Analyzing RSS applications on library web sites

Introduction

Web sites are one of the prime mediaof communication and an organisation’s“virtual representation to the world”.Recognizing the usefulness of web sites,commercial, social and entertainmentdomains have long been developingweb-based information systems (Teoet al., 2003). To support the academiccommunity, libraries too have beengradually transforming traditionallibrary services to online informationservices by upgrading the cyber-infrastructure of the libraries (Balajiand Kumar, 2011). The web siteprovides access to informationresources, online catalogues, news andevents while providing informationabout library collections and facilities.However, due to rapid growth of theinternet and easy accessibility of onlineresources and facilities, libraries merelyhaving web sites will not attract many ofusers (Chua and Goh, 2010). They needto create web sites where users findpossibilities for interaction, experiencefreedom and get high quality onlineexposure. This necessitates that librariesintroduce Web 2.0 technologies thatencourage users’ involvement inpromoting web-based library services,potentially expanding the scope oflibrary facilities beyond physicalboundaries and the working hours ofthe library. One of these Web 2.0applications is RSS, the acronym for“Rich Site Summary”/“Really SimpleSyndication”/“RDF Site Summary”.

RSS is an XML based web contentsyndication format (Libby, 1999) thatallows users to access frequentlypublished and updated works(Wusteman, 2004; Buigues-Garcia andGimenez-Chornet, 2012) and greatlysupports the purpose of informationmanagement (Harinarayana and Raju,2010). It is used to automatically and

selectively pull in updated informationby scanning many webpagessimultaneously. To provide variousinstructions in a lively and attractiveway, libraries episodically release audioor video podcasts that can beautomatically downloaded with RSS(De Sarkar, 2012).

The major advantage of RSS is thatone need not understand the technologyof this application to use it (Click andPetit, 2010). RSS reader, a specialsoftware, collects a large number ofRSS feeds and displays them to a user,relieving the user of searching for newcontent, and reducing informationoverload. RSS feeds are formattedprecise information sources linked todedicated URLs (Kim and Abbas,2010). Users can subscribe to RSSfeeds of new additions and stay currentwith updated web content (Britt, 2005).Users can receive notification aboutnew arrivals in the library, new articlespublished in e-journals, newly addedtopics in news and events sections, andmuch more (Bradley, 2007; Chowdhuryet al., 2007; Kroski, 2008).

Problem statement

This emerging technology, RSS, hasmade sharp inroads in diverse fields.Over the last few years, it has earnedincreasing attention in educationalsectors as an evolving educationaltool, facilitating communication andcollaboration in teaching and learningenvironments (D’Souza, 2006; Dieuand Stevens, 2007; Lee et al., 2008;Lan and Sie, 2010; Montalvo et al.,2010; Maio et al., 2012), has often beenemployed in the health sector(Karpinski, 2008; Marton, 2011) andhas become more common in libraries(Ram et al., 2011; Nesta and Mi, 2011).However, the majority of the earlier

research articles relating to theapplication of RSS in libraries eitherconcentrated on case studies in aparticular library (Neilson, 2008),described some of its potentialfeatures (Anderson, 2006; Cooke,2006), guided librarians on how to useit (Blansit, 2006), dealt withtechnicalities on the nature of RSS andits application (Kelly, 2005; Armstrong,2007), or gave an overview of theapplication of Web 2.0 tools, focusingon RSS along with other web-basedapplications (Nguyen, 2008;Harinarayana and Raju, 2010; Si et al.,2011). Though several authors havestressed the potential benefits of usingRSS in the library (Bradley, 2006; Wuand Li, 2007; Kroski, 2008; Neilson,2008), still less is known about howdifferent types of libraries areembracing this emerging technologyand using it to enhance library servicesacross the globe.

RSS has immense potential toimprove web-based communication,providing updated information to thetarget group and keeping theminformed with the latest information(Tripathi and Kumar, 2010; Chua andGoh, 2010). The main advantage ofRSS is its “merits of simplicity,timeliness, extensive sources andpersonalization of syndication andwithout interference of informationrubbish” (Si et al., 2011). Despitebeing a viable option for libraries tointroduce RSS as a novel way to reachout to the users’ communities (Bradley,2007; Kroski, 2008), scant attention hasbeen paid to the extent of itsimplementation across differentgeographical regions (Chua et al.,2008). Additionally, there has beenlack of concerted efforts to compare thedegree of prevalence of RSS inacademic libraries where it is meetingthe needs of the academic community

4 Library Hi Tech News Number 5 2012, pp. 4-21, q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 0741-9058, DOI 10.1108/07419051211262072

Analyzing RSS applications on library web sites

Tanmay De Sarkar

and public libraries, and catering todissimilar groups sharing diverseinterests across different socio-economic cultures.

Very little research based literatureis available to date that highlights thesurvey and evaluation of RSS amongpublic and academic libraries across thecontinents. There are few articlesillustrating with examples how thisweb-based application is beingpotentially harnessed in libraries toprovide information services to thepresent day user communities.Research on RSS is needed, especiallywith a view toward developing a goodunderstanding of each of thefunctionalities of RSS. The field needsto study how RSS is being utilized tosatisfy varying information needs of theusers, and to holistically examine andassess its implementation in bothacademic and public libraries acrossthe globe. Hence the paper seeks toaddress following research questions:

RQ1. In what ways is RSS beingutilized in libraries?

RQ2. To what extent is RSS prevalentin libraries?

Objective of the study

The present study was particularlyrelevant because a comprehensivereview of the RSS functionalities indifferent types of libraries across theworld was still elusive. Supported bynumerous examples of libraries usingRSS along with the analysis of each ofthe RSS features adopted, the studyaims at drawing the attention of librarystakeholders about the ways RSS isbeing implemented to add a newdimension in users’ service. Toaddress the above research question,the following objectives are set to beachieved:

(1) To examine the characteristics ofRSS used in libraries and toinvestigate its purpose of use.

(2) To measure the degree ofimplementation of RSS in librariesacross the continents.

Scope of the study

The present study, being a part ofsocial science research, was based on

the survey method. The survey wasconfined to academic and publiclibraries of four continents – Asia,Australia, Europe and North America.The libraries of four continents selectedfor the study were definitely not arepresentative sample of the entireuniverse of libraries. However, thescope was set in such way as largenumbers of library web siteswere available in those regions, andthe web sites were also easily accessibleto the researcher.

Literature review

Most of the publications on RSSidentified a long list of possible areaswhere this technology can beeffectively implemented, encouragingthe researcher to delve into thepotentiality of this viable web-basedapplication in library web sites.Individual case studies have beendemonstrated in several papers.However, research on its prevalenceand extent of implementationencompassing different types oflibraries across the world is hard to find.

Maness (2006) envisioned that to berelevant to present day’s context,libraries needed a major paradigmaticshift, not only using their web site toprovide access to resources but alsoaccess to their control, opening agateway of “collaborative discoverysystems” where users seek and utilizeinformation not as individuals but ascommunities. Addressing variousissues illustrating the use of Web 2.0applications in libraries, he pointed outthat RSS feeds provide users a novelway to syndicate and republish contentson the net, and also observed thatlibraries were still to explore ways touse RSS more pervasively. Cold (2006)opined that RSS can be used as apotential media for data mining fromthe internet. Using the RSS aggregator,RSS content that suits the users’requirements can be collocated byscanning through multiple sites(Lee et al., 2008). Bradley (2007)identified a lot of possible areaswhere this technology can be effectivelyintroduced in libraries. Kroski (2008)neatly illustrated some best practices forRSS and its usability in libraries.

However, there have beencontradictory views on the nature ofRSS. Some literature (Armstrong,

2007; Wu and Li, 2007; Youngkin,2010) opined that RSS contributes to“push” information proactively to thetarget users while others (Dieu andStevens, 2007; Kim, 2008) opined thatit contributes to “pull”, giving usersfreedom to select content of interest,making users feel less non-intrusive.D’Souza (2006) argued that RSS isbetter compared to pulling technologyas RSS does not advertise (“push”)hoping for the prospective users tocome and visit the web site, but allowsusers to subscribe to feeds and collect(“pull”) it according to theirconvenience.

Lan and Sie (2010) observed thatRSS greatly supports learningactivities. They noted that unlikee-mails and various portals, throughwhich students often subscribe toinformation sources and get floodedwith spams and receive occasional pop-ups and advertisements, RSS sends onlyrelevant information related to theirdesired topic. Harinarayana and Raju(2010), while conducting exploratoryresearch illustrating the use of Web 2.0features in 57 library web sites of highereducational institutes, put forwardthat RSS, being used to disseminatelibrary news and current alerts, canbe visualized as an emergingtool to provide net-based currentawareness services (CAS) and selectivedissemination of information (SDI)services.

Chua and Goh (2010), undertaking asurvey of Web 2.0 applications onlibrary web sites, observed that RSS isprimarily used to disseminate news andevents, and updates of resources. Basedon the information intensive serviceprovided by the library, theyhave proposed a classification of Web2.0 applications fitting the libraryframework. Among the threedimensions of libraries – informationcollection, information processing andinformation dissemination – RSS fitinto the information disseminationcomponent of the library because itsmain purpose is to keep users abreast ofrecent changes made to the webcontent. The study empirically provedthat the use of new web-basedtechnologies enhances the quality ofthe library web site considerably. Theoutcome of the analytical studyreasoned that Web 2.0 functionalitiestogether account for 70.5 per cent of the

Library Hi Tech News Number 5 2012 5

variability in web site quality, of whichRSS is one of the major contributorsthat “supports multilateral flow ofinformation amongst users andlibrarians”.

In an attempt to examine the useand awareness of new web-basedtools by Greek LIS professionals, asfuture librarians, Garoufallou andCharitopoulou (2011) observed thatmost of the students are ignorant aboutthe nature and use of Web 2.0applications, and only a few studentsare familiar with RSS feeds. Theyopined that introducing Web 2.0 toolsinto the LIS school curriculum couldimprove the understanding of new web-based applications and preparegraduates for diverse libraryenvironments.

Balaji and Kumar (2011),investigated the prevalence of use ofnew generation web technologiesamong technological universities insouth India, and reported that contraryto their Western counterpart, Indianuniversities are lagging far behind indeploying web-based informationservices. Despite the potentiality ofWeb 2.0 applications, they noted thatRSS feeds, as a prime component ofnew web-based tools, are beingintroduced in only a handful oflibraries. They argued that academiclibrary web sites in India are yet to beconsidered as “gateways of researchand primary media for informationaccess”. They also reasoned thatimplementation of Web 2.0 applicationsrequire the libraries to be “skilled andpassionate to re-create libraries’mission”.

In a study investigating the statusand construction pattern of Web 2.0applications among selected topChinese university libraries, Han andLiu (2010) found that Catalog 2.0 wasmost commonly used, followed byRSS. In a separate study, examiningthe use of RSS among other Web 2.0applications in Chinese universitylibraries, Si et al. (2011) reportedthat RSS is the most widely used web-based application, though Web 2.0technologies as a whole have yet to beextensively embraced by the universitylibraries that cater to the needs ofinformation seeking communities. Thestudy found that the design of the “RSSinterface” with clear instruction on howto use RSS, classification of feeds, links

to RSS reader downloading service, etc.greatly influences the effectiveness andconvenience of the use of RSS feeds bythe users. Both of the above studies’statistical evidence revealed a basiclevel of applications of RSS along withother Web 2.0 tools adopted by some ofthe Chinese university libraries.

The above studies did not provide acomplete picture of functional featuresof RSS which are being differentiallyembraced by libraries throughout theworld. Therefore, a comprehensivestudy to explore the overall status andfunctional features of RSS employed bydifferent types of libraries across theworld is essential in evaluating the levelof effective implementation of RSS inthe library field.

Apart from these, a few studies werealso conducted on RSS in combinationwith other Web 2.0 technologies tomeasure its rate of implementation insome libraries. Nguyen (2008) surveyed32 university libraries across Australiato study the applications of Web 2.0tools and observed RSS being themostly used application. Aharony(2009), in his research on Israelilibrarians, reported that the personalitycharacteristics, and other factors liketechnical expertise, motivation, andability to integrate different webapplications are essential forimplementation of Web 2.0. Tripathiand Kumar (2010) studied selecteduniversity libraries in Australia,Canada, USA and the UK to examinethe prevalence of Web 2.0 tools andfound that RSS, blogs and instantmessaging are the most popular inuniversity libraries. Kim and Abbas(2010), while investigating the adoptionof Web 2.0 applications amongacademic libraries, pointed out thatRSS and blogs are among the mosthighly utilized applications. Nesta andMi (2011), while reviewing the use ofnew technologies in the library, notedthat the automated feeds of RSS canserve as an excellent marketing tool topromote proper utilization of libraryresources, besides keeping usersupdated with new additions and newsand events. A survey on Web 2.0applications among 27 nationallibraries by Buigues-Garcia andGimenez-Chornet (2012) found thatRSS, as a “user information servicetool”, is one of the most frequentlyimplemented applications among

national libraries. A content survey ofthe Association of Research Libraries’(USA) web sites regarding the use ofWeb 2.0 technologies by Mahmood andRichardson (2011) revealed that RSSwas the most popular among the web-based applications and the study furtherpointed out that most of the academiclibraries prefer RSS for publishingnews and announcements, whereas theapplication of RSS for providing tablesof contents of journals service is leastpreferred among them.

Most of the earlier studies conductedon the use of RSS in libraries focusedon the nature of RSS, concentratingon its application in specific libraries,and guiding librarians on thetechnical aspects of creating, handlingand syndicating RSS feeds. Laterpublications are basically researchoriented work focusing on itsimplementation in conjunction withother Web 2.0 applications thatare mainly restricted to academiclibraries only. Furthermore, to date,very few research based articles on theuse of RSS in libraries are availablethat investigate and evaluate theimplementation of RSS technology,illustrating how different libraries areharnessing this technology. Hence thereremains a gap in this field of researchthat calls for further attention.Therefore, the present study has beenconducted to examine thoroughly thecharacteristics and purpose of use ofRSS in academic and public librariesand to study the extent of its applicationin different types of libraries acrossdifferent continents and provide aconcrete picture of its implementationin libraries.

Methodology

The methodology of content analysiswas used for the present study. Contentanalysis entails “a set of qualitative andquantitative methods for collecting andanalyzing data from verbal, print, orelectronic communication” (Kondrackiet al., 2002). It is a research techniquethat “involves qualitatively extractingthe intended meaning by coding orparaphrasing text” (Woodcock, 2008).Content analysis is used to identify theexistence of specific concepts orkeywords in a given content andrequires a checklist to determine thefrequency of appearance of each of the

6 Library Hi Tech News Number 5 2012

ideas or terms in it (Dixon et al., 1987).The above features of content analysishave made this technique the mostappropriate for this research.

Sampling technique

The convenience sampling methodunder non-probabilistic samplingtechnique was used for the presentstudy. Unlike probabilistic samplingtechnique, this method has somelimitations as it does not guaranteethat each and every element in thepopulation has equal chance of beingincorporated into the study. Still thismethod was chosen because theelements of population can be selectedon the basis of ease of access. Thepopulation under study was fairly bigwith large number of web sites,i.e. the public and academic libraryweb sites across the world, came underthe purview of the research.Moreover, there was no single onlinelibrary directory that comprehensivelycovered each and every element of thispopulation. Therefore, the conveniencemethod was used to pick up elements ofthe population from the sampling framethat was designed by the researcher inan unstructured way, amalgamatingvarious online library directories.

Altogether four samples were drawn,one from each region:

. 50 libraries (25 academic and 25public libraries) each from Asia andAustralia; and

. 80 libraries (40 academic and 40public libraries) each from Europeand North America.

Only the easily accessible library websites, i.e. which were close to the handsof the researcher were selected from theconstructed sampling frame for thestudy. Web sites in non-Englishlanguage and those having restrictedaccess were excluded from the presentwork. Additionally, the conveniencesampling method was preferred to theprobabilistic method to minimizethe time and expenditure needed tocarry out a survey; and therefore thistechnique was chosen by the researcheras a more appropriate method forconducting the present study.

Sampling frame. A total of 260 web

sites of public and academic libraries

from four continents were selected.

In order to minimize systematic bias

that might have occurred due to

adoption of non-random sampling

technique, the researcher ensured that

samples were drawn from appropriate

sampling frame. Therefore, various

online directories were consulted

to gain access to library web sites.

While selecting libraries, sufficient

care was taken to ensure that the

academic and public libraries from

different socio-economic conditions

were accommodated in order to make

the sampling frame exhaustive,

covering the whole universe of the

population under study. Four samples

were drawn from the sampling frame

comprising following web resources:

. Four International Colleges and

Universities (international higher

education directory) (www.

4icu.org/).. Academic Ranking of World

Universities – 2011 (www.shangha

iranking.com/ARWU2011.html).. Canadian Library Gateway-

Canadian Public Libraries North

America: National Libraries (www.

collectionscanada.gc.ca/gateway).. Hennen’s American Public Library

Ratings, 2010 edition (www.haplr-

index.com/HAPLR100.htm).. Libdex (directory of libraries

across the world) (www.libdex.

com/country.html).. Libraries of Asia Pacific Directory

(www.nla.gov.au/apps/lapsdir?

action¼LapsBrowse).. Libweb (listing libraries from 146

countries) (http://lists.webjunction.

org/libweb/).. PublicLibraries.com (public

libraries across the USA) (www.

publiclibraries.com/).. Times Higher Education’s list of

the world’s top universities

for 2011-2012 (www.timeshigher

education.co.uk/world-university-

rankings/).. UK Public Libraries (http://dial

space.dial.pipex.com/town/square/

ac940/weblibs.html).. World Digital Library (www.

wdl.org/en/institution/).

Data collection technique

Data were collected over a four-month period, between August 2011and November 2011, using two-stepcontent analysis. First, the contents ofthe library web sites were studied toidentify the existence of RSS. Thepresence or absence of RSS in thelibrary web site was binary coded either1, i.e. “yes” or 0, i.e. “no”. Data on RSSwere collected from the library’s websites, where RSS were either linkeddirectly to the library’s home page or toa subsequent page. Some RSS werehosted by the library blog and not evendirectly linked through that libraryhome page, and were difficult tolocate from library’s web site. TheGoogle search engine was used tolocate those links to RSS in thelibrary’s web site.

Once a web site was coded 1 for thepresence of RSS, a second round ofanalysis was performed to investigatethe extent of its use. The second step ofcontent analysis is the key to develop agood understanding on how RSS isbeing applied in libraries. It entailsevaluation of the degree of prevalenceof RSS in libraries through gatheringinformation followed by binary codingalong the checkpoints of the researchinstrument. As research instrument, thechecklist was used in the present study.Each checklist carries a series ofstatements called checkpoints, eachwith provisions of alternative answers,either “yes” or “no”.

Reviewing related literature, it wasfound that although some of researchpapers published tools to evaluate Web2.0 applications but until now none ofthe instruments has a complete setof parameters or standards to measureand appraise all of the Web 2.0technologies. Based on the checklistconstituted by Nguyen (2008) forappraising various Web 2.0applications in the universities ofAustralia and the checklist developedby Tripathi and Kumar (2010) forevaluating the use of Web 2.0 tools insome university libraries, the researchinstrument for the current study wasconstructed. The checkpoints withchecklist therein as designed byNguyen (2008) and Tripathi andKumar (2010) were primarily basedon usability criteria of Web 2.0 tools.Nguyen (2008) introduced 95


checkpoints in his checklist and Tripathiand Kumar (2010) incorporated 70checkpoints encompassing variousWeb 2.0 applications.

Checkpoints from both the earlierstudies that entails RSS were puttogether to eliminate duplication. Thefiltered checklist so emerged with themerging of the above two and wasfurther updated with the incorporationof additional inputs derived frombrowsing various library web sitesproviding RSS, together withsynthesized ideas that emerged fromthe literature survey. Next the checklistwas circulated among a few libraryprofessionals who had exposure toinformation technology to cross checkand remove any ambiguities, andfinalized items were selected forinclusion into the instrument. Finallytwo checklists with altogether 19checkpoints have been constructedthrough merging of checkpoints fromNguyen and Tripathi and Kumar alongwith some fresh inputs.

Construction of the researchinstrument. The research instrumentwas made to pass through varioustesting to ensure its usability. First,face validity of the instrument wastested as the checkpoints were vetted byexperts, and consensus was reached onthe relevance to the topic andunambiguity of items. Second, theconcurrent validity of the present scalewas compared with that of Nguyen, asthe face validity of that scale was earlierempirically proved through usage.Moreover, the response categories ofsome of the checkpoints of earlierscales were found to be poor andslightly difficult to answer, thatjustified the construction of a newscale in tune with the earlier scales,maintaining criteria validity.

Third, consistency of the scale wastested by deploying two researchfellows of library and informationscience, who have knowledge on newweb-based technologies. The twoscholars (coders) were given trainingon data collection technique using theinstrument along the checkpoints. Nextthey were advised to carry out anindependent survey of 15 academic and15 public libraries, randomly chosenfrom the original sample of 260 libraryweb sites. The RSS criteria as observedalong the checkpoints were coded

independently by the coders. Theresults of the observations of the twocoders of the same events werecompared using Cohen’s Kappa.The pair-wise inter-coder reliabilityvalues for 19 checkpoints calculatedseparately were found to fall withinranges, 0.82-0.97, indicating almostperfect non-random agreement inobservation among two coders.

Finally, the scale was economicalbecause the number of checkpoints was19 which require little observation time.Again, the scale was also convenient touse because of the presence of properlayout and clear instructions.Furthermore, the scale was easy tohandle as evident by its successfulexecution by the two coders. The abovecriteria justified incorporation of thechecklist as an appropriate researchinstrument for conducting the researchstudy.

Analysis of data

Based on data culled out along theprescribed checkpoints from among260 library web sites, the qualitativefeatures of RSS were quantified andadmitted into a matrix in an Excel sheetand subsequently analyzed to find howthe RSS functionalities are appropriatedinto the library web sites.

Once the inter-coder reliability wastested, the coders sat together with theinvestigator to identify the areas whereslight disagreement in their observationexists. The contents of those web siteswere scanned to resolve any differenceof opinion. The coders, after beingacquainted with the technicalitiesinvolving analytical methods, wereadvised to independently study theremaining 230 library web sites, whichwere equally divided between them,using two-step content analysis. Onthe basis of data entered along thecheckpoints in the checklists, the valueof the characters and purposes of use ofRSS was calculated. Each checkpoint inthe checklist was marked with a value of1 or 0 depending on either “yes” or “no”answers. Two checklists were devised –one with nine checkpoints to measurethe characteristics of RSS (Table I) andanother with ten checkpoints to measurethe purposes of its use (Table II) in thelibrary. The checkpoints with cumulated

values collected along the constructedchecklists were illustrated in Table IV.The proportionate score on checkpointsof RSS features and purposes wererepresented by Figures 1 and 2respectively.

The degree of prevalence of RSS ineach library was measured using the“application index” which was used byNguyen (2008) to measure the degree ofadoption of Web 2.0 technologies inlibrary:

Application index ðRSSÞ

¼

Total checkpoints with “yes”

answers in a library

!

Total number of checkpoints used

£ 100

The above equation indicates that alibrary with all checkpoints coded 1

Table I.Characteristic features of RSS used inlibraries

C1 Links to library’s homepage

C2 Instructions on how to use RSS

C3 RSS feeds are classified

C4 Items in feeds are searchable by

keywords

C5 Items in feeds are sorted by

categories

C6 Links to RSS readers downloading

services

C7 Feeds are displayed at one place

C8 RSS feeds offered through other

services

C9 Feedback on RSS

Table II.Purposes of using RSS in libraries

P1 General news

P2 Library news and events

P3 New addition of books

P4 New addition of e-journals

P5 New addition of e-resource database

P6 Research tool

P7 Customized catalogue search

P8 Announcements about workshops

and exhibition

P9 Personalized information on lending

status

P10 Others


will have 100 per cent application indexfor RSS. The higher value ofapplication index (RSS) of a libraryindicates that a considerable number ofcheckpoints in that library are markedwith “yes” answers. Therefore, anapplication index (RSS) is a measure

to estimate the extent ofimplementation of RSS in a library.

Similarly, the region-wise meanapplication index for RSS was alsomeasured to explore the extent at whichlibraries in a particular region embraceRSS on an average:

Region-wise mean application index ðRSSÞ

¼

Total checkpoints with “yes”

answers in selected libraries

using RSS in a region

0B@

1CA

Total number of checkpoints used

£Total number of selected

libraries using RSS in that region

0B@

1CA

£100

Results and discussions

The web sites of academic andpublic libraries studied, across the fourcontinents revealed that approximately62 per cent libraries (162 out of 260)use RSS, though the characteristics ofRSS and purpose of using it varies fromlibrary to library. RSS is mostly used todisseminate news and announcements,and the use of RSS for tracking duedates of library materials is the leastnoticed among the libraries studied.Some of the libraries have restrictedentry to RSS for the students andfaculty members of that library only.For instance, University of EdinburghLibrary has a customized cataloguesearch facility that can be saved throughuser authentication. Hong KongPolytechnic University Library andQueensland University of TechnologyLibrary require library members toenter login/ password to gain access toits specific RSS facilities.

Some libraries prefer blog as a moreviable platform to provide RSS feedsand channels for interaction with users.For example, the Library blog of theMassachusetts Institute of Technologyprovides RSS feeds for new additions,news and events, podcasts, videos,and subject catalogues. ColumbiaUniversity Library provides a long listof RSS feeds – ask a librarian, eventsand exhibits, workshops, news, libraryhours, new e-resources, featurese-resources, and many more throughits library blog. University CollegeLondon Library uses its library blog tokeep users and staff up-to-date withe-resources, including e-journals,e-books, and databases available atthe library. The RSS icon on the homepage of Duke University Librarylinked to a blog with list of RSS feeds,which include, among others, the feeds

Figure 1. Proportionate score on checkpoints of RSS features

Figure 2. Proportionate score on checkpoints of purpuses of using RSS


for job vacancies and scholarlycommunications. The University ofNorth Carolina at Chapel Hill Libraryprovides RSS feeds of news and eventsthrough its home page. However, itredirects users to visit its blog to findmore RSS feeds, additionallyencouraging users to create RSS feedsfor saved searches.

Characteristics of RSS

Characteristics of RSS have beenillustrated in Tables I and IV. It showsthat 65 per cent of libraries providelinks to RSS through the library homepage, either directly or indirectlythrough drilled-down pages or viablogs linked to library home pages.However, RSS not linked throughlibrary home pages are verydifficult to locate, e.g. RSS facilitiesof Stanford University Library, EcolePolytechnique Federale de LausanneLibrary, Swiss National Library, andNational Library of Belarus.

Many libraries (89 out of 162, i.e.55 per cent of those using RSS) provideadequate instructions on the use of RSS.It is particularly important for newusers to be acquainted with the conceptof RSS. Proper instruction on RSS willenhance its accessibility to the usersand will help them to easily identify andsubscribe to RSS feeds. The Universityof Western Australia Library provides abrief introduction to RSS, displayingRSS feeds and using screenshots,guiding users on how to locate andsubscribe to feeds. Library instructionmanuals, posted in the web site ofUniversity College Dublin Library,provide step-by-step guidance how touse RSS. The Public Library ofCincinnati and Hamilton County,besides instructing users how tosubscribe to RSS, provides links tovarious resources to consult with, so asto get familiar with the concept of RSSand its various functionalities.Interestingly, a screencast of MontanaState Library provides guide to use RSSthrough online video.

A noticeable feature among librariesusing RSS is that 50 per cent of librariesprovide links to download RSSfeed reader/aggregator/channel. Forexample, Indianapolis Marion CountyPublic Library provides a link to theRSS aggregators’ site that displays a

long list of hyperlinked RSS readers. Alink to the RSS reader, along withinstructions on how to download it,relieves library users from searchingand locating a reader on their own,e.g. University of Chicago Library,University of California IrvineLibrary, Baltimore County PublicLibrary, Berkeley Public Library, andMultnomah County Library. PhoenixPublic Library lists popular RSSreaders – both online RSS readers thatwork from any web browser, anddownloadable readers that run onindividual computers, including thoseavailable free of cost, and therebyoffering users convenient options tochoose from. Bibliotheque et ArchivesNationale, Canada offers links tomultilingual RSS readers to serve itscosmopolitan user communities.

In order to increase identificationand accessibility to RSS feeds, entriesare categorized with division andsubdivision. For example, Universityof Auckland Library categorized RSSfeeds under databases, e-journals, newbooks, library blogs, workshops,suggestion, and research space. Eachof these feed categories are againsubdivided, e.g. feeds for new booksare subdivided into:

. RSS library – for new bookslocated in 18 branch libraries orcollections;

. RSS subject – for new booksclassified into subjects as comeunder different faculties; and

. create new books feed – foraggregated new arrivals, irrespectiveof subject or location.

More interesting features are“suggestion feed,” soliciting feedbackfrom users in order to undertake constantand purposeful user-centered change inlibrary services, and “research spacefeed,” informing research scholars aboutnew additions to the theses database.

RSS feeds are variously classified indifferent libraries. In some libraries,feeds are subdivided according to thetypes of documents, e.g. in NorthCanton Public Library feeds areclassified into new books, new videos,new sound recordings, and large printbooks. Feeds are also categorized underthe name of branch/departmentallibraries, e.g. Northwestern UniversityLibrary provides a long list of news

feeds categorized under the names ofdepartments and collections. However,some libraries prefer feeds to bearranged under different topicalheadings, e.g. University of CaliforniaSan Diego Library provides direct linksto several subject library blogs, each ofwhich offers an independentlycategorized feed list. Interestingly,University of California Los AngelesLibrary encourages users to use thecustomized feed wizard in order tocreate the RSS feed for their subject ofchoice. Hennepin County Library’sRSS feeds are classified into subjectguides, news feeds from local librariesand others. Noticeable among theseis the bookspace feed which includes –e-books, audio books, music, videos,book club (inviting book reviews anddiscussions), and much more. On theother hand, Montgomery County PublicLibraries classifies feeds – by type ofprogram, by branch, and by audience.Being a public library, catering tothe needs of users belonging to diverseage groups, the audience feeds arefurther categorized to target groups ofusers ranging from babies, toddlers,preschoolers, kindergarteners toseniors, independently.

RSS feeds of the University of BritishColumbia Library and University ofIllinois at Urbana Campaign Librarycomprise books, journals, database,citations, etc. allowing users to selectthe resources from which content is to bepulled to satisfy diverse informationneeds of the academic community.Denver Public Library offers a feed forlibrary events and research newstogether with feeds pertaining to a longlist of different library blogs. RSS feedsof Brooklyn Public Library allow usersaccess to feeds primarily categorizedinto blogs and branch info feeds,calendar feeds, and articles anddatabases to keep users updated withnewly published information. As usersare keen to find recent additions, somelibraries inform users about the date ofthe posting of the feed, arranging RSSfeeds chronologically, e.g. NationalLibrary of Israel and Dekalb CountyPublic Library.

In 74 per cent of libraries (usingRSS), items in feeds are browsable bykeywords, such as, Uppsala UniversityLibrary, National Library Board ofSingapore, and National CentralLibrary of Rome. The keyword search


option assists users in tracking itemswith minimum expense of timeand energy. On the other hand, in34 per cent of libraries (using RSS),items in feeds are sorted by categoriestoo, e.g. Delft University of TechnologyLibrary, Trinity College DublinLibrary, and the State Library ofWestern Australia.

Display of RSS feeds in one place isa very convenient method for librariesto draw users’ attention to the types offeeds they offer. About 57 per cent oflibraries list RSS feeds in one place.However, some libraries prefer topicalfeeds to be displayed at their respectivepages, e.g. in State Library of SouthAustralia new resource feeds aresegregated from events feed, whichcan be traced at the “events” link.

Another noticeable upshot of the useof RSS in libraries is to enhancecollaborative knowledge sharingamong the user community in anetworked environment, using theweb site as a conduit for outreachand promotion of library activities.Many libraries are reaching out tothe prospective user communities,marketing library collections andfacilities and providing library servicesto the patrons using various socialnetworking web sites. Interestingly alibrary user may update a blog feed andmake the content accessible throughFacebook, as seen in Olathe PublicLibrary. Similarly a library user can addFlickr photos and encourage users toimport the image into Twitter (e.g. NewYork Public Library’s photostream).The library may update Twitter feedsand pull in contents to its Facebook toencourage the scope of informationsharing among the patrons beyond thelibrary’s actual web site, e.g. CamdenCounty Library System and Universityof Liverpool Library. MonroevillePublic Library updates its RSS feed ofPodcasts and the link appears at thelibrary Facebook, informing users aboutthe updates, right from the socialnetworking site. University of Texas atArlington Library encourages users tosubscribe to RSS feeds associated withits Flickr photos and to share imagesthough social networking sites. RSSfeeds of Christchurch City Librariesinform users whenever a newphotograph is added to its Flickr site.State Library of Queensland’s “Webcastfeed” offers “video and audio webcasts

of public talks, interviews, trainingsessions and other public programs”.Libraries intending to do communityoutreach use RSS, as was noticed in 48per cent libraries, to enhance new web-based applications, such as blog,podcast, social networking tools, etc. toextend library services and facilities in asocially rich online interactive platform.

To be pertinent to the modern era,libraries need to provide value addedservices to users according to theirneeds and expectations. Keeping thesein view, libraries should entertain users’participation in library activities andencourage them to post and sharecomments on library collections andservices through online comment linksprovided at a suitable place on the website. Sharing suggestions throughcomments feed, users can exchangetheir views and interact with librariansto make better use of library facilities.Accordingly, 25 per cent libraries notonly encourage users’ to send feedbackand comments but also let others knowand share solicited suggestions throughcomments feeds, e.g. Hennepin CountyLibrary, Georgia State UniversityLibrary, and Sheridan Library of JohnsHopkins University. Interestingly, thecomments feed of Monash UniversityLibrary can be viewed or subscribed tokeep track on newly added feedback onall postings.

Accessibility of RSS could beimproved if the RSS icons areproperly focused and made attractive,because users are not supposed to gothrough the tiring effort of searching fora feed to be subscribed. Whiledesigning the web site and during itsupgrades, stress need to be given to theuse of standard RSS/Atom/XML iconsso that RSS icons/ hyperlinks are dulyidentified, positioned and adjusted withthe page, while maintaining theaesthetic quality of the web site aswell. While RSS feeds at drill-downpages are to be properly linked forbetter accessibility, to promote the useof RSS, attention has to be paid to thetype of information to be deliveredthrough RSS, based on the requirementsof the users’ community.

Purposes of using RSS

The purposes for which RSS arebeing used in libraries are outlined in

Tables II and IV. It is evident fromTable IV that the top two purposes ofRSS use are conveying library news andevents (147 out of 162 libraries, i.e.91 per cent of libraries) and notificationabout new acquisition of books (111 outof 162 libraries, i.e. 69 per cent oflibraries). Additionally, to have a visualimpact, some libraries even post theimages of title pages of newly arrivedbooks along with the contents of thefeed, e.g. Westerville Public Libraryand Washington Centerville PublicLibrary. The E-catalogue RSS feed ofthe State Library of Tasmania allowsusers to view or subscribe to recentlyadded materials to the librarycollection.

RSS keeps users regularly updatedwith upcoming news and events,conveying to users any change inopening hours and closing hours, userservices, and also informing users aboutthe hundreds of job vacancies forlibrarians, e.g. Princeton UniversityLibrary, Katholieke UniversiteitLeuven Library, National Library ofSweden and National Central Library ofTaiwan. The Library calendar feed ofSanta Clara County Library providesdates, times, locations, and informationabout the library’s programmingschedules. To make it fit for theindividual user’s need, the calendarfeed offers facility for customization.Users belong to particular age groupsand have specific subject interests andcan select a feed of library eventspertaining to their requirements.Lakewood Public Library offers newsfeeds informing users about classes,events and construction news.

RSS feeds for new books are oftenused as subject guides for libraryusers. Usually new book feeds arearranged subject-wise alphabetically,e.g. University of Otago Library andKing County Library System. However,Kenton County Public Library not onlyoffers RSS feeds for newly acquiredbooks but also identifies the newlyordered books for prospective users.Moreover, through the search optionsassociated with new additions, one cancreate customized filtered feeds to getupdates about periodicals.

Interestingly another way of usingRSS as subject guides was noticed insome libraries displaying numeroussubject specific feeds for newlyarrived books arranged according to


different classification schemes, ascited in Table III.

RSS feeds for new books,categorized under differentclassification schemes, satisfy thediverse subject approaches of the usercommunity. They can keep track of thelatest additions to their area of interestwithout visiting the library web site.

About 38 per cent of libraries conveyinformation on new arrivals of journalsthrough RSS, e.g. Hong KongUniversity of Science and TechnologyLibrary which notifies users with a listof e-journals added during the past 30days. Another interesting feature is toprovide table of contents (TOC) feedsfor keeping users notified automaticallywhen a new issue of a journal isuploaded, e.g. Cornell UniversityLibrary and Toronto University DentalLibrary. National Diet Library offersRSS feeds of the Japanese PeriodicalIndex to give article information aboutrecently added issues of the periodicalsthat it indexes. Subscribing to RSSfeeds of newly added journals andrecent articles of existing journals is themost convenient option for scholars toremain updated about recentdevelopments in specific subject areas.

Database feeds regularly informusers about new acquisitions in the listof online databases, e.g. GriffithUniversity Library and National DietLibrary. In addition to providing feedsfor new additions to the list of librarydatabases, Santa Clara County Libraryalso notifies users the moment a newly

added article of a journal in a databasematches a user-created pre-set searchterm. Tohoku University Library evenprovides an RSS feed for any trialdatabase so that users can promptly benotified about trial versions and they areallowed to test the functionality andusefulness of the database and offerfeedback on it, before the library finallydecides to subscribe to it.

Another noticeable feature is that in28 per cent of libraries RSS feeds arealso used as tools to keep users updatewith research tips, e.g. University ofChicago Library and San Jose PublicLibrary. University of PennsylvaniaLibrary alerts users with researchhighlights through their “Research atPenn” RSS feed. The Library ofCongress notifies users with “updateson new content, points of interest,research and re-use of the ChroniclingAmerica digitized newspapers”. RSSsaves the time of the researcher, makingdocument tracking faster and moreconvenient. For example, RSS feedsof Shanghai Jiao Tong UniversityLibrary provide notification about thelatest academic research achievementsfor the prospective users’ community.Moreover, RSS feeds of new thesesfrom the University of St. AndrewsLibrary help keep scholars updated withnascent advancements in the academicfields.

Nowadays users not only use theonline catalogue to locate the books oftheir preference but also to pre-recordhis/her choice on a subject/topic so that

he/she will get instantly notified themoment the desired document has beenincorporated into the library holdings.A customized RSS feed for librarycatalogue search is designed to meet theneeds of individual users based on pre-selected search terms. Accordingly, 31per cent libraries enable their customersto save catalogue searches as RSSfeeds, e.g. Hennepin County Library,University of British ColumbiaLibrary and the Universitat HeidelbergLibrary.

Users choose RSS feeds for regularupdates of workshops, seminars,conferences, and exhibitions. About27 per cent libraries use RSS for thesepurposes, e.g. Monroe County PublicLibrary, Ann Arbor District Library,National Library of Belarus, NationalLibrary of France, University of OxfordLibrary, and the University ofPennsylvania Library.

Libraries also use RSS to providepersonalized services to enable users totrack due dates of documents borrowedfrom the library. For example, ShanghaiJiao Tong University Library providesRSS feeds for personal book borrowingand returning information. The“MyLoans” RSS feed of the Universityof Sydney Library notifies users aboutdue dates and overdue charges.Columbia University Library informsusers about the status of their loanrequests made through interlibrary loan.Christchurch City Libraries provides alink to “Library Elf”, a web-basedservice that offers an RSS feed tolibrary users so that they may receivenotification about due dates of libraryitems and status of titles requested.

RSS can also be conveniently used forseveral other purposes. RSS feeds areused to trace book reviews anddiscussion, e.g. Greene County PublicLibrary offers a feed for book reviewsand recommendations, encouragingusers to develop critical thinking abilityand promoting reading habits in general.RSS feeds of the University ofCambridge Library, University ofMichigan Library and Kenton CountyPublic Library provide information onjob vacancies. University of HelsinkiLibrary, University of Adelaide Libraryand the State Library of Queenslandprovide RSS feeds for training schedules.

By offering a number of RSS feedsand advertising on the contents of feedsin blogs and in various social

Table III.Subject-wise RSS feeds for newly arrived books arranged under differentclassification scheme

Name of the universities

RSS feeds tracking new arrivals by

classification schemes

National Chiao Tung University 1. CCL

2. LCC

Seoul National University DDC

Australian National University Library Modified LCC scheme

Flinders University DDC

University of Melbourne DDC

University of New South Wales RFCD

Newcastle University DDC

Concordia University LCC

Georgia State University Library LCC

University of Oklahoma LCC

Notes: CCL – Classification for Chinese Libraries; DDC – Dewey Decimal Classification; LCC –

Library of Congress Classification; RFCD – Research Fields, Courses and Disciplines

Classification


networking sites, libraries are reachingout to users beyond the actual peripheryof the library web site, convenientlypromoting library resources to patronswhile increasing the number ofsubscribers (Table IV).

Prevalence of RSS in libraries acrossthe continents

Implementation of RSS across thecontinents encompassing the academicas well as public libraries has beenthoroughly examined. The findingsrevealed that the prevalence of RSSvaries significantly along thecontinents. The present study involvesinvestigation carefully conductedamong public and academic libraries,to examine RSS implementation inpublic and academic libraries alongthe geographical regions. The overalldegree of prevalence of RSS has beenmeasured in two ways.

Measuring the extent of use of RSSacross the globe. There is anoticeable difference between theacademic and public libraries usingRSS in different regions. It wasobserved from the above analysis(Figures 3 and 4), conductedseparately among academic and publiclibraries, that in Europe and NorthAmerica the extent of use of RSS inpublic libraries is high compared toacademic libraries. However, thesituation is completely reversed inAsian and Australian libraries, whereRSS in academic libraries are moreprevalent compared to public libraries.Disparity between public and academiclibraries using RSS to facilitate libraryservice may be attributed to diverseuser profile in academic libraries andpublic libraries.

The user group of academiclibraries – particularly of universitylibraries is comprised of students,teachers and scholars, and the library isbasically meant for the service of itsparent institution. On the other hand,public library users are strictly of aheterogeneous nature and serve thecommunity’s people. Therefore, publiclibraries put more emphasis onattracting heterogeneous user groups,comprising users from different agegroups and having disparate levels ofunderstanding and want to satisfy their

diverse needs and expectations. Publiclibraries, particularly those which arecity council libraries or regionallibraries, are additionally meant for theservice of city council or other relatedbodies. Contrary to public libraries, theuser group of academic libraries is welldescribed; their subject area is also fairlywell defined. Academic library users areusually more acquainted with the newtechnological innovations and exposedto new modes of learning environmentthan a section of the public library users.This difference of attitude betweenpublic and academic library users maybe attributed to disproportionate use ofRSS among different types of libraries indifferent regions.

Investigating the overall prevalenceof RSS among libraries across theregions revealed that proportionatelylarge number of libraries in NorthAmerica (32 per cent) are using RSS,followed closely by the libraries inAustralia (30 per cent), distantly bylibraries of Europe (24 per cent) withlibraries in Asia (14 per cent) trailingfar behind. Both the above studiesmeasure the extension of RSSimplementation along the continents.

Determining the RSS implementationrate along the regions. However,another study was conducted todetermine the degree ofimplementation of RSS among thelibraries already using it. Theinvestigation was based on the valueof region-wise mean application index(Table V) and sought to measure theintensity adoption of RSS, i.e. RSSimplementation rate in academic andpublic libraries in a region.

Comparing the result of analysis ofdata measuring region-wise meanapplication index for RSS (i.e.intension of adoption of RSS) withthat of analysis of data measuringoverall adoption of RSS (i.e. extensionof adoption of RSS), it was revealedthat the proportionately extension ofRSS implementation is a little higher inNorth America (32 per cent), than inAustralia (30 per cent) (Figure 5).However, proportionately the extent ofRSS adoption, i.e. RSS implementationrate is fairly high in North America(32 per cent) compared to Australia(27 per cent) (Figure 8). It was alsoobserved from the above study thatalthough there remains a very marginal

difference between the number oflibraries in North America andAustralia embracing RSS, the RSSimplementation rate is comparativelyvery high in North American librariescompared to that of Australian libraries.It indicates that on average, libraries inNorth America, those have alreadyintroduced RSS in the library, haveintensively embraced RSS facilities toincorporate into more potential areas oflibrary services, compared to thelibraries using RSS in other continents(Figures 6 and 7).

The outcome of the study alsoreveals that proportionately largenumbers of public libraries in Europe(25 per cent) are using RSS, comparedto the public libraries of Asia (11 percent) (Figure 4). However, the RSSimplementation rate among publiclibraries is comparatively a littlehigher in Asia (22 per cent) than thatin Europe (20 per cent) (Figure 7);indicating that although there areconsiderably small numbers of publiclibraries in Asia using RSS the rate ofimplementation of RSS among thoseAsian public libraries is slightly higherthan the European public libraries usingRSS. This suggests that some Europeanpublic libraries are more enthusiasticabout RSS use but less inclined to itseffective implementation. The findingsalso suggest that the proportionatelyoverall extent of RSS adoption is moreprevalent among the libraries in NorthAmerica (32 per cent), followed bythat in Australia (27 per cent), Europe(21 per cent) and Asia (20 per cent)(Figure 8).

On the other hand, overall extent ofRSS use, i.e. simply measuring theregion-wise proportionate number oflibraries using RSS, irrespective of thenumber of potential areas in the librarycoved by RSS, is very high in NorthAmerica and very low in Asia. Thissuggests that libraries in Asia mighthave largely overlooked the concept ofintroducing RSS. Still, the disparityamong the libraries in differentcontinents concerning the adoption ofRSS may be attributed to thedifferential rate of internet accessamong the libraries in differentgeographical regions.

Internet usage statistics derived fromInternet World Stats: usage andpopulation statistics (www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm) on 31


Table IV.Total score on checkpoints in academic and public libraries

Sl

No

Lib

rari

es a

cro

ss g

eog

rap

hic

al r

egio

ns

Ch

eckp

oin

ts o

n R

SS

fea

ture

sC

hec

kpo

ints

on

pu

rpo

ses

of

usi

ng

RS

S

Asi

a (a

cad

emic

lib

rari

es)

C1

C2

C3

C4

C5

C6

C7

C8

C9

P1

P2

P3

P4

P5

P6

P7

P8

P9

P10

1B

ilken

t Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry0

01

11

00

11

11

00

00

00

00

2H

ong

Kon

g B

aptis

t Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

11

10

11

00

01

11

00

00

01

3H

ong

Kon

g U

nive

rsity

of

Sci

ence

and

Tec

hnol

ogy

Libr

ary

11

10

01

10

00

11

11

11

10

14

Mid

dle

Eas

t Tec

hnic

al U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

10

01

00

00

00

10

00

00

00

05

Na

tiona

l Chi

ao T

ung

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

01

11

00

00

01

10

00

00

00

6N

atio

nal T

sing

Hua

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry0

10

10

01

00

01

10

00

00

00

7O

saka

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

00

10

00

00

01

00

00

00

00

8S

eoul

Na

tiona

l Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

11

11

00

00

01

11

11

10

10

9S

hang

hai J

iao

Tong

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry0

10

11

00

00

11

00

00

00

00

10To

hoku

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

00

11

00

00

01

00

10

00

00

11To

kyo

Inst

itute

of

Tech

nolo

gy L

ibra

ry1

00

10

01

00

01

00

00

00

00

Asi

a (p

ub

lic li

bra

ries

)C

1C

2C

3C

4C

5C

6C

7C

8C

9P

1P

2P

3P

4P

5P

6P

7P

8P

9P

1012

Na

tiona

l Cen

tral

Lib

rary

, Tai

wan

10

01

00

00

01

10

00

00

00

013

Na

tiona

l Die

t Lib

rary

11

11

10

10

01

11

11

11

00

114

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

& A

rchi

ves

of IR

of

Iran

10

00

00

00

00

10

00

00

00

015

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

Boa

rd S

inga

pore

11

11

11

10

00

11

00

00

00

016

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

of

the

Phi

lippi

nes

10

01

00

00

11

10

00

00

00

017

The

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

of

Isra

el1

00

10

01

00

01

11

00

00

00

Tota

l sco

re o

n c

hec

kpo

ints

in A

sia

147

715

73

71

25

178

54

33

11

3A

ust

ralia

(ac

adem

ic li

bra

ries

)C

1C

2C

3C

4C

5C

6C

7C

8C

9P

1P

2P

3P

4P

5P

6P

7P

8P

9P

1018

Aus

tral

ian

Na

tiona

l Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

11

10

11

00

11

10

00

00

01

19D

eaki

n U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

10

01

00

00

01

10

00

00

00

020

Flin

ders

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry0

11

11

11

10

11

11

11

10

01

21G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

10

11

11

00

11

11

11

11

00

022

Jam

es C

ook

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry0

10

11

10

11

11

11

11

10

00

23La

Tro

be U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

11

11

11

10

01

11

00

00

00

024

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

01

11

01

11

11

10

00

00

00

25S

win

burn

e U

nive

rsity

of

Tech

nolo

gy L

ibra

ry0

00

10

00

00

00

00

00

10

00

26U

nive

rsity

of

Mel

bour

ne L

ibra

ry

01

11

01

11

01

11

11

00

00

027

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

dela

ide

Libr

ary

10

01

10

01

11

11

10

11

10

128

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Libr

ary

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

10

129

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ante

rbur

y Li

brar

y1

11

11

11

01

11

11

11

10

00

30U

nive

rsity

of

New

Sou

th W

ales

Lib

rary

01

11

00

01

00

11

11

10

00

031

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

ewca

stle

Lib

rary

00

11

00

00

01

10

00

00

00

032

Uni

vers

ity o

f O

tago

Lib

rary

10

01

00

00

01

11

00

00

00

033

Uni

vers

ity o

f S

outh

Aus

tral

ia L

ibra

ry1

11

11

11

00

01

11

01

10

00

34U

nive

rsity

of

Syd

ney

Libr

ary

11

11

10

11

11

11

11

11

11

035

Uni

vers

ity o

f Ta

sman

ia L

ibra

ry1

01

11

00

01

11

00

01

10

00

36U

nive

rsity

of

Wai

kato

Lib

rary

00

11

10

00

01

11

00

00

00

037

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn A

ustr

alia

Lib

rary

01

01

01

01

01

11

11

01

10

038

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

ollo

ngon

g Li

brar

y0

00

10

00

00

00

11

11

10

00

(con

tinu

ed)


39V

icto

ria U

nive

rsity

of

Wel

lingt

on L

ibra

ry1

11

00

01

10

11

11

11

00

10

Au

stra

lia (

pu

blic

lib

rari

es)

C1

C2

C3

C4

C5

C6

C7

C8

C9

P1

P2

P3

P4

P5

P6

P7

P8

P9

P10

40A

uckl

and

City

Lib

rarie

s0

10

11

10

00

00

10

00

10

00

41C

ante

rbur

y C

ity L

ibra

ry

01

01

11

01

10

11

00

01

00

042

Chr

istc

hurc

h C

ity L

ibra

ries

11

11

01

11

01

11

11

11

11

143

Ham

ilton

City

Lib

rarie

s 0

00

10

00

00

01

00

00

10

00

44N

api

er P

ublic

Lib

rarie

s0

00

10

00

00

00

10

00

10

00

45N

atio

nal A

rchi

ves

of A

ustr

alia

10

01

00

11

01

10

00

00

00

046

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

of

New

Zea

land

11

11

01

11

00

11

00

10

10

047

Sta

te L

ibra

ry o

f Q

ueen

slan

d1

11

10

11

10

11

00

00

11

01

48S

tate

Lib

rary

of

Sou

th A

ustr

alia

11

10

01

10

01

01

00

00

00

049

Sta

te L

ibra

ry o

f Ta

sman

ia0

10

00

10

00

00

00

00

10

00

50S

tate

Lib

rary

of

Vic

toria

00

11

10

01

01

11

00

00

11

151

Sta

te L

ibra

ry o

f W

este

rn A

ustr

alia

10

01

10

01

01

10

00

01

00

052

Sut

herl

and

Shi

re L

ibra

ries

10

10

01

10

00

10

00

00

00

053

Wel

lingt

on C

ity L

ibra

ries

01

11

11

10

01

11

00

00

00

0To

tal s

core

on

ch

eckp

oin

ts in

Au

stra

lia20

2022

3217

1917

179

2530

2614

1214

208

47

Eu

rop

e (a

cad

emic

lib

rari

es)

C1

C2

C3

C4

C5

C6

C7

C8

C9

P1

P2

P3

P4

P5

P6

P7

P8

P9

P10

54B

iblio

teka

Uni

wer

syte

cka

W W

arsz

awie

1

00

11

00

00

11

00

00

00

00

55D

elft

Uni

vers

ity o

f Te

chno

logy

Lib

rary

1

00

10

01

00

01

10

00

00

00

56D

urha

m U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

11

11

01

10

01

11

00

11

00

057

Eco

le P

olyt

echn

ique

Fed

eral

e de

Lau

sann

e Li

brar

y0

10

10

10

00

11

11

11

10

00

58Im

peria

l Col

lege

Lon

don

Libr

ary

10

11

00

00

11

10

00

00

00

059

Kar

olin

ska

Inst

itute

t Lib

rary

10

01

00

10

01

10

00

00

00

060

Ka

thol

ieke

Uni

vers

iteit

Leuv

en L

ibra

ry

00

01

10

11

11

10

10

00

00

061

Na

tiona

l Uni

vers

ity o

f Ir

elan

d, G

alw

ay L

ibra

ry1

01

00

00

00

01

11

00

10

00

62N

ewca

stle

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry (

UK

)1

11

10

11

11

11

01

00

00

00

63P

olite

cnic

o di

Tur

ino

Libr

ary

10

00

00

10

00

01

00

00

00

064

Trin

ity C

olle

ge D

ublin

Lib

rary

0

00

11

01

11

11

10

00

00

00

65U

nive

rsita

t Hei

delb

erg

Libr

ary

00

00

00

01

00

01

00

01

00

066

Uni

vers

iteit

Utr

echt

Lib

rary

11

11

00

10

01

11

00

00

00

067

Uni

vers

ity C

olle

ge D

ublin

Lib

rary

0

00

00

10

00

01

10

00

01

00

68U

nive

rsity

Col

lege

Lon

don

Libr

ary

00

00

00

00

11

11

11

00

00

169

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

mst

erda

m L

ibra

ry1

00

10

00

00

11

00

00

00

00

70U

nive

rsity

of

Bris

tol L

ibra

ry0

00

10

01

00

11

00

00

00

00

71U

nive

rsity

of

Cam

brid

ge L

ibra

ry1

01

10

01

01

11

11

10

00

11

72 U

nive

rsity

of

Hel

sink

i Lib

rary

10

01

10

10

01

10

00

00

00

173

Uni

vers

ity o

f K

ent L

ibra

ry1

01

11

00

01

11

10

00

10

00

74U

nive

rsity

of

Live

rpoo

l Lib

rary

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

175

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r (T

he J

ohn

Ryl

ands

Lib

rary

)1

10

10

00

00

11

11

00

00

00

76U

nive

rsity

of

Oxf

ord

Libr

ary

00

10

01

00

00

11

11

00

10

077

Uni

vers

ity o

f S

t. A

ndre

ws

Libr

ary

11

11

00

11

01

11

11

10

00

178

Upp

sala

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

01

00

10

10

01

11

00

10

00

Eu

rop

e (p

ub

lic li

bra

ries

)C

1C

2C

3C

4C

5C

6C

7C

8C

9P

1P

2P

3P

4P

5P

6P

7P

8P

9P

10

(con

tinu

ed)

Table IV.


79B

iblio

teca

Nac

iona

l de

Por

tuga

l1

00

10

00

10

11

00

00

00

00

80C

lare

Cou

nty

Libr

ary

00

01

00

01

01

11

00

00

10

081

Dun

dee

Libr

arie

s0

00

10

00

00

01

10

00

10

10

82E

dinb

urgh

City

Lib

rarie

s an

d In

form

atio

n se

rvic

es0

10

11

01

11

11

10

00

00

01

83E

ssex

Cou

nty

Cou

ncil

Libr

arie

s0

11

11

11

00

00

10

00

10

01

84H

ertfo

rdsh

ire C

ount

y C

ounc

il Li

brar

ies

00

01

00

00

00

01

00

01

00

085

Na

tiona

l and

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry o

f B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na1

00

10

00

10

11

00

00

00

00

86N

atio

nal C

entr

al L

ibra

ry o

f R

ome

10

01

00

00

01

10

00

00

00

087

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

of

Bel

arus

10

01

10

10

01

10

00

00

10

188

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

of

Est

onia

10

01

00

01

01

10

00

00

00

089

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

of

Fran

ce1

01

00

01

10

11

10

00

00

00

90N

atio

nal L

ibra

ry o

f P

olan

d1

11

10

11

00

11

00

00

00

00

91N

atio

nal L

ibra

ry o

f S

cotla

nd1

11

11

11

00

11

11

00

10

01

92N

atio

nal L

ibra

ry o

f S

wed

en1

11

10

01

10

11

00

00

01

00

93P

orts

mou

th C

ity C

ounc

il Li

brar

ies

00

01

00

01

00

00

00

01

00

094

Sta

ffor

dshi

re C

ount

y C

ounc

il Li

brar

ies

11

00

01

01

01

10

00

00

00

095

Sw

iss

Na

tiona

l Lib

rary

00

11

00

11

00

10

00

00

00

096

The

Brit

ish

Libra

ry1

00

10

00

00

11

00

00

00

01

97T

he N

atio

nal L

ibra

ry o

f R

ussi

a0

00

10

01

10

11

00

00

00

00

98T

he N

atio

nal L

ibra

ry o

f W

ales

01

00

00

11

00

10

00

00

10

099

Wilt

shire

Cou

ncil

Libr

arie

s1

00

10

00

00

01

00

00

00

00

Tota

l sco

re c

hec

kpo

ints

in E

uro

pe

2914

1736

1011

2319

932

4124

126

412

73

10N

ort

h A

mer

ica

(aca

dem

ic li

bra

ries

)C

1C

2C

3C

4C

5C

6C

7C

8C

9P

1P

2P

3P

4P

5P

6P

7P

8P

9P

1010

0C

alifo

rnia

Inst

itute

of

Tech

nolo

gy L

ibra

ry1

00

11

00

01

11

11

10

00

00

101

Car

negi

e M

ello

n U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

01

01

01

00

11

11

11

11

00

010

2C

olum

bia

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry0

01

11

11

10

01

10

00

01

01

103

Con

cord

ia U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

11

11

11

11

01

11

11

10

10

110

4C

orne

ll U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

11

11

01

10

11

11

11

10

10

010

5D

uke

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry1

01

11

01

11

11

11

11

01

01

106

Geo

rgia

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

00

10

00

00

11

11

10

01

00

010

7H

arva

rd U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

11

11

11

01

00

01

10

01

00

010

8M

assa

chus

etts

Inst

itute

of

Tech

nolo

gy L

ibra

ry1

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

00

109

McG

ill U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

11

11

01

00

01

10

00

00

10

011

0N

orth

wes

tern

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry0

01

11

01

00

01

11

00

01

00

111

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

11

11

11

11

11

11

10

10

00

011

2S

herid

an L

ibra

ry o

f Jo

hns

Hop

kins

Uni

vers

ity

01

11

01

01

10

11

10

11

00

111

3S

tanf

ord

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry0

11

10

11

01

00

11

00

00

00

114

Toro

nto

Uni

vers

ity D

enta

l Lib

rary

02

00

01

00

00

11

10

00

00

011

5U

nive

rsity

of

Brit

ish

Col

umbi

a Li

brar

y1

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

01

116

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alifo

rnia

, Irv

ine

Libr

ary

10

10

01

10

01

11

01

00

10

011

7U

nive

rsity

of

Cal

iforn

ia, L

os A

ngel

es L

ibra

ry0

11

10

11

01

01

11

11

10

00

118

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alifo

rnia

, San

Die

go L

ibra

ry1

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

00

119

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alifo

rnia

, San

ta B

arba

ra L

ibra

ry1

00

11

01

00

11

00

00

00

00

120

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry0

11

11

01

01

11

11

11

11

01

(con

tinu

ed)

Table IV.


121

Uni

vers

ity o

f Ill

inoi

s a

t Urb

ana

Cam

paig

n Li

brar

y 1

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

00

122

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

ichi

gan

Lib

rary

01

01

10

10

10

11

11

00

00

112

3U

nive

rsity

of

Nor

th C

arol

ina

at C

hape

l Hill

Lib

rary

11

01

11

10

11

10

11

10

10

012

4U

nive

rsity

of

Okl

ahom

a Li

brar

ies

10

11

10

11

00

01

10

00

00

012

5U

nive

rsity

of

Pen

nsyl

vani

a Li

brar

y 1

01

10

01

10

01

11

10

01

00

126

Uni

vers

ity o

f Te

xas

at A

rlin

gton

Lib

rary

01

01

01

01

01

10

00

00

10

012

7U

nive

rsity

of

Was

hing

ton

Libr

ary

10

10

00

01

01

11

10

00

10

112

8U

nive

rsity

of

Wis

cons

in-M

adis

on L

ibra

ry0

11

00

10

01

11

11

00

01

00

129

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St.

Loui

s Li

brar

y1

11

10

11

01

11

11

10

01

00

No

rth

Am

eric

a (p

ub

lic li

bra

ries

)C

1C

2C

3C

4C

5C

6C

7C

8C

9P

1P

2P

3P

4P

5P

6P

7P

8P

9P

1013

0A

nn A

rbor

Dis

tric

t Lib

rary

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

11

113

1B

altim

ore

Cou

nty

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry

11

10

01

11

01

11

00

00

00

113

2B

erke

ley

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry1

00

00

10

10

11

00

00

00

00

133

Bib

lioth

eque

et A

rchi

ves

Na

tiona

le, C

anad

a1

10

11

10

10

11

11

11

00

00

134

Bro

okly

n P

ublic

Lib

rary

11

10

00

11

01

11

01

00

10

013

5C

amde

n C

ount

y Li

brar

y S

yste

m1

00

00

11

11

11

10

00

01

00

136

Dek

alb

Cou

nty

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry1

11

00

11

10

11

10

01

01

01

137

Den

ver

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry1

11

00

11

10

11

10

01

00

01

138

Gre

ene

Cou

nty

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry1

11

00

11

10

11

10

01

00

01

139

Hen

nepi

n C

ount

y Li

brar

y1

11

00

11

00

11

10

01

11

10

140

How

ard

Cou

nty

Libr

ary

Sys

tem

10

11

01

01

01

11

00

00

10

014

1In

dian

apol

is M

ario

n C

ount

y P

ublic

Lib

rary

11

10

01

11

01

11

00

11

00

014

2K

ento

n C

ount

y P

ublic

Lib

rary

11

10

01

11

01

11

00

11

10

114

3K

ing

Cou

nty

Libr

ary

Sys

tem

01

10

01

01

01

11

00

00

00

114

4La

kew

ood

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry1

11

00

10

00

11

10

00

00

01

145

Libr

ary

of C

ong

ress

11

11

01

11

01

11

10

10

10

014

6Lo

udou

n C

ount

y P

ublic

Lib

rary

01

10

01

10

01

11

00

00

00

114

7M

onro

e C

ount

y P

ublic

Lib

rary

1

11

00

11

10

11

10

00

01

00

148

Mon

roev

ille

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry1

00

10

01

10

11

00

00

00

00

149

Mon

tana

Sta

te L

ibra

ry1

11

10

01

10

11

11

11

10

00

150

Mon

tgom

ery

Cou

nty

Pub

lic L

ibra

ries

11

11

01

11

01

11

00

00

00

115

1M

ultn

omah

Cou

nty

Libr

ary

01

10

01

11

01

11

00

00

00

015

2N

ew Y

ork

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry0

11

11

11

10

11

00

00

00

00

153

Nor

th C

anto

n P

ublic

Lib

rary

11

10

01

00

00

01

00

10

00

015

4O

lath

e P

ublic

Lib

rary

01

01

10

11

01

10

00

00

00

015

5P

hoen

ix P

ublic

Lib

rary

11

11

01

10

01

11

00

11

01

015

6P

ublic

Lib

rary

of

Cin

cinn

ati

& H

amilt

on C

ount

y1

11

00

10

11

11

10

00

01

00

157

San

Jose

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry1

01

00

01

10

11

11

11

00

01

158

San

ta C

lara

Cou

nty

Libr

ary

01

00

11

11

01

11

11

00

00

015

9S

anta

Cru

z P

ublic

Lib

rarie

s1

11

10

10

10

11

00

00

00

00

160

The

Sea

ttle

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry1

00

00

11

10

01

00

00

00

00

161

Was

hing

ton

Cen

terv

ille

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry0

11

00

11

10

01

10

00

00

01

162

Wes

terv

ille

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry

01

11

01

11

01

11

10

00

10

1To

tal s

core

on

ch

eckp

oin

ts in

No

rth

Am

eric

a43

4849

3721

4845

4221

5059

5332

2226

1629

321

Table IV.


December 2011 (latest at the time theauthor submitted the paper), revealedthat the internet penetration rate isvery high in North America(78.6 per cent), followed by that of inAustralia (67.5 per cent) and Europe(61.3 per cent), while the internetpenetration rate in Asia (26.2 per cent)is extremely low.

Noticeably, in North America, therate of internet usage is comparativelyvery high, suggesting that the internetpenetration rate may have a positiveimpact on the high implementation ofRSS in libraries (Figure 6). Librariesare pursuing expanded web-basedservices to attract new users and meettheir expectations and informationneeds. The prevalence of RSS among

Australian and European librariescorresponds to the rate of internetusage in those regions too. However,the internet usage rate is very low inAsia and a proportionate number oflibraries using RSS in Asia is also verylow. Very low level of internetaccessibility in Asia may be due to thedigital divide. Internet and networkingfacility still remains a distant dream invast areas of this part of the globe,preventing many libraries fromundergoing a transformation into web-based library services.

Conclusion

Libraries, nowadays, are goingthrough an era of continuous

challenges and opportunities,struggling to prove their potentiality ina changing environment that is markedby the development of newtechnologies and issues relating todiverse users’ expectations. Librariesneed to rethink how the three maincompetency areas of the library –information collection, processing anddissemination – could be effectivelymanaged in order to attract users andprove its relevance to the tech savvyusers. Libraries piggyback on new web-based technologies that intend toenhance user involvement with thelibraries, encouraging user interactionand participation through web sites.Present day users do not come to thelibrary, instead the library goes to theusers. The study gives an overall pictureof the use of RSS in academic andpublic libraries worldwide. It illustrates,with examples, how RSS can beincorporated by the libraries efficientlyto provide library services in a web-based environment, commensurate withthe users’ expectation.

The current study was limited to fourcontinents – North America, Europe,Asia and Australia, and the survey wascompletely internet based, conductedon library web sites accessible to all andavailable in English. Web sites oflibraries having limited access andrestricted to specific groups, withpasswords, have been kept outside thescope of research. As the investigationwas fully internet based, the data wereoften subject to a bit modification.Moreover, only the libraries of highereducational institutions wereconsidered for academic libraries,which may partially run the risk offalling short of accurately representing

Figure 3. Use of RSS in academic libraries

Figure 4. Use of RSS in public libraries

Table V.Region-wise mean application index for RSS

Total score on

checkpoints

(characteristics)

Total score on

checkpoints

(purposes)

Sum total score

on checkpoints

(characteristics 1

purposes)

Total number of

selected libraries

with RSS

Mean application

index for public and

academic libraries

calculated separately

Region-wise

mean

application

index

Continents

Academic

library

Public

library

Academic

library

Public

library

Academic

library

Public

library

Academic

library

Public

library

Academic

library (%)

Public

library

(%)

For both types of

libraries (%)

Asia 41 22 32 18 73 40 11 6 35 35 35

Australia 108 55 110 37 218 92 22 14 52 35 45

Europe 94 74 96 55 190 129 25 21 40 32 36

North

America 175 179 163 148 338 327 30 33 59 52 56


the entire population. Additionally, theinvestigation did not focus on speciallibraries and libraries of all othercontinents were not covered by the

present study. Hence the present studyextends the scope of future research toall other regions and types of librariesnot included in this study. There might

have been a little gap in attaining acomplete picture of the scenario untillibrary web sites in non-Englishlanguage are fully accessed andclearly analyzed.

Convenient sampling method wasemployed to study the populationconstituting the academic and publiclibraries scattered in differentgeographical regions. Futureinvestigation may focus on othermethods of sampling and datacollection to solicit the views andopinions of librarians and users onRSS applications. The problems theymight encounter after adopting thisweb-based tool need to be discussed,which will help develop a deepunderstanding of the usability aspectof RSS and its effectiveness in meetingusers’ expectation in the internetenvironment.

Prevalence of RSS was onlyqualitatively measured using contentanalysis taking note of absence andpresence of RSS features which maypartially influence the understanding ofits effective use. Content analysis,combined with questionnaire andinterview method may enable futureresearchers to integrate other issues. Forexample, studies could analyze theimpact of RSS on users’ andlibrarians’ attitudes and perception,which in turn may help measure howfar library web sites using RSS arecapable of motivating and engagingusers to harness web-based libraryfacilities and services.

The current study investigatingthe characteristics and purposes ofRSS used in academic and publiclibraries across the continents, alongwith highlighting the region-wiseprevalence of RSS, provides anoverview of the extent to whichRSS is being implemented in differenttypes of libraries to meet therequirements of diverse groups of usersbelonging to different social andeducational cultures. Being anexhaustive assessment of one of themost viable library initiated net-basedfunctionalities, the present investigationalong with its findings provides valuableinformation to librarians, particularlythose who are yet to introduce thisfacility so that they may betterunderstand how this technology isbeing used across the regions. Basedon the findings along the checkpoints,

Figure 5. Use of RSS among libraries across the continents

Figure 6. Proportionate RSS implementation rate (academic libraries)

Figure 7. Proportionate RSS implementation rate (public libraries)

Figure 8. Overall RSS implementation rate


researchers will hopefully be to conductfuture investigation among librariansand patrons in order to evaluatequalitatively the impact of RSS inmeeting users’ expectation. Thefindings will enhance “professionalunderstanding” of the use of RSS andwill guide future librarians in usinglibrary web sites effectively forproviding web-based informationservices thereby enhancing itssustainability and service value.

REFERENCES

Aharony, N. (2009), “Web 2.0 use bylibrarians”, Library & Information ScienceResearch, Vol. 31, pp. 29-37.

Anderson, B. (2006), “Keeping up”,Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian,Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 113-7.

Armstrong, K. (2007), “Using RSS feeds toalert users to electronic resources”, TheSerials Librarian, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 183-91.

Balaji, B.P. and Kumar, V. (2011), “Use ofweb technology in providing informationservices by south Indian technologicaluniversities as displayed on librarywebsites”, Library Hi Tech, Vol. 29 No. 3,pp. 470-95.

Blansit, B.D. (2006), “Using RSS to publishlibrary news and information”, Journal ofElectronic Resources in Medical Libraries,Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 97-104.

Bradley, P. (2007), How to Use Web 2.0 inYour Library, Facet Publishing, London.

Britt, P.J. (2005), “RSS investors – there’sgold in them thar standards”, available at:www.econtentmag.com/Articles/News/News-Feature/RSS-Investors-Theres-Gold-in-Them-Thar-Standards-13507.htm (accessed 5October 2011).

Buigues-Garcia, M. and Gimenez-Chornet, V.(2012), “Impact of Web 2.0 on nationallibraries”, International Journal ofInformation Management, Vol. 32, pp. 3-10.

Chowdhury, G.G., Burton, P.F.,McMenemy, D. and Poulter, A. (2007),Librarianship: An Introduction, FacetPublishing, London.

Chua, A.Y.K. and Goh, D.H. (2010), “Astudy of Web 2.0 applications in librarywebsites”, Library & Information ScienceResearch, Vol. 32, pp. 203-11.

Chua, A.Y.K., Goh, D.H. and Lee, C.S.(2008), “The prevalence and use of Web 2.0in libraries”, available at: www.springerlink.com/content/g5178509gk74114p/fulltext.pdf (accessed 20 August 2011).

Click, A. and Petit, J. (2010), “Socialnetworking and Web 2.0 in informationliteracy”, The International Information &Library Review, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 137-42.

Cold, S.J. (2006), “Using really simplesyndication (RSS) to enhance studentresearch”, ACM SIGITE Newsletter, Vol. 3No. 1, pp. 6-9.

Cooke, C.A. (2006), “Current awareness inthe new millennium”, Medical ReferenceServices Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 59-69.

De Sarkar, T. (2012), “Introducing podcastin library service: an analytical study”,VINE, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 191-213.

Dieu, B. and Stevens, V. (2007),“Pedagogical affordances of syndication,aggregation and mash-up of content on theweb”, TESL-EJ, Vol. 11 No. 1, available at:www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume11/ej41/ej41int/

Dixon, B.R., Bouma, G.D. and Atkinson,G.B.J. (1987), A Handbook of SocialScience Research, Oxford UniversityPress, Delhi.

D’Souza, Q. (2006), RSS Ideas forEducators (Version 1.1), available at:http://eprints.rclis.org/bitstream/10760/7273/1/RSS%20Ideas%20for%20Educators111.pdf

Garoufallou, E. and Charitopoulou, V.(2011), “The use and awareness of Web2.0 tools by Greek LIS students”, NewLibrary World, Vol. 112 Nos 11/12.

Han, Z. and Liu, Y.Q. (2010), “Web 2.0applications in top Chinese universitylibraries”, Library Hi Tech, Vol. 28 No. 1,pp. 41-62.

Harinarayana, N.S. and Raju, N.V. (2010),“Web 2.0 features in university librarywebsites”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 28No. 1, pp. 69-87.

Karpinski, J.L. (2008), “Disconnected in aconnected world”, Medical ReferenceServices Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 53-72.

Kelly, B. (2005), “RSS – more than justnews feeds”, New Review of InformationNetworking, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 219-27.

Kim, H.N. (2008), “The phenomenon ofblogs and theoretical model of blog use ineducational contexts”, Computers &Education, Vol. 51, pp. 1342-52.

Kim, Y. and Abbas, J. (2010), “Adoption oflibrary 2.0 functionalities by academiclibraries and users: a knowledgemanagement perspective”, The Journal ofAcademic Librarianship, Vol. 36 No. 3,pp. 211-8.

Kondracki, N.L., Wellman, N.S. andAmundson, D.R. (2002), “Contentanalysis: review of methods and their

applications”, Journal of NutritionEducation and Behavior, Vol. 34 No. 4,pp. 224-30.

Kroski, E. (2008), Web 2.0 for Librariansand Information Professionals, New-Schuman Publishers, New York, NY.

Lan, Y. and Sie, Y. (2010), “Using RSS tosupport mobile learning based on mediarichness theory”, Computers & Education,Vol. 55, pp. 723-32.

Lee, M.J.W., Miller, C. and Newnham, L.(2008), “RSS and content syndication inhigher education: subscribing to a newmodel of teaching and learning”,Educational Media International, Vol. 45No. 4, pp. 311-22.

Libby, D. (1999), “RSS 0.91 specification,revision 3”, available at: www.rssboard.org/rss-0-9-1-netscape (accessed 6 October2011).

Mahmood, K. and Richardson, J.V. Jr(2011), “Adoption of Web 2.0 in USacademic libraries: a survey of ARLlibrary websites”, Program: ElectronicLibrary & Information Systems, Vol. 45No. 4, pp. 365-75.

Maio, C.D., Fenzaa, G., Gaetab, M., Loiaa, V.,Orciuolib, F. and Senatorea, S. (2012), “RSS-based e-learning recommendations exploitingfuzzy FCA for knowledge modeling”,AppliedSoft Computing, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 113-24.

Maness, J.M. (2006), “Library 2.0 theory:Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries”,Webology, Vol. 3 No. 2, available at:www.webology.org/2006/v3n2/a25.html(accessed 17 August 2011).

Marton, C. (2011), “American cancerhospital web sites and adoption of Web 2.0technologies”, Journal of HospitalLibrarianship, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 294-304.

Montalvo, S., Palomo, J. and Laguna, P.(2010), “Bridging the gap between teachingand breaking news: a new approach basedon ESHE and ICT”, Procedia Social andBehavioral Sciences, Vol. 9, pp. 1423-8.

Neilson, C. (2008), “Current awareness on ashoe string”, Internet Reference ServicesQuarterly, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 57-67.

Nesta, F. and Mi, J. (2011), “Library 2.0 orlibrary III: returning to leadership”, LibraryManagement, Vol. 32 Nos 1/2, pp. 85-97.

Nguyen, C.L. (2008), “A survey of theapplication of Web 2.0 in Australasianuniversity libraries”, Library Hi Tech,Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 630-53.

Ram, S., Anbu, J.P.K. and Kataria, S.(2011), “Responding to user’s expectationin the library: innovative Web 2.0applications at JUIT Library: a casestudy”, Program: Electronic Library &


Information Systems, Vol. 45 No. 4,pp. 452-69.

Si, L., Shi, R. and Chen, B. (2011), “Aninvestigation and analysis of the applicationof Web 2.0 in Chinese university libraries”,The Electronic Library, Vol. 29 No. 5,pp. 651-68.

Teo, H., Oh, L., Liu, C. and Wei, K. (2003),“An empirical study of the effects ofinteractivity on web user attitude”,International Journal of Human-ComputerStudies, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 281-305.

Tripathi, M. and Kumar, S. (2010), “Use ofWeb 2.0 tools in academic libraries: areconnaissance of the internationallandscape”, The International Information& Library Review, Vol. 42, pp. 195-207.

Woodcock, K. (2008), “Content analysis of

100 consecutive media reports of

amusement ride accidents”, Accident

Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 40 No. 1,

pp. 89-96.

Wu, W.G. and Li, J. (2007), “RSS made

easy”, Medical Reference Services

Quarterly, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 37-50.

Wusteman, J. (2004), “RSS: the latest feed”,

Library Hi Tech, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 404-13.

Youngkin, A. (2010), “Librarian-controlled

RSS a novel approach to literature search

follow-up”, Journal of Hospital

Librarianship, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 123-31.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Tanmay De Sarkar has contributed

many research articles in Library

Science. He has been serving the

University since 2004, prior to which

he had been serving at the British

Council Library, Calcutta. He is a guest

lecturer in the Department of Library

Science, University of Calcutta.

Tanmay De Sarkar (tdesarkar@

caluniv.ac.in, [email protected])

is Assistant Librarian at the Central

Library, University of Calcutta,

Kolkata, India.


Date post:	23-Dec-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	tanmay
View:	217 times
Download:	1 times

Analyzing RSS applications on library web sites

Documents