I finally got around to reading a couple of posts I’d squirreled away, and they turn out to be somewhat related. Brian Mathews posts about 5 next-gen library catalogs and 5 students: their initial impressions. Important to us here at……

At first glance, I associate the term “database” with a relational database (since I am a software engineer). I also like the term resource or simply source.

We use Source for precisely the reason that what we are searching is not necessarily a database. (And, in passing, I agree that a database can exist independently of the software used to manage it. But I am not trying to define “database” here.)

One immediate disqualification fro database is that, using its conventional conflation, it does not describe what a federated search system searches. There is a (very famous) database called “Medline”. But it is not a Source. We have to be more precise, because the Medline ‘thing’ is available from at least 6 different Hosts (notice capitalisation). Each of which spins it a different way (pun intended for those of you old enough to remember “database spinners” - here called Hosts). Thus to us a Source is a combination of the data(base) and the Host making it available. There are other nuances to allow for the actual functionality and the software involved, but this is the broad brush picture.

Equally we needed something not overloaded as “database” is, because many of the things we connect to are not collections of data. They may be processing systems - think of a ILS circulation system. So we chose the more neutral “Source” (over “Resource” as it was shorter) and capitalised it for this defined meaning.

And…. it seems a reasonably well understood term. Most people are familiar with a source as something from which things flow or where things are available, so it seemed a good fit.

Terms most often cited as being misunderstood or not understood by users include…
Database
E-journals
Index
Periodical or Serial
Resource