases. With this model, the user would need to spend time navigating through the networks to find desired information.

An example of a hybrid model is one in which a multimedia information system contains search clients or engines which would link to external databases to locate information not available on the contained system. An application of the hybrid model is a CD-ROM encyclopedia which could be used to gain introductory knowledge of a topic and then, after exhausting relevant knowledge available in the encyclopedia, request an online search---using either pre-designated or user-created search strategies--for current research articles on an aspect of the topic to gain more current or in-depth information. While pre-designated search strategies would be fixed and stored on the CD-ROM, the databases searched would be online rather than on disk, thereby permitting access to the newest updated information.

The communications complex and hybrid models would seem to be the models of choice except for the issue of useful access to the remotely stored information. The speed of data transfer (available bandwidth at user-end) is currently limited. The current generation of fast modems is somewhat adequate for the transfer of text; however, large files and high-volume loads on networks combine to give the home user long waiting times for retrieving information. A recent Web-delivered government registration form of a series of about 200 check-off questions, (one question per screen) was reported by one institution to take about 5-6 minutes to load each screen. In order to complete the required form, the institution needed hire someone for 40 hours for two weeks. This system has, needless to say, since been improved.

When creating digital libraries intended for home users, capability of the usersU equipment to receive the information in a reasonable amount of time needs to be carefully considered. A media complex (CD-ROM) model could cause the user to feel psychologically cut-off from the parent library. The hybrid model, in which a fairly fixed body of reference material could be issued on CD-ROM with links available to various levels of media format at the parent library, could be an acceptable alternative.

Most of the other problems home users encounter with a digital resources can, according to Sloane (1995), can be categorized as navigation and document referral (classification and indexing and shelf location in the book environment). Further, the current systems of referral provide reference at the book or document level. In a digital environment, the preference would be, as Sloane puts it, at the level of "information nuggets." This would be equivalent to a back-of-the book index compiled by an expert human indexer.

Authors including Adam, Bhargava and Yesha (1995), confirm this needed level of granularity and point out that in order for digital libraries 3to be maximally useful, they must be highly organized with useful indexes and intra- and inter-document linkages2 (p. 3).

WHAT CAN DIGITAL LIBRARIES ADD TO TRADITIONAL LIBRARIES?