Get documents about "Introduction / Background
Document Sample
EDNER
Formative Evaluation of the
Distributed National Electronic Resource
Portal Profiling
An analysis of features in a range of Portals
EDNER Deliverable MDB1A
Contact
Professor Peter Brophy
Centre for Research in Library and Information Management
Manchester Metropolitan University
Geoffrey Manton Building
Rosamond St. West
off Oxford Rd.
Manchester M!5 6LL
p.brophy@mmu.ac.uk
47839a87-71a5-4909-88d3-f405e6696e70.doc
EDNER
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals
Version control
Version Date of release Status/Notes
1.0 7th March 2003 Draft
1.1 10th July 2003 Revised for publication
This document should be cited as:
Brophy, P., Fisher, S., Butters, G. (2003) EDNER: Formative Evaluation of the
Distributed National Electronic Resource: Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in
a range of Portals. (Deliverable MDB1A, EDNER Project). Manchester: CERLIM
(The Centre for Research in Library & Information Management).
EDNER – the formative evaluation of the UK higher education sector’s Distributed
National Electronic Resource (DNER) – is a three year project being undertaken by the
Centre for Research in Library & Information Management (CERLIM) at the Manchester
Metropolitan University and the Centre for Studies in Advanced Learning Technology
(CSALT) at Lancaster University. Details of the project’s work and copies of published
reports are available at http://www.cerlim.ac.uk/edner/
EDNER
Contents
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 2
2. Methodology.......................................................................................................... 4
3. Portal types investigated ....................................................................................... 7
3.1 Search Engine (SE) sites ................................................................................. 7
3.2 Internet Service Providers (ISPs) sites ............................................................. 7
3.3 Specialist (vertical) sites .................................................................................. 7
3.4 Academic sites................................................................................................. 7
4. Analysis of portal features ..................................................................................... 9
4.1 Utilities ........................................................................................................ 9
4.2 User Profiling / Content Filtering ................................................................ 11
4.3 Resource Discovery .................................................................................. 12
4.4 News/News Feeds .................................................................................... 15
4.5 Community Communication ...................................................................... 17
4.6 Subject-specific (portal's specialisation) .................................................... 18
4.7 Advertising ................................................................................................ 19
4.8 Education-based ....................................................................................... 20
4.9 Leisure ...................................................................................................... 21
4.10 Miscellaneous services .......................................................................... 21
4.11 Assistance with site use......................................................................... 22
4.12 Additional features found not listed above ............................................. 23
5. Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 25
6. References .......................................................................................................... 26
Appendix 1 Features Matrix ................................................................................. 28
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p1
EDNER
1. Introduction
EDNER - the formative evaluation of the UK higher education sector's Distributed
National Electronic Resource (DNER) - is a three year project being undertaken by
the Centre for Research in Library & Information Management (CERLIM) at the
Manchester Metropolitan University and the Centre for Studies in Advanced Learning
Technology (CSALT) at Lancaster University. One strand of the project is to
undertake an evaluation of the JISC Subject Portals. As part of that work a
systematic investigation of portal features was undertaken in the summer of 2002 to
help develop a profile of features of JISC, institutional, and commercial portals.
Within the EDNER project the term ‘Portal’ has a fairly tight definition as prescribed
by the JISC 5/99 Programme and subsequently the Portal Development Programme.
The 5/99 Programme Call documentation, and more particularly the ‘Town Meeting’
held in London after the Call was announced, suggested that in essence:-
‘A portal accepts requests from users and itself interrogates information
services it believes may hold appropriate resources. It sends queries to those
services and accepts result sets. It then processes those result sets (for
example, by removing duplicates) and presents them to the user. In essence
the user never leaves the portal.’ [1]
This has subsequently been expanded to:-
‘Technically, a portal is a network service that brings together content from
diverse distributed resources using technologies such as cross-searching,
harvesting, and alerting, and collates this into an amalgamated form for
presentation to the user. This presentation is usually via a web browser,
though other means are also possible. For users, a portal is a, possibly
personalised, single point of access where searching can be carried out
across one or more than one resource and the amalgamated results viewed.
Information may also be presented via other means, for example, alerting
services and conference listings or links to e-prints and learning materials.’
[2].
In the wider community the term ‘portal’ is used far more freely to describe web sites
with varying degrees of functionality, for example:-
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p2
EDNER
‘Systems which gather a variety of useful information resources into a single,
'one stop' web page, helping the user to avoid being overwhelmed by info-
glut, or feeling lost on the Web.’ [3]
‘ ...An organising principle that brings like-minded businesses and customers
together, to their mutual benefit. Information is obtained, ads are seen,
products are purchased, and everyone's happy.’ [4]
However, thinking is changing, and the JISC definitions have developed over time.
One draft considered by the JISC funded Subject Portals Project (SPP) [5]
suggested:
‘A portal is an online service that provides a personalised, single point of
access to resources that support the end-user in one or more tasks (resource
discovery, learning, research etc). The resources made available via a portal
are typically brought together from more than one source.’ [6]
Another suggests that a portal is a:
‘...network service that provides access to a range of heterogeneous network
services, local and remote, structured and unstructured. Such network
services might typically include resource discovery services, email access and
online discussion fora. Portals are aimed at human end-users using common
Web 'standards' such as HTTP, HTML, Java and JavaScript.’ [7]
For the purpose of this study a loose interpretation of the term has been accepted so
as to be as inclusive as possible.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p3
EDNER
2. Methodology
An extensive sample of the literature on the subject of portals was scrutinised to gain
an insight into what was being considered as the functionality that differentiated a
portal from a simple web page. Examples of the most relevant literature consulted
are included in the list of references [3, 4, 8-25]. An initial list of features that might
be found in a portal was then compiled from the features suggested in the literature.
Those features consisted mostly of what might be expected in a commercial portal as
provided by popular search engines such as AltaVista, Excite and Yahoo!, or Internet
Service Providers (ISPs) such as AOL, Freeserve and MicroSoft Network(MSN). Also
included are some features from specialist (or vertical) sites such as iVillage,
LibraryHQ and Zdnet, and academic sites such as MyLibrary @ NCState (North
Carolina State University) and MyUCLA (University of California at Los Angeles).
Added to this were portal features contained in a survey [26] conducted on behalf of
the JISC-funded Subject Portals Project (SPP)[5]. The survey results included
features suggested by academic information professionals for inclusion in an
academic subject-based portal, and as such included several items deemed
desirable but not necessarily yet provided in existing portals.
The resultant list was edited for duplication of features under different names, i.e.
where different terminology had been used to describe the same feature. Putting an
interpretation on what someone had meant by a particular term, and whether they
meant the same thing as another person using a similar term, was quite a difficult
task, and some value judgements had to be made in order, as far as possible, to
avoid ambiguity. The problem of interpreting terminology arose again when actually
checking sites for features where each site’s meaning for a term could differ
somewhat. Value judgements were made in order to be as consistent as possible.
However, there was one instance where the offerings of different sites were hardly
the same: the feature ’travel news’ in most instances consisted of news items about
holidays or the prospects for national and international travel. One US university site,
however, didn’t offer that kind of news, but under the title ‘travel news’ offered real-
time up-to-the-minute traffic and public transport news for the local area. This
illustrates how terminology can be used with different nuances of meaning.
The features were grouped where possible into similar types. Some groupings were
fairly obvious: e.g., the features ‘chat’, ‘chat channels’, ‘instant messaging’,
‘computer conferencing’, ‘newsletter’, ‘message boards’, ‘discussion groups’, ‘ask an
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p4
EDNER
expert’ and ‘collaborative working’ all readily fell into the group ‘Community
Communication’; several varieties of news - ‘general’, ‘local’, ‘world’, ‘sport’,
‘weather’, ‘stock market’, - could all be grouped under ‘News’. In some cases,
though, the grouping of the features was somewhat arbitrary and thus fairly
meaningless, so the groupings are of limited significance: the important matter was
that a feature was listed for investigation.
During the investigation, several additional features were found that were deemed to
be worth noting and added to the list as ‘Additional features found’. It is somewhat
surprising that some of the features listed here hadn’t previously been in the list, e.g.
‘Job search’ and ‘Calendar of events’, but their omission could again be the result of
mis-interpretation of terminology. Other additions are perhaps newer features, e.g.
‘SMS text messaging’ and ‘TV listings’. It should also be noted that sites add
features from time to time.
Based on the literature reviewed above, a list of portals for possible analysis was
produced. The list included what various authors suggested were portals, whether or
not the site owners described them as such. Each of the sites on the list was
subjected to a brief initial investigation to confirm its existence and suitability for
inclusion in the analysis. As a result, some sites were excluded. For example, one
site was excluded because its primary focus had changed (a site that was about pets
in general had been taken over by a pet supermarket chain as their own); one had
recently been taken over by another; the extent to which shopping malls offered
services from the features list was found to be so very limited that they would not
provide a useful comparison to the other sites; and some ISP sites (e.g. MSN) could
not be thoroughly analysed without actually becoming a paying subscriber.
MyLibrary@NCState is the name given to software that was developed by Eric Lease
Morgan (http://dewey.library.nd.edu/mylibrary/) and originally implemented at North
Carolina State University. It has since been implemented at a number of other sites,
and nine of these were included in the initial investigation. Since all of these were
very similar to the original implementation, and all of them offered only what the
underlying university library site offered, (albeit organised in a different manner), no
others were included in the final list. MyLibrary - Virginia Commonwealth University
(VCU) was included. It is not an implementation of MyLibrary@NCState, having been
developed independently at VCU.
That initial investigation resulted in a shorter list for thorough analysis. Sites chosen
were categorised into four types: Search-engine based (six); Internet Service
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p5
EDNER
Provider (ISP) based (three); specialist (vertical) (six); and academic (four). Where
there was a UK and a US version of the site, the UK one was listed. It was noted
that UK and US versions are often somewhat different.
A matrix was constructed of the features list against the final sites list, and each site
systematically investigated to find which of the features it offered. For the most part
particular features were available within the site itself, but in some cases a feature
was offered but took the user out of the site - i.e. to another site. This was indicated
in the matrix. However, this was only applied to features that were actually offered
within the portal: having moved to another site using a link in the portal, other
features found on that site were not indicated as available from the portal. Other
cases arose where it was unclear whether a feature exactly matched something in
the features list, and this too was indicated in the matrix. A few cases were found
where it could not be firmly established whether a feature was or wasn’t there, and
again this was indicated in the matrix. As previously noted some additional features
were found that were deemed to be worth noting and added to the list. Having found
a new feature on one site, previously checked sites were re-checked for that
additional feature in case it had been overlooked. The analysis took place between
the first week in June and the first week in October 2002.
Finally, for the purpose of comparison, a fifth category of portal was added: the
JISC-funded Subject Portals Project (SPP) [5] planned features.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p6
EDNER
3. Portal types investigated
Four types of site were investigated.
3.1 Search Engine (SE) sites
AltaVista (UK) http://uk.altavista.com/,
Excite (UK) http://www.excite.co.uk,
LookSmart (UK) http://www.looksmart.co.uk/,
Lycos (UK) http://www-uk.lycos.com/,
Netscape (UK) http://www.netscape.co.uk/,
My Netscape http://my.netscape.com/index2.psp
3.2 Internet Service Providers (ISPs) sites
AOL (UK) http://www.aol.co.uk/,
BTopenworld http://www.btopenworld.com/default,
Freeserve http://www.freeserve.com/
3.3 Specialist (vertical) sites
Fool.com (UK) http://www.fool.co.uk,
iVillage http://www.ivillage.co.uk/,
LibraryHQ.com http://www.libraryhq.com,
Zdnet (UK)http://www.zdnet.co.uk/,
24 hour museum http://www.24hourmuseum.org.uk/,
HERO http://www.hero.ac.uk/
3.4 Academic sites
The four academic portals are actually two ‘MyLibrary’ sites -
My Library (Virginia Commonwealth University)
http://www.library.vcu.edu/mylibrary/
MyLibrary @ NCState (North Carolina State University) http://my.lib.ncsu.edu/
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p7
EDNER
and two ‘institutional’ sites -
My UW (University of Washington) http://myuw.washington.edu/
MyUCLA (University of California at Los Angeles) http://www.my.ucla.edu/.
This distinction is important in some cases and has been made in the analysis when
considering some of the features.
JISC-funded Subject Portals Project (SPP) [5] planned features were added for
comparison.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p8
EDNER
4. Analysis of portal features
Sites differed considerably in what they offered, perhaps indicating that they were
each aimed at a specific target market. The full matrix is included as appendix. A
summary of the availability of features on the sites is as follows:
4.1 Utilities
Channels/Categories:
Some sites offer a vast array (e.g. over 40), others offer only a handful.) Found in all
the Search Engines (SEs) except Excite, which is purely a directory service, all ISPs
and specialist sites, one institutional site and one MyLibrary site. They are not
features of MyLibrary @ VCU and MyUCLA, but are included in SPP planned
features.
Browseable Hierarchical Directories:
Found in most SEs and ISPs, one specialist site (iVillage), but none of the academic
sites.
Email account facilities:
Present in some SEs, all ISPs, one specialist site (iVillage), both institutional sites,
but not MyLibrary sites.
Address Book:
Present in some SEs and ISPs, none of the specialist sites, both institutional sites,
but not in MyLibrary sites.
Bookmark Manager:
Surprisingly, bookmarks were found in only one of each of the SEs and ISPs and
none of the specialist sites, but all of the academic sites.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p9
EDNER
Calculator:
Two of the SEs had calculators and they were also provided by MyLibrary @
NCState (where it is available on the underlying library site).
Calendar:
One each of the SEs, ISPs and specialist sites had a calendar, two institutional sites
had one and also MyLibrary @ NCState (where it is available on the underlying
library site).
Currency Exchange Rates:
Present in some SEs and ISPs, but none of the specialist or academic sites.
Diary/Planner:
Found in only one ISP and one institutional site.
Internet Telephony:
Only one ISP offered this directly at the time of the survey.
Access to Geographical Maps:
Three of the SEs, all ISPs and MyLibrary @ NCState (where it is available on the
underlying library site) provided this facility.
People Finders:
Are offered by one SE, one specialist site, both institutional sites and MyLibrary @
NCState (where it is available on the underlying library site)
Personal Information Storage Space:
Only MyUCLA offered this directly as a service to the user, as distinct from some of
the other sites that requested personal information for their own purposes.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p10
EDNER
Language Translation:
Translation of web pages was provided only by the Search Engine Alta Vista.
Web Space:
(For creating the user’s own Web site) was present in some SEs, all ISPs and one
institutional site.
Zip Code/Post Code:
Look up facilities were provided in one each of the SEs, ISPs and specialist sites
(iVillage).
4.2 User Profiling / Content Filtering
Family Filtering:
The facility to restrict access to material deemed unsuitable, especially for children
was present in some SEs and ISPs. Specialist and academic sites would tend not to
need this because of their specialisation.
Creation of User Profile(s) of interests:
Only MyLibrary @ VCU and MyUW offered this directly, and it is included in SPP
planned features. However, sites that offered some personalisation (see below)
maintained settings between sessions, and so could be considered to be keeping a
personal profile.
Personalisation: (Changing various aspects to suit oneself)
Two SEs, two ISPs, one specialist and all academic sites offered this to some extent,
and it is included in SPP planned features. The need to do so for specialist sites is
limited by the fact that they have a specialism. The most common features offering
personalisation are content, channels displayed, type of news, and display
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p11
EDNER
appearance. Personalisation of links is most common in academic sites, and the
capability to create a ‘my journals’ list is a feature of only MyLibrary sites.
4.3 Resource Discovery
Subject-specific:
(Specialisation of the portal). All the specialist sites offer some sort of resource
discovery for their specialism, and it is included in SPP planned features. This
feature is not to be expected in other types of site.
Single Sign-on Access Management:
This feature provides automated access to all services for which a user is authorized
through a single login to the portal. It is not offered by any of the sites in this study,
except MyLibrary @ VCU which offers it to a very limited degree. It is however
included in SPP planned features.
This is a matter being addressed widely in the academic and commercial sectors.
Many solutions are being introduced in a variety of situations. For example, the
finance company egg plc now offers its customers a single sign-on facility giving
them access to all their egg plc bank accounts, and several portal products from
commercial vendors offer a form of single sign-on.
Resource Descriptions:
These were present in the SE LookSmart, all ISPs to some degree, some specialist
sites and three academic sites. It is a facility that is included in SPP planned
features.
Selected or Quality Assured (QA) content:
QA is specifically claimed by one SE, two ISPs, three specialist sites, three academic
sites and is included in SPP planned features. However, some further explanation is
necessary.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p12
EDNER
The SE LookSmart says in its help pages ‘Each web site is reviewed for quality... ‘,
but this may only apply to specially selected sites and content, the presence of which
is sometimes paid for by the resource provider. Many other search results are from
the web via Google, and as such probably have not been reviewed by LookSmart.
ISP BTopenworld takes its search results from LookSmart and so by inference has
the same QA. Freeserve refers to partners being chosen because of their
commitment to quality.
MyUCLA doesn’t specifically claim any QA but the nature of the host institution infers
QA to the user.
Browse Resources:
One SE (LookSmart), two ISPs, three of the specialist sites and three of the
academic sites feature Browse Resources.
Search Bibliographic database:
The SEs do not provide this feature, but ISPs AOL and Freeserve have partner or
associate sites that offer it. Three of the academic sites offer it, and although UCLA
doesn’t offer it directly, it does allow access to the library site which does. It is
included in SPP planned features.
Search Citation Databases:
It is only present in three of the academic sites, and is included in SPP planned
features.
Search the local Web site (or in-house):
Only available from one of each of the SEs and ISPs, but it is available from all but
one specialist sites and all academic sites.
Search the local OPAC:
Fairly obviously, OPAC searching is only offered by the academic sites, and even
there only indirectly through the institutional library site.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p13
EDNER
Search e-Journals:
The SEs do not provide this, but again ISPs AOL and Freeserve have partner or
associate sites that offer this, and all the academic sites offer it. It is included in SPP
planned features.
Search Tables of Content (TOCs):
These are offered only by three of the academic sites, and the feature is included in
SPP planned features.
Cross-search multiple resources:
This feature allows single searching carried out across many resources
simultaneously, It is not offered by any sites in this study, except indirectly and in a
very limited way by MyLibrary @ NCState via the underlying library site. It is
included in SPP planned features.
Search WWW:
With the exception of three of the specialist sites, all other sites offered this directly.
Often a third-party search engine is used. In some case the third party’s search box
is provided on the host site and it is obvious that the third party is being used. In
other cases, though, only when the results set is returned does it become obvious
that some or all of them are from the third party. In the case of LookSmart (and thus
BTopenworld whose search results come from LookSmart) a number of hits in the
search results are from ‘featured’ or ‘selected’ (possibly paid-for) listings that have
been ‘... reviewed for quality’. They are followed by ‘related’ results from Google.
Locate, Access/Request, and Deliver/Procure:
These are concepts that do not fit well with SEs, ISPs or most specialist sites
because they are terms peculiar to the information profession. Consequently, of the
sites in this study, 24 Hour Museum and the academic portals offer these features
most obviously, and they are included in SPP planned features. However, almost all
sites offer some sort of access to resources.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p14
EDNER
Access to Alternative Search Engines:
Eight of the sites offered an alternative search engine to their standard one.
4.4 News/News Feeds
In the News/Headlines:
Available in all but one of the SEs, all ISPs, but only one each of the specialist and
academic sites. Is included in SPP planned features.
General news - world:
Available in all but one of the SEs, all ISPs, but only one each of the specialist and
academic sites.
General news - local:
Only in MyNetscape and MyUW. As MyNetscape is US-based, even when
subscribed to and accessed from the UK, all the news is ‘local’ to the USA.
Subject-specific news:
This is news that is specific to the specialism of the site. It is, and can only be,
offered by the specialist sites, although both MyUW and MyLibrary Library @
NCState offer news specific to their respective institutions. Is included in SPP
planned features.
Weather forecast:
A feature that is offered by most SEs and ISPs plus specialist iVillage, and academic
MyUW as part of its local news.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p15
EDNER
Weather news:
Some of the sites that offer a weather forecast also provide other weather news.
Stock market prices and Stock market news:
These are offered by half of SEs, all the ISPs, and Fool.com which specialises in
finance, but not by the rest of the specialists nor by the academic sites.
Sports results:
Present in two of each of the SEs and ISPs, none of the specialists and only MyUW
of the academic sites.
Sports news:
Surprisingly, this feature is offered by three of each of the SEs and ISPs; that is one
of each offers sports news but not sports results, presumably because ‘news’ does
not have to be as up-to-the-minute as ‘results’.
Entertainment news:
Offered by most SEs in some form, all ISPs, and specialist iVillage, but not the
academic sites.
Travel news:
General travel news is provided by three SEs and two ISPs. Under this heading,
MyUW offers local traffic and public transport news.
Job vacancy ads/announcements:
This feature was available on a few of the non-academic sites. What was more
common was a ‘Job Search’ facility, which is described under ‘Additional features
found’ below.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p16
EDNER
Message of the day:
This was only offered as such by MyNetscape, although other headline-type features
could be considered to be similar to this and are to be found on many of the sites.
Alerting Service (to new or updated resources):
Offered only by MyNetscape (but news feeds are almost all US-based), HERO, both
MyLibrary sites, and is included in SPP planned features. Each of these services
was selective by user profile, and alerts were sent by email or web site message.
4.5 Community Communication
Chat (real-time) (Internet Relay Chat):
Chat facilities were available in three SEs, all the ISPs, specialist iVillage and
academic MyUCLA.
Chat Channels:
These were available in the same three SEs and ISPs as above, but not by iVillage
or MyUCLA.
Instant Messaging:
Is only offered by two SEs and all ISPs.
Computer Conferencing: Not offered as such by any of the portals, but could be
construed as just a specific use of ‘Chat’.
Newsletter / e-Zine / I-journal:
The newsletter facility was found in one SE, one ISP, three specialists and one
Institutional site. MyUCLA offered access to a newsletter not actually run by the site.
None of these had any peer-review process.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p17
EDNER
Bulletin / Message boards:
Found in one SE, two ISPs, three specialists and one each of the MyLibrary and
Institutional sites.
Online Discussion Groups / NewsGroups:
None of the Search Engines had discussion groups, but they were provided in all
ISPs, three specialists and one Institutional site.
Find / ask an expert:
Offered as such only by iVillage.
Collaborative working:
Not a facility that was offered by any of the sites in this study.
4.6 Subject-specific (portal's specialisation)
By definition, this category is more likely to be offered by the specialist sites.
ePrint archive:
This was not offered by any site in this study.
FAQs:
Found to be present on the specialist site HERO only.
Funding sources:
Present on two specialist sites, LibraryHQ and HERO.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p18
EDNER
Glossary of subject terms:
Again, only found on specialist site HERO.
Links to related web sites:
Provided by three specialist sites.
Register of Research:
Offered indirectly by only one specialist HERO.
Software Plugins:
No subject-specific software is offered by any site.
4.7 Advertising
Adverts - general:
Carried by all SEs and ISPs, two specialists, but no academic sites.
Adverts - Subject-specific: (That is, specific to the portal's subject area)
Obviously these were only applicable to specialist sites, and three of those carried
them.
Adverts – classified:
These were only found in one SE and one specialist site.
Conference announcements:
Two specialists sites (LibraryHQ and HERO) provided conference announcements,
but also are included in SPP planned features.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p19
EDNER
Other (non-leisure) events announcements:
Other event announcements are found on the two specialist sites (LibraryHQ and
HERO), on one academic site (MyUW), and are included in SPP planned features.
Entertainment events announcements:
Provided specifically by only three SEs, one ISP and MyUW.
4.8 Education-based
Courses / Course announcements:
Announcements are alluded to indirectly by one ISP (BTopenworld) and one
specialist (HERO), and made directly by one specialist (Zdnet (UK)) and one
Institutional site (MyUW).
Web based learning resources:
These resources are accessed indirectly from one ISP (Freeserve), mentioned
directly by one specialist (HERO) and one Institutional (MyUW), and are included in
SPP planned features.
‘Courseware’ – course-specific information:
Not offered by any sites in this study.
Library account, Library borrowing record, and ILL requests access: These
features are clearly only applicable to academic sites of which three offer access to
these, directly or indirectly.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p20
EDNER
4.9 Leisure
Horoscopes:
Are present on two SEs, all ISPs and one specialist (iVillage).
Online Shopping:
Most SEs, all ISPs, and three specialists have online shopping facilities
Interviews/chat with celebrities:
These featured on one ISP and are occasionally found on the specialist iVillage.
4.10 Miscellaneous services
Book reviews:
None were found.
Online surveys:
None were found.
Budget-management software – corporate, - personal:
Something similar to this is provided by specialist Fool.com
Organization chart:
Could be accessed indirectly by MyLibrary @ NCState.
Press release submission:
Not found on any site.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p21
EDNER
CV submission:
Provided by one SE, two ISPs, two specialists, but no academic.
e-Commerce:
Only present on Zdnet.
Online banking / finance:
Present on one SE, two ISPs, and one specialist.
4.11 Assistance with site use
Support and guidance and Immediate help / help pages:
Almost all of the sites provided this in some form or other. In many cases the on-
screen instructions were sufficiently clear (for example, there was an explanation as
to what will happen on clicking a link) to count as this feature. Sometimes assistance
was available via a chat or instant messaging system, and sometimes via a
telephone help line. In many cases help pages were immediately available, and are
included in SPP planned features. However, in the cases of one SE (Excite) and one
specialist (24 Hour Museum) neither of these features could be found.
Your Librarian (access to a librarian specialising in the users’ subject area) :
The feature is not really applicable to SEs, ISPs or specialists. It is provided by both
MyLibrary sites and indirectly by MyUW.
Site map:
Is not provided by any of the SEs nor the academic sites. Only one ISP (Freeserve),
and five of the specialist sites (the exception being 24 Hour Museum) do specifically
provide a site map.
Feedback option:
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p22
EDNER
It is offered specifically by almost all sites in this study, and is included in SPP
planned features. Those that did not provide it (LookSmart, Netscape (UK) and
Freeserve) had contact details, but did not actually encourage feedback as such.
4.12 Additional features found not listed above
Job search:
This facility was found in two SEs, three ISPs and three specialist sites, but was not
provided by the academic sites, which did nott offer job vacancy advertising either.
SMS text messaging:
Provided by one of the SEs, two ISPs and one of the specialists. This is a relatively
new feature and may well be introduced by other sites after this study, (in fact one of
the ISPs introduced this feature during the period of this study.)
TV listings:
Three of the SEs, all the ISPs, and one specialist site (iVillage) contained TV listings.
They were available indirectly from MyUW.
Online resource submission:
This is the ability to suggest or submit online resources for inclusion in the portal and
was only offered by the specialist site, 24 Hour Museum.
Games:
Present on three of the SEs, all of the ISPs and two of the specialist sites.
Searching via a map:
One of the SEs and two of the specialist sites offered this feature.
Calendar of events:
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p23
EDNER
Two specialist sites and one each of the MyLibrary and Institutional sites have event
calendars.
Counselling on-line:
This is an innovative feature offered by MyUCLA.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p24
EDNER
5. Conclusions
A very few years ago portals were seen as promising to fulfil the premise of a one-
stop-shop, where users would opt for the one portal of choice. However, it was noted
during this study that the more features a site offered, the more congested the screen
could be. It is not intended to discuss this further here except to note that some sites
dealt with this matter better than others. However, it is likely that if a portal was to
attempt to provide ‘all things for all people’ - and certainly if it attempted to provide
the majority of the functionality listed here - there might be too much on one screen
and too many channels to choose from. Thus no single portal is likely to serve all
purposes. Different portals will require suitable sets of features as appropriate to the
job in hand.
Chris Awre and Alicia Wise remark:
‘Portals are seen by many as the way to open doors on the web to
information and knowledge. Alongside this consensus of sorts, though, the
debate on what a portal is and how portals can best be developed continues.’
[27]
Clearly the concept of portals is still developing and there remains a lot of uncertainty
as to the products which will, in the end, attract and keep the interest of users.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p25
EDNER
6. References
1. Joint Information Systems CommitteeJISC Circular 5/99: Developing the
DNER for Learning and Teaching (1999)
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/pub99/c05_99.html and Notes from a town meeting on
JISC Circular 5/99, 1999. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/pub99/c05_99_mtg.html
2. Joint Information Systems Committee Portals: Frequently Asked Questions,
2000. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=ie_portalsfaq
3. Portals in Higher Education, EDUCAUSE Review 35, no.4 July/August 2000,
p.30 in Personalized library portals as an organizational culture change
agent, Lakos, A, Gray, C, Information Technology in Libraries, 19(4)
December 2000, p.169-174.
4. O'Leary, M, Grading the Library Portals, Online, 24(6) November/December
2000, p.38-44
5. Subject Portals Project, 2002 http://www.portals.ac.uk/spp/
6. Stuckes, J. Avoiding portal wars: a JISC view, 2002.
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/workshops/webmaster-2002/
7. Miller, P. The concept of the portal. Ariadne, 30, 2002.
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue30/portal/
8. Guenther, Kim, Customized data delivery through web portals, Online,
November/December, 2002.
9. Hane, P.J., Dialog announces Info Pro Portal, Information Today, 17 (1),
January, 2000
10. Lakos, A, Gray, C. Personalized library portals as an organizational culture
change agent, Information Technology in Libraries, 19(4) December, 2000.
11. Minkel, W, Portal Combat, School Library Journal, May, 2000.
12. Jacso, P, Portals, Vortals and Mere Mortals, Computers in Libraries, 21 (2),
February, 2001.
13. What is a Portal, Anyway? Judith Boettcher interviews Howard Strauss,
CREN Tech Talk Series, January 2000
http://www.cren.net/know/techtalk/trans/portals_1.html
14. Bradley, P, Internet portals, Records Management Bulletin, 98 (16), August,
2000.
15. Goodman, A & Kleinschmidt, C, Frequently Asked Questions about Portals,
Traffick.com, March, 2000. http://www.traffick.com/article.asp?aID=9
16. Rowley, J, Portal Power, Managing Information, 7 (1), January/February
2000.
17. Ketchell, D. S.,Too Many Channels: Making sense out of portals and
personalisation, Information Technology in Libraries, 19(4) December, 2000.
18. Swisher, Bob, UCLA Gives Students a Personalized Contact With School, it-
fyi email list, September, 1998. http://www.ou.edu/archives/it-fyi/0357.html
19. Stoner, M, Getting Personal, Currents, March, 2000.
http://www.case.org/currents/2000/March/Stoner.cfm
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p26
EDNER
20. Wetzel, K A, Portal Functionality Provided by ARL Libraries: Results of an
ARL Survey, ARL Bimonthly Report 222, June 2002.
http://www.arl.org/newsltr/222/portalsurvey.html
21. Parapadakis, G, Collaborative, Corporate and Enterprise Portals, Information
Management & Technology, May/June 2001.
22. Geenstein, D and Healy, L W, Print and Electronic Information: Shedding
New Light on Campus Use, EDUCAUSE Review, September/October 2002.
23. Deans, K R and von Allmen, A, Poo Poo Portals At Your Peril, AusWeb02,
July 2002. http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw02/papers/refereed/deans/paper.html
24. White, M, The ins and outs of portals, Information World Review, March 2001
25. Clark, J, Subject portals,. Ariadne, 29, 2001.
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue29/clark/intro.html
26. Mathematics Portals Project. Portal development. 2002
http://www.mathgate.bham.ac.uk/mathsportal/Developments.asp
27. Awre, C and Wise, A, Portal progress, CILIP Library and Information Update,
1 (6), September, 2002.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p27
EDNER
Appendix 1 Features Matrix
Portals Features
Portal Type> Search Engines ISPs Specialist (vertical) Academic Portals SPP
Subject Portals Project
MyLibrary @ NCState
Virginia Commonwealth Uni
* = feature available and user stays in the Portal
24 hour museum
LookSmart (UK)
Planned Features
o = feature available but takes user out of Portal
LibraryHQ.com
Netscape (UK)
Fool.com (UK)
Altavista (UK)
(Uni of Washington)
My Netscape
Btopenworld
~ = unsure whether feature there as described
Lycos (UK)
Zdnet (UK)
Freeserve
AOL (UK)
? = unsure whether feature is there at all
MyLibrary
MyUCLA
My UW
For other symbols see "notes" at end of table
ivillage
HERO
Excite
Portal>
Feature date tested> .6/6 .24/7 .25/7 .25/7 .6/9 .3/9 .25/7 .8/8 .26/7 .9/8 .30/9 .6/9 .4/10 .12/8 .12/8 .13/8 .13/8 .14/8 .1/10
Utilities:-
Channels / Categories * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ *
Browseable Hierarchical Directories * * * * * * * * ~
Email account facilities - full system * * * * * * * *
Email account facilities - read other accounts
Address book * ~ * * *
Bookmark Manager * * * * * *
Calculator * * o
Calendar * * * * o *
Currency exchange rates * * o * *
Diary / Planner * *
Internet telephony *
Access to Geographical Maps * * o o * o o
People finder * * * o *
Personal information storage space o
Language Translation (of web pages) *
Web space (for creating own web site) * * * * * o
Zip Code/Post Code look-up * * ~
User profiling / Content filtering:-
Family filtering * *b * *
Creation of User Profile(s) of interests * * *
Personalisation to some extent * * * * * * * * * *
of portal content * * * * * * ~ *
of channels displayed * * * * *
of display/customisation of appearance * * * * * * * * *
of alerting service / SDI * * *
of news/news feeds * * * *
of links to other sites * * * * * * *
‘my journals’ list creation * *
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p28
EDNER
Portals Features
Portal Type> Search Engines ISPs Specialist (vertical) Academic Portals SPP
Subject Portals Project
Virginia Commonwealth Uni
MyLibrary @ NCState
* = feature available and user stays in the Portal
24 hour museum
LookSmart (UK)
Planned Features
o = feature available but takes user out of Portal
LibraryHQ.com
Netscape (UK)
Fool.com (UK)
(Uni of Washington)
Altavista (UK)
My Netscape
Btopenworld
~ = unsure whether feature there as described
Lycos (UK)
Zdnet (UK)
Freeserve
AOL (UK)
? = unsure whether feature is there at all
MyUCLA
MyLibrary
ivillage
HERO
My UW
Excite
Portal>
Feature date tested> .6/6 .24/7 .25/7 .25/7 .6/9 .3/9 .25/7 .8/8 .26/7 .9/8 .30/9 .6/9 .4/10 .12/8 .12/8 .13/8 .13/8 .14/8 .1/10
Resource Discovery:-
Subject-specific (Portal's specialisation) e * ~ * * * * *
Single sign-on Access Management ~ *
Resource descriptions * * * o * * * o * o *
Selected (quality assured) content *a *c o ~ * * o * o *
Resource rating o
Browse resources * * o * * * o o o
Search Bibliographic database o o o o o *
Search Citation database o o ? *
Search local web site (or in-house) * * * * * * * o * o *
Search local OPAC o o o o
Search e-Journals o o o o o o *
Search Tables of Content (TOCs) o o ? *
Cross-search multiple resources d *
Search WWW * * *f * * *f *f *f *f * * of * * *f *
Locate * * o * o *
Access/request o o o o o o o o o o * * * o * o *
Deliver/procure o * o *
Alternative search engines o o o ~ * o o *
News/news feeds:-
In the News/Headlines o * * * * * * * * * *
General news - world o o * * * * * * * *
General news - local * *
Subject-specific (Portal's specialisation) news * * * * * * * o *
Weather forecast * * * * * * * * *
Weather news * * * * * o
Stock market prices * * * * * o *
Stock market news * * * * * o *
Sports results * * o * *
Sports news o * * * * * * *
Entertainment news o * * * * * * *
Travel news o * * o * * ?
Job vacancy ads/announcements * o * * o
Message of the day *
Alerting Service * * *~ * *
selective by user profile * * * * *
general
by email * * * * *
by web site message * *
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p29
EDNER
Portals Features
Portal Type> Search Engines ISPs Specialist (vertical) Academic Portals SPP
Subject Portals Project
Virginia Commonwealth Uni
MyLibrary @ NCState
* = feature available and user stays in the Portal
24 hour museum
LookSmart (UK)
Planned Features
o = feature available but takes user out of Portal
LibraryHQ.com
Netscape (UK)
Fool.com (UK)
(Uni of Washington)
Altavista (UK)
My Netscape
Btopenworld
~ = unsure whether feature there as described
Lycos (UK)
Zdnet (UK)
Freeserve
AOL (UK)
? = unsure whether feature is there at all
MyUCLA
MyLibrary
ivillage
HERO
My UW
Excite
Portal>
Feature date tested> .6/6 .24/7 .25/7 .25/7 .6/9 .3/9 .25/7 .8/8 .26/7 .9/8 .30/9 .6/9 .4/10 .12/8 .12/8 .13/8 .13/8 .14/8 .1/10
Community Communication:-
Chat (real-time) * * * * * * * *
Chat Channels * * * * * *
Instant Messaging * * * * *
Computer conferencing
Newsletter / eZine / Ijournal * * * * * * o
Peer-Reviewed
Bulletin / Message boards * * * * * * o *
Online Discussion Groups / NewsGroups * * * * * * *
Find / ask an expert *
Collaborative working
Subject-specific (Portal's specialisation):-
ePrint archive
FAQs *
Funding sources * *
Glossary of subject terms *
Links to related web sites * * *
Register of Research o
Software Plugins *
Software tools
Subject idiosyncrasies *
Advertising
Adverts - general * * * * * * * * * * *
Adverts - Subject-specific (Portal's specialisation) * * *
Adverts - classified * *
Conference announcements * o *
Other (non-leisure) events announcements * o * *
Entertainment events announcements * * * * *
Education-based
Courses / Course announcements o * o *
Web based learning resources o * * *
‘Courseware ‘ - course-specific information
Library account access * o o
Library borrowing record access * o o
ILL requests access o o o
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p30
EDNER
Portals Features
Portal Type> Search Engines ISPs Specialist (vertical) Academic Portals SPP
Subject Portals Project
Virginia Commonwealth Uni
MyLibrary @ NCState
* = feature available and user stays in the Portal
24 hour museum
LookSmart (UK)
Planned Features
o = feature available but takes user out of Portal
LibraryHQ.com
Netscape (UK)
Fool.com (UK)
(Uni of Washington)
Altavista (UK)
My Netscape
Btopenworld
~ = unsure whether feature there as described
Lycos (UK)
Zdnet (UK)
Freeserve
AOL (UK)
? = unsure whether feature is there at all
MyUCLA
MyLibrary
ivillage
HERO
My UW
Excite
Portal>
Feature date tested> .6/6 .24/7 .25/7 .25/7 .6/9 .3/9 .25/7 .8/8 .26/7 .9/8 .30/9 .6/9 .4/10 .12/8 .12/8 .13/8 .13/8 .14/8 .1/10
Leisure
Horoscopes * * * o * *
Online Shopping * * * * * * * * * *
Interviews/chat with celebrities * ~
Online concerts
Miscellaneous services
Book reviews
Online surveys
Budget-management software - corporate ~
Budget-management software - personal ~
Organization chart o
Press release submission
CV submission * * * * o
e-Commerce *
Online banking / finance * o * o
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p31
EDNER
Portals Features
Portal Type> Search Engines ISPs Specialist (vertical) Academic Portals SPP
Subject Portals Project
Virginia Commonwealth Uni
MyLibrary @ NCState
* = feature available and user stays in the Portal
24 hour museum
LookSmart (UK)
Planned Features
o = feature available but takes user out of Portal
LibraryHQ.com
Netscape (UK)
Fool.com (UK)
(Uni of Washington)
Altavista (UK)
My Netscape
Btopenworld
~ = unsure whether feature there as described
Lycos (UK)
Zdnet (UK)
Freeserve
AOL (UK)
? = unsure whether feature is there at all
MyUCLA
MyLibrary
ivillage
HERO
My UW
Excite
Portal>
Feature date tested> .6/6 .24/7 .25/7 .25/7 .6/9 .3/9 .25/7 .8/8 .26/7 .9/8 .30/9 .6/9 .4/10 .12/8 .12/8 .13/8 .13/8 .14/8 .1/10
Assistance with site use
Support and guidance * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * * *
Immediate help / Help pages * * * ~ * * * * * * * * *
Your Librarian * o *
Site map * * * * * *
Feedback option * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Additional features found not listed above:-
Job search * * * o o * * o
SMS text messaging * * * *
TV listings * * * * o * * o
Online resource submission *
Games ~ * * * o * * o
Searching via a map * * *
Calendar of events * * o *
Counselling on-line *
Notes
a Looksmart says in its help pages "Each web site is reviewed for quality . . ", but this may only apply to
specially selected sites and content, the presence of which is sometimes paid for by the resource provider:
many other search results are from are from the web via Google and as such probably have not been reviewed
by LookSmart.
b Looksmart says in its help pages "sites containing adult content or inciting violence and hatred are not
included in the Directory."
c Btopenworld search results come from Looksmart; see note a.
d MyLibrary@NCState allows access to the Library's facility for 'cross-searching'(?) other academic library
OPACS: whether live or from a union catalogue or harvested metadata is not known.
e MyNetscape, although accessed through Netscape's UK site, has all US content.
f In a WWW search, many, in some cases all, of the search results are from Google for the following sites:-
HERO; Looksmart; MyNetscape; AOL; Freeserve; Btopenworld (results are from Looksmart);
MyLibrary@NCState.
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p32
EDNER
Portal Profiling - An analysis of features in a range of Portals p33
Related docs
Other docs by HC121001085946
citizenship is really about learning to live together in a group or community
Views: 0 | Downloads: 0
