"'Tis
better to light a candle than to curse the darkness," so they say. How
much wattage do you think all we information professionals could generate
if we really tried? How much dark could we enlighten if we searchers got
those honeybees humming and the wicks a-dipping in that melted beeswax?
Let's try. But
what heart of darkness should we concentrate our efforts upon? Personally,
I suggest that we pick a target that others do not see, one that we know
has high potential, but that the laity, even technically sophisticated
laypersons, might not recognize as the underpinning of future important
content flows.
A simple one springs
to mind. Everyone go to your institutional Web sites. If your institution
doesn't have a Web site — well, then you probably are too busy to read
the rest of this article. (Shame! Fie!) But if you don't want to target
your Web site, then target a site of a major vendor or publisher or some
frequently used Favorite/Bookmark.
Ready? Okay. Look
for the contact information. It might be a sub-entry under "About Us" or
it might just be "Contact Us." No fair if the "Contact Us" triggers an
Outlook Express window popping up. Searchers have a right to contact institutions
using the medium they choose — snailmail, telephone, fax, etc.; they shouldn't
have to obey the communication format dictations of the recipient.
In any case, people
use contact information for more than just contacting concerns. They use
it as part of a critical assessment process. How often do you seek contact
information just to verify the country or state of the site's owner? Or
perhaps you hope to find out their affiliation with larger concerns? Then
there are the sites that use a product or service or publication name as
the domain name instead of the parent corporation. Fine, if users have
full knowledge of the background of the product or service or publication,
but not so fine if you still have questions about the vendor as a company
or institution.
The absence of
easily and universally accessible contact information on Web sites is more
than an inconvenience to users. In e-commerce dealings, the absence can
be a deal breaker. Users start to worry about why this vendor won't supply
the most basic information about itself. Suddenly, those ancient, atavistic
fears start rising from the id, fears of the unreality of shopping in a
world with no shops. Suspicions run rampant — "Hmmm. They want my address
— shipping AND billing — not to mention my credit card number, but when
I ask the simplest question — like 'Who are you and where are you? ...
Hmmm."
Even in the relatively
benign worlds of dot-edus and dot-govs, the lack of specific contact information
can irritate searchers. Many monster Web sites with hundreds and thousands
of pages have a Contact section, but only one for the entire institution.
One assumes that people will want to get in touch with specific departments
or subsidiaries or subagencies or on-campus institutes. A post office box
number, city, state, and ZIP code for an entire institution just doesn't
cut it.
Oh, and don't you
just love the sites, particularly dot-govs, where you get down to the specific
level, the specific office, the specific bureaucrat you need to reach,
you click on their contact information and get a phone number with no area
code or a mail code with no street address? ("Well, Postal Person, I think
it's in the nation's capitol somewhere, but you'll know it when you see
it because the office door will have a big A384 on it...I think.") I remember
one site which gave me all the information I needed at the sub-sub-sub-page
level except for the ZIP code. To get that one element I had to
forage all the way back up to the parent agency.
So what's all this
got to do with information professionals? Well, we know that sites should
contain that basic kind of information. We know the way that information
should be tagged — nothing cute, just the most common language possible
("Contact"). We know where it should appear — on the top or side of every
page, a quick click away. We also know that, if kept standardized and universally
available, it would be an easy matter for some Net Newbie — or some "golden
oldie" that wants to improve their products and processes — to skim through
the open Web on a regular basis and give us a useful, complete set of institutional
directories.
How about it? Others
complain about the Web. We fix it. Others kick and cuss. We get out and
push. We're the Web version of the Navy's Seabees, "The difficult we do
immediately. The impossible takes a little longer." Solutions 'R' Us.
Right?! Damn straight!
And besides, when it comes to building industrial strength Web sources,
you go to the people who know best, the people who were online before online
was online. Info pros! When it comes to the basics, the solid stuff, the
Web is ours, and what we own, we keep in working order. It's a dirty job,
but someone's got to do it.
...bq
|