CFR, LSA, and Federal Register
In order to compare the online and print versions of the CFR, LSA, and Federal Register, I chose to compare approaches to researches regarding the regulations on Federal Flood Insurances, lists of eligible communities, which is a question we researched on a previous assignment.

I first compared the two publications of the CFR Indexing tools, and found that it was easier to find references in the print version than online, because an incorrect phrasing would produce no results online, whereas in the print version, there were similar phrases to direct the user, or even “see also” references.  There is a feature that allows the user to browse the titles easily online, but the user would have to know (more or less) the name of the title needed.  When the needed title is unknown, the search engine is much more useful online.  However, again, the engine is not friendly to the user who is unfamiliar with Boolean logic, and is not as sophisticated as others I have used in the course of this assignment.  Results are displayed by relevance of the frequency of the occurrence of the search terms in the document, and no further means of narrowing the search is provided after the initial entry.  Both resources deliver immediate results when the title and chapter of the document needed is known.

I found the print version the easier to read of the two, because I always prefer reading print to a computer screen.  I find it easier to scan for relevant phrases or words in print, although using the “search page” function of any browser to search for terms can alleviate this difficulty.

The Federal Register keeps both versions up to date daily (except on weekends and holidays), but even using the online version of the LSA, I found the online version to be more confusing and not necessarily the most efficient means of research.  Using that search engine just produces too many unnecessary hits.  The print version of the LSA and Federal Register can be cumbersome, but it’s definitely more intuitive to a practiced researcher.  Also, it’s easier to tell when the printed version was last updated, because they are usually shelved chronologically.  The online version often has “last updated” dates on the page, which can be misleading unless the researcher knows to look for other pages which have probably updates the information more recently.

In all, if I had a choice between using the GPO site or the print version of the CFR, LSA, and Federal Register, I would choose the print version, because it seems more logically arranged to me.
 

GPO and Cornell Legal Information Institute federal code
In order to compare the GPO and the Cornell sites, I chose to research the penalties for passport forgery, also researched for another assignment.

I found subject searching the USC and CRI on the GPO site to produce a set of hits that had mixed relevance.  Searching the GPO can be very ineffective if the search terms are not very specific.  On the other hand, I found that the same phrases I used on the GPO site were likely to work on both sites in the same way.  By that, I mean that if I entered a search term that produced no hits on the GPO site (e.g. “passport and forgery and penalties”), it also produced no results on the Cornell site.  If I found a search term that worked on the GPO site (e. g. “passport and forgery”), it also worked on the Cornell site.  The difference I found lay in the quality of the sites produced and the differences in abilities to narrow the search terms.  On the GPO site, there was not ability to narrow the search results after the initial set was produced, and the hits were not displayed logically but by relevance of word occurrence.   On the Cornell site, not only were the hits displayed with more descriptive labels, they were also arranged by relevance to the subject (or so it seemed to me).

Additionally, Cornell supplies another search function that allows the user to search the title chosen, and includes ways to narrow the search by adding more pertinent keywords or section numbers.  Cornell also links references to other documents it keeps online to the text, which is very helpful.  When searching the GPO site, the user often can’t tell whether the document displayed is helpful or not until checking the link itself, which can be time-consuming considering the amount of useless hits it can display.

Cornell is also more helpful in that it offers additional services for the researcher.  It adds links to Notes, Parallel Authorities, other Topical References, and has an Update function which calls up more current information if it exists.  The GPO site may mention other relevant sections or titles or documents in its pages, however they are not annotated, nor linked.  Therefore another search has to be conducted in the case of finding this kind of additional information.

In terms of interface, again, I would have to prefer Cornell.  The Cornell site looks professional, and is arranged so that the user needs to perform very little scrolling.  Relevant sites are linked when they are associated with the site, and the searching is much more productive with their engine.  The web author also used frames in such a way that the user is always aware of which part of the site is being navigated.  The GPO site forces the user to scroll too much, does not publish the material in a form that is easy to read online, and can be confusing to navigate.  To be more effective, a web author should allow for a means to return to the most relevant site on every page.

In all, I found the Cornell site to be a far more effective site, even though the content of the two sites appears to be the same in general content and timeliness.
 

Findlaw, The Law Engine and Hieros Gamos
Of the search engines I used the most, I would have to prefer “Findlaw” http://www.findlaw.com and “The Law Engine” http://www.fastsearch.com/law/index.html.   I like these two because they combine both search engines with links to subject searches.  “Findlaw” is more dedicated to the idea of providing links by subject, which can be useful when you know the question you want to find an answer to, but don’t know where you would necessarily find it.  “The Law Engine” provides its subject searches according to type of resource, which can be useful if you know where you want to go, and just want a gateway to the site.  The better search engine of the two, just in terms of producing results, would have to be the “Findlaw” site.  It’s powered by AltaVista, and only allows for input in one box, initially.  However, after the initial search it provides means of narrowing the search, which “The Law Engine” does not do.  “The Law Engine” provides means to search several engines, which can be helpful, but it doesn’t provide any annotation to suggest which engine would be better for any given or why.

The search engines on both produce good results to secondary sources about the search term entered, but a user would do better to search for primary sources on the sites intended solely for those searches.  Personally, I was unsuccessful in finding a reference to a primary source using several of these search engines.

Comparing these two sites to other engines, I found that other sites can be much more frustrating.  For example, the “Internet Legal Resource Guide” http://www.ilrg.com provides a much less intuitive interface.  The subject searches are divided by type of researcher doing the search, rather than by type of material being researched.   This site makes for an effective directory for someone looking for a particular firm or web site, however the site doesn’t state directly that the material is more useful used that way.  It advertises itself as “a comprehensive resource of the information available on the Internet concerning law and the legal profession, with an emphasis on the United States of America.”   This would lead one to believe that any kind of information could be searched productively on this site, and it would if you understood that it was going to direct you to other sites containing the needed information.

The “Internet Lawyer” is a web site which will eventually get you to pertinent information, but not without having to sort through page after gratuitous page.  Its subdivisions, separated by a page apiece, were time-consuming and frustratingly unnecessary.  It advertises a monthly newsletter for $129.00 per month, but I wouldn’t pay that for a web site that couldn’t manage its information more effectively.

My favorite all-around site turned out to be the “Hieros Gamos” http://www.hg.org site.  This web site has it all, literally, as far as I can tell.  It combines international and domestic information, and allows users to search the Internet as a whole as well as the site only.  It provides information about firms, libraries, law associations, world organizations, and practice areas.  It even provides access to primary sources all over the world.  Its interface is intuitive and attractive, and the navigation always allows the user to see exactly where she[he] is within the site, and allows a very simple click to return to any given point.

Compare this to the GPO site, which was difficult to navigate out of some documents.  The user was never altogether sure whether the information was the most current, or the only information to be found.  And the GPO site was not nearly as attractively displayed, nor readable.

The only site I’ve found which compares, as far as I’m concerned would be Lexis-Nexis’s “Academic Universe.”  The search engine is not as useful to those without skill with Boolean logic in Academic Universe, but for a practiced researcher, “Academic Universe” provides access to information in the news, in business, legal and medical fields, and in reference texts.  Not to mention journals, periodicals and other sources.  I would rate this site as my most favorite site in terms of authority, comprehensiveness, and ease of use (because I’ve used it so much), except that it’s not free to use outside of school use.  That makes me want to investigate “Hieros Gamos” even more closely.
 

Abbreviated Bibliography
Cornell Legal Information Institute federal code   http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/
GPO Access Code of Federal Regulations    http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_doc/aces/aces140.html
Findlaw    http://www.findlaw.com
Hieros Gamos   http://www.hg.org
Internet Legal Resource Guide    http://www.ilrg.com
The Law Engine    http://www.fastsearch.com/law/index.html