I'll give it a 79, Dick -- (ability to evaluate law-related web sites).

• Author: Footz, Valerie

Well, okay, it's not quite American Bandstand material, but the ability to evaluate law-related web sites is an increasingly valuable skill. Many of these points are interrelated and the weight you place on the answers to each of the questions will change depending on the purpose of your research. I find it logical to group the questions I ask myself under seven general categories: scope, content, organization, links, currency, read-ability, and authority.

Scope

Identifying the scope is the easiest way to begin the evaluation. The scope is a superficial way of determining the site's relevance to your needs.

* Does the site clearly state its purpose? If the site cannot succinctly describe its reason for being, its value may be lowered due to a lack of organization or thoroughness. A plan is fundamental to a good site.

* Does the site provide the criteria for what is on the site and what is not? Sites should be able to let users know what types of information they are striving to make available and their rationale.

* Has the site has been created for a specific audience such as lawyers or teenagers? Sites which are targeted for specific groups may be useful for other users, but their primary purpose should be kept in mind.

Content

The content is of primary concern to information seekers. If you have found something you think applies to your research, you should ask yourself the following questions.

* Is the jurisdiction relevant? Is it a federal, provincial or municipal matter? The content of various governmental sites is uneven. Compare your provincial justice or attorney general department site with the Department of Justice Canada site. Sometimes it is not as important that the information come from your jurisdiction primarily because of a lack of information on the topic or its quasi-legal nature (for example, babysitting and the law).

* Is it a specialized site that concentrates on one area of law? If so, it may be able to cover the subject more thoroughly.

* Does the site claim to be comprehensive or selective? Providing a comprehensive service requires a lot of resources, can the people responsible deliver? If the site is selective, who is doing the selecting and on what basis?

* Does the site consist of more than just links to other sites? Does it contain unique content that cannot be found elsewhere? Sometimes a listing of links is useful, but those links must eventually lead to some hard data to which someone has devoted resources.

...