From Pitt to Houston to West Texas A&M

July 10, 2008 – 12:39 pm

While I was in library school at Pitt, I was pretty non-committal about what sort of library I was headed for after finishing the degree.  A number of people I knew were particularly intent on a public library or an academic library, and a few were even specifically inclined to a special library.  I was more inclined to academic than public but was intent on keeping my options open between various paths.  For three semesters, I had an academic reference internship at Hillman Library, but during one semester I also interned at a law library.  I took course in medical librarianship and in business information resources.   For two semesters, I led the student group there of the Special Libraries Association, and as I neared graduation, I seriously pursued one academic position, but ultimately opted happily for an opportunity that fell into my lap, after the SLA Conference in Denver, for a corporate role as a technical librarian on a contract basis.

For about six months, I took care of the library needs of an oil and gas company in Houston, TX.  It was definitely valuable and worthwhile experience (and lucrative), and I’m glad I did it.  Even before I left Pittsburgh to start that job, though, I was glad of its impermanent nature, for two reasons.   Firstly, I never intended to settle in Houston permanently, and nothing about the city changed my mind on that.  Also, with that academic reference internship still so recently behind me, this seemed like the best time to shift back into academic work, as I knew I wanted to.

I would never rule out an eventual return, perhaps, to some kind of special library, but I knew while in Houston that, though I appreciated the corporate perspective, the energy industry focus, and managing all aspects of a small library’s operation, it was important to get my career back into a university library for several reasons.   For one, I missed the actual reference work.  While there was a little of that in the corporate setting, most typically the internal customers knew what specific materials they wanted and required only the procurement of those items or, sometimes,  needed me to do the literature search and return a results list for their review (and then get them the selected items).  Each of those are pleasant enough tasks, but there’s a limit to the variety in it and, therefore, how much I could learn.  Reference at an academic library will also include some routine, of course, but, crucially, it’s a different routine, and more to the point, there’s always going to be new questions to answer.

At least as important is the instruction aspect.  Many, perhaps most, academic reference jobs include some classroom instruction element, which I was hoping to develop beyond the experience I had at Pitt.  Moreover, almost any reference transaction includes the opportunity, or sometimes the need, for individual instruction.  This is sometimes true in a corporate setting, but much more frequently in a university environment.   Consequently, there’s double the satisfaction–you’ve not only connected someone with the specific information that they need but also increased their knowledge of the process for the future.

Additionally, there is the question of subject matter.  As interesting as it was to gain some insight into oil and gas exploration and production, I was eager to broaden again the topics that I dealt with.  While I may end up specializing again in the future, I’m excited right now to deal with a wide range of topics.

Likewise, I’m excited to deal with a wide range of sources.  There’s only so many that were needed in dealing with a specific set of needs for a specific set of customers in a corporate library.  Any good university is going to offer a broader variety of resources.  Not every library will have all databases, of course, but I’ll still be dealing with a wider range and simply a different selection at a university than at the corporation.

Lastly, I knew that I wanted to have as complete a command as possible of the different elements of librarianship—what are all (or as many as are possible to know) of the different information resources anyone might need, whether print or electronic; how can we best facilitate users’ access to and understanding of those resources; how are those resources most effectively organized; and how can we best manage the collections of those resources—and I knew that an academic library would be the best setting to develop that expertise.

For all those reasons, I’m glad to say that, although it took me a little longer than I liked, I found just the right position that satisfies those goals for this point in my career.   At the beginning of last week, I began as a reference librarian at Cornette Library of West Texas A&M University in Canyon, TX.  (Remaining in Texas after leaving Houston was just a coincidence; I was applying all over the country.)  I’m confident I can do a lot of good for the users of Cornette and the WT community and likewise confident that I’m going to grow a lot professionally in this role.

Much that I discuss on this site in the future will still deal with topics or sources I’m engaged with completely independently of my work at Cornette, but certainly to some extent I’ll also be drawing upon issues provoked by my current work, as well as exploring in greater depth resources that I have there.  (That’s right–some fun nights at the office after hours!)

The points above seem worth noting not only to clarify the picture of who I am and how I’m progressing as a librarian but also to provide some context for when I start going on about some item I pull of the reference shelves or some idea raised in the course of my job.  Of course, it also really seems kind of fundamental on a site headlined “Steve Ely on LIS and life” to sum up Steve Ely’s life with LIS.

[Update: I changed the post title, and consequently the URL, for greater clarity.  Also, I fixed a few typos.]

Delicious RSS feeds

July 6, 2008 – 11:12 pm

I mentioned earlier I’ve been encountering some unresponsiveness from Del.icio.us customer support with resolving some broken RSS feeds.  It seems worth clarifying the details with that.  As I noted, I bookmark stuff with it constantly and have thousands of items there now.   I’ve long had people in my Del.icio.us network, which is essentially a kind of internal reader of feeds from selected users, as it sorts chronologically all of their new bookmarks, but I’ve never had any need to subscribe to a Del.icio.us feed otherwise.   Recently, though, I wanted to use a WordPress RSS widget on another blog and found that somehow it wasn’t recognizing as a valid feed either http://del.icio.us/rss/steve.ely or http://feeds.delicious.com/rss/steve.ely.  I’d seen the widget work fine for John Scalzi, so I tried http://del.icio.us/rss/jscalzi and found that it worked just fine.  Confounded, I began trying others.   A few worked, while others didn’t.

To confirm it wasn’t a problem with WordPress, I tried subscribing with Bloglines, which has been my primary RSS reader for a while.  It worked for Scalzi’s and a couple others, but, again, didn’t work for mine or some others.   Since I’ve been getting little or no support from Del.icio.us on this, I did a little more testing on it.  Not that I was likely to fix the problem myself, but I wanted to at least have more data, I guess, in case they do want to do something with it.

Bloglines is pretty inconvenient for this, though, I decided, so started testing with Google Reader.  Specifically, I checked the operability of the RSS feed for those Del.icio.us accounts in my network.  I currently have 32 in the network.  (Scalzi’s not among them.)  It turns out that
http://del.icio.us/rss/username doesn’t work for 28 of them.  For four of them, Google Reader was able to recognize and subscribe to the feed.  For the others, it said something like
“No feed available for ‘http://del.icio.us/rss/UIClibrarian.’”  28 users out of 32!  I haven’t any idea if the proportions would hold up outside of my network, but if so, that’d be broken feeds for seven eighths of all users.  Ridiculous.

The good news is I seem to have found a good workaround.  (It’s still bad news that something that should work on its own is broken.)  Some Del.icio.us users in my network I know about because they’re my friends in real life, but some I just discovered by clicking around, looking at who bookmarks similar stuff as me in a similar way or who shares with me overlapping network or fans.

One of the latter sorts is the mysteriously named MissElliot1978, who I just noticed today has made clear her real name, Bonnie J. M. Swoger, with a link to her web site.   Apparently, she’s a librarian at SUNY Geneseo, and at first I was just sort of appropriately impressed with her web page.  After a minute, though, something dawned on me.  Hers (http://del.icio.us/rss/MissElliot1978) is among the RSS feeds Google Reader wasn’t recognizing for some reason, and yet content from her bookmarks was showing up fine on her own web site, via Feedburner.   Intrigued, I created a Feedburner account and pointed it toward  http://del.icio.us/steve.ely, and it generated and RSS feed for me at http://feeds.feedburner.com/Delicious/steveely, which Google Reader and the WordPress widget seem to cope with just fine.  What makes it odd is that Feedburner knows the original feed is http://del.icio.us/rss/steve.ely.   If the original is no good, why is that not an obstacle for Feedburner?  If it is OK, why did Bloglines, Google Reader, and WordPress have such a problem with it?

Either way, I’m not happy that those Del.icio.us RSS feeds aren’t working on their own, but I am glad to have achieved the intended effect.  Now if I can just get Ms. Swoger to explain how she’s managed to combine items from multiple sources into one Feedburner feed.

Update: Two excellent developments.  Bonnie Swoger promptly replied to my inquiry and explained that it’s a service called feed.informer.com that allows for the combining of feeds.  So that’s pretty great.  Second, Britta, the Delicious community manager intern, apparently is keeping a close eye on blog posts about Delicious and, as you might notice, commented on this post and the preceding one, reaching out to ensure the issue is well-resolved.  So that’s quite well done by her and hopefully the beginning of a fruitful dialog.

Delicious customer support and Yahoo turmoil

July 6, 2008 – 3:09 pm

I’ve been a huge user and proponent of Del.icio.us for about two years now.  I’ve got over 5,000 bookmarks there with a proportionately vast number of tags.  I’ve given a lot of thought to its benefits and enthusiastically sung its praises to multiple audiences of friends and colleagues in library school, in various jobs, and in personal life.  I have, in the past, been very happy with their customer support.   This summer, though, I’ve been rather disappointed by that support, and I wonder if the problems are tied to the apparent turmoil at Yahoo.

Last summer, three different rather vexing problems arose in connection with the basic retrieving functions of Del.icio.us, and my report of one of these was quickly escalated to a product manager who was able, with some effort, to resolve all three problems within a week. This year, after discovering in May that the RSS feed seems to be broken for not only my own account but also for many others, I at first received no reply at all, then only vague assurances and promises in response to my subsequent entreaties, and eventually nothing at all again.

Del.icio.us is owned, of course, by Yahoo.  Like Flickr, it was founded independently and later bought by Yahoo.  Now Yahoo itself seems to be in chaos, with a wildly uncertain future and an inability to keep its management team intact.  After repeated efforts, Microsoft may yet succeed in acquiring some or all of Yahoo.    An advertising deal between Yahoo and Google has aroused controversy and is drawing antitrust attention from the Justice Department.  There’s talk about the company merging with AOL.   Corporate raider Carl Icahan is trying to take it over.

Now Yahoo is overhauling its organizational structure and management team in the wake of the departure of key executives.  I first noticed this with Flickr founder Stewart Butterfield, who was bound to get extra attention because his letter of resignation was a thing of beauty and hilarity.   Few would dare (and still fewer so successfully execute) the lively and lovable tactic of writing the resignation as a fictional (and weird) short story.   Butterfield cast Yahoo as a tin-smithing endeavor that he joined in 1921 and watched expand into such other industries as corrugated steel, synthesized rubber, grain processing, brewing, salty snacks, oil exploration and refining, and hotels & casinos, to name just a few, before finally concluding, 30 years after a sheet of tin last rolled off their production lines, that there’s just no place for him there anymore.  I wondered a bit, perhaps, about the significance of his resignation, but mostly I just appreciated the genius and humor of the letter.

A few days later, though, it really became apparent things were crumbling.   Butterfield had submitted his letter to (then) senior vice president Brad Garlinghouse.  But within a week, it was revealed that Garlinghouse himself was leaving, along with at least three other senior vice presidents.  Clearly, this thing is spiralling out of control.  114 executives have now left since January 2007.  Especially relevant to the impact on the management of Del.icio.us itself is that along with Garlinghouse and the others, Joshua Schachter also found it necessary to resign.

Schachter founded Del.icio.us.  He conceived, developed, and built the thing.  Two and a half years ago, after selling it to Yahoo, he was happy to hand over management and get back to coding.   By this summer, though, he’d apparently become so frustrated with the management of it that he had to get out and join the ranks of the “gloriously unemployed.”  (It’s probably a lot more glorious when you’re a multimillionaire.)

I suspect all this is having its impact on my own difficulties getting effective support as a user.  The TechCrunch blog post tied Schachter’s frustrations to “the development of the new version of delicious [which] seems to have almost stalled within Yahoo,” but it’s difficult to imagine all of this not also affecting the normal resolution of issues with the existing version.

It’s difficult to envision a likely scenario for the company that would really bode well.  Icahan?  Microsoft?  AOL?  Please.  None of that seems at all promising.  As distasteful as all those other options are, though, it’s hard to have faith in the present Yahoo management of Del.icio.us when they can’t even get their RSS feeds to work.   I have to worry about what the state of the product and the support may be in a year or two.

The system Schachter gave us has been perhaps my favorite Web 2.0 tool.  I’ve admired it greatly and used it extensively.   I’ll probably continue to for the time being.   Contingency plans appear increasingly necessary, though.  Recent business news offers a sobering lesson on the dangers of relying so much on anyone’s product, especially one owned by a volatile public company.

Update: Here’s something particularly good to see.  In the morning (her time) of the next business day after I posted this, a comment appeared here from Britta, the Delicious community manager intern, who’s apparently keeping quite close eye on blog posts about Delicious.  As you’ll see below, she clarifies “We’re still live and kicking here at Delicious, and we haven’t changed our support procedures recently. They work most of the time but aren’t perfect, and sometimes unlucky issues slide through the cracks,” and she goes on to address the substance of the policy in the following post.  So that’s well done by her, catching things that drop through those cracks, and hopefully this is the beginning of a fruitful dialog.  It does speak well of their customer service’s vitality when they’re watching this intently what such random people as I happen to say about them.

Maghound

June 29, 2008 – 8:34 pm

Rogier

From the Folio article:

Maghound.com allows consumers to choose titles from a variety of publishers for a mix-and-match “subscriptions” where they pay one monthly fee and have the ability to switch titles at any time. Unlike traditional subscriptions, members aren’t locked in their memberships and can cancel whenever they wish…..The pricing for a membership is tiered—three titles for $3.95 per month, five titles for $7.95, seven titles for $9.95, and $1 per title for eight titles or more.

This project has really exciting potential. Right now, the site isn’t showing more than 2 or 3 magazines they’ve got there that I’d consider subscribing to, but if they can get any 4 or 5 from a specific 20 or so additional titles, I’d probably sign up. Of course, I’m forced to judge their offerings from the web site as it stands in late June, two months before the launch. The article about it says it has 280 titles already on board and possibly 300 by the September launch and 400 by the end of the year. The Maghound site only currently shows 46 (if I count right) of those.

I would consider The New Yorker, Sports Illustrated, Wired, & Time. I’m not sure if those four would be enough to get me to sign on, though. I don’t know if I’d consistently want to stick with three of those four.

Titles not currently showing there that would interest me include:

The Atlantic, Harper’s, The Nation, The Economist, The Believer, Business Week, Newsweek, Reason, Rolling Stone, Mother Jones, The American Conservative, The Freeman, American Heritage, National Geographic, National Geographic Traveler, Scram, Washington Monthly, Newsweek, ESPN, London Review of Books, New York Review of Books, The Walrus, Helix SF, Locus, and Subterranean.
[Later update] Also, The American Prospect, The Progressive, American History, Fortune, Farm Journal, New Statesman, Skeptical Inquirer, Scientific American, and U.S. News and World Report.

I’m eager to see what the full 300 titles they offer are in September.

Update: I just realized their pricing model doesn’t really make sense.  Wouldn’t you expect the price per title to go down as you increase the number of titles you’re subscribing to?  But with “three titles for $3.95 per month, five titles for $7.95, and seven titles for $9.95,” you’re looking at $1.31 per title if you subscribe to three, $1.59 each if you get five, and $1.42 for each if you get seven.  That’s just weird.  Maybe the idea is to really deter people from subscribing to five titles?    Really, why is there a penalty for a medium number of titles?

Resource review : HPL business databases

June 21, 2008 – 12:47 am

Some observations about a few of the business databases offered by the Houston Public Library:

1.  infoUSA’s ReferenceUSA, Dun & Bradstreet’s Million Dollar Database, and Factiva from Dow Jones each are powerful tools for getting data about companies.   A few advantages and disadvantages of each stand out at a glance.

  • ReferenceUSA covers rather more fields in any given record.  Some elements included that I particularly like include the Company News, Competitors Report, Business Expenditures, Nearby Businesses, UCC filings, and Public Filings.  None of these are available on the record for the same company in the Million Dollar Database.
  • The MDB does have brief biographies of the executives, though, which the others do not.
  • Factiva has almost nothing in a company record that the the other two don’t.  It lacks the executive bios of the MDB and the Business Expenditures, Nearby Businesses, UCC filings, and Public Filings of Reference USA.  It does have a Peer Group section similar to the Competitors Report of ReferenceUSA.  It also has a NewsBrief section that rivals or bests that from ReferenceUSA.  This is only fair, since Factiva has a parallel purpose for news article searching.
  • While any given company record in the MDB may be in many ways less extensive than in ReferenceUSA, there are many more company records in the MDB, which notes in its “About” section that it covers 23 million companies.  ReferenceUSA says on its own “About Us” section that it contains information on 14 million U.S. businesses and 1.5 million Canadian businesses.
  • In addition, though, ReferenceUSA has residential listings for 210 million U.S. residents and 12 million Canadian households, which the MDB doesn’t.  Naturally, it can’t track that many people perfectly.  I can find my brother-in-law and father, easily enough, for instance, but I don’t seem to be in there myself.  I wonder if having a land telephone line makes a difference.

2.  The help/support feature for Factiva seems to be badly broken.  It will allow you to search for FAQ articles, but no matter which one you select, when you click on the link, the screen says, “Invalid Article ID.“  Come on, Dow Jones!  You’re letting us all down.  Is this Rupert Murdoch’s fault?

3.  Speaking of broken things, the link for OneSource on the HPL subject listing of business databases actually points to ReferenceUSA, which made me wonder if the former actually turned into the latter.  It doesn’t appear so.  Then I noticed that the HPL alphabetical listing of all databases actually doesn’t list OneSource at all, so this could be screwed up in any of a few different ways.

4.  Like Factiva, Gale’s Business & Company Resource Center allows searching for both company records and news articles.  Also of value for company records are Mergent Online and Hoover’s and for articles, popular and scholarly, are EBSCO’s Business Source Complete and Gale’s InfoTrac variations, such as InfoTrac Small Business Collection.  Comparisons of these will wait until another time.

On Public Access to Subscription Databases

May 31, 2008 – 2:00 am

I just created a new page on this site entitled “Everyone’s License” that I anticipate revising often enough that it seems to warrant life outside the flow of blog posts. It’s to examine how widely access to subscription databases is offered through public libraries. It may require original research to address some of the questions raised below or maybe these answers are already out there (seems very plausible) and easily found. Beyond analysis of the situation, though, the page will collect web pages providing the resources described. If I realize this totally duplicates what exists somewhere else, I’ll be happy to give it up. In the meantime, I don’t expect to put up a blog post every time I revise the page, but it seemed worth mentioning to begin with. There’s a bit more, including some of the links in question, that I didn’t copy over, but the following paragraphs are all from that page directly.

I imagine a tiny fraction of the public realize they have access to some very good subscription databases through their public libraries websites. I wonder what proportion of Americans really have that access. The number of databases available from even a good public library will never match an ARL school’s or most colleges otherwise. But people in decent-sized cities do have access to a lot more resources than they may know. I’ve most recently lived in Houston and Pittsburgh. Each of those library systems has subscriptions to a number of research databases that exceeded my expectations. Anyone with a library card can use those databases over the web, and, of course, any resident within their local area can get a library card. It increases access wonderfully.

Of course, it raises the question of information literacy in a significant way. While in pursuing my MLIS in Pittsburgh, I worked part-time with at an office downtown and discovered that the highly intelligent, educated professionals I worked with never went to the library. It had no appeal, and they had no interest. I wonder, then, how many are apt to care about or effectively use such resources when they do know of them. Other relevant questions come to mind, though. I wonder if the research is out there already addressing them. Specifically:

  1. What are the public library systems, or consortia, with web access to research databases from vendors such as EBSCO and ProQuest/CSA?
  2. How many public libraries don’t offer such access?
  3. What are the total populations of people within the areas served for groups 1 and 2 above?
  4. How many people within group 1 (and for that matter group 2 and the nation altogether) even hold library cards at all?
  5. How many library cardholders within group 1 know about those research databases? And/or how many use them?

For all I know so far, most of America may have be in group 1 above, or perhaps only a small minority. This seems like the sort of thing someone’s already looked into and is keeping an eye on. Organizations I’m going to look to first are ALA’s Public Library Association (PLA) and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). If the research has been done and the answers are out there somewhere, I’d think the PLA should have it. It seem like something the IMLS might be interested in, though, too, so they’re worth a look. While I’m very much of the opinion that the PLA ought to point to the research if it’s out there, it’s plausible that they don’t but it’s nonetheless written up in some scholarly LIS journal. In that case, I may, somewhat ironically, be hampered by a lack of database access. One sort of research databases that’s unsurprisingly absent from public libraries is the LIS variety. I’ll confront that difficulty as I exhaust other options. I’m curious enough to do original research here, but of course I don’t want to waste effort duplicating what’s already out there.

Update: Actually, while Pitt spoiled me with three different LIS databases and Houston Public Library doesn’t have three, it does have one, which is better than I thought. So that helps.

2nd Update: I’ve improved the syntax in the first sentence a bit.

“Previously, on steve ely dot net….”

May 25, 2008 – 10:59 pm

The HTML pages previously found at this address can now be found via http://www.steveely.net/profile.html.

Similar content will likely also appear in some WordPress pages here before very long. There may eventually be other non-WordPress pages under this domain as well. Obviously, I’ll note these developments when they occur. For now, though, the gist of my HTML work is back, and you remain well-positioned to learn about me and my career.

Ely 2.0

May 24, 2008 – 9:40 am

Depending on your timing, you may be encountering an awkward lack of content. Today I replaced the static HTML pages I had at this address (steveely.net) with this installation of WordPress. Hopefully all the content from those two pages will be back up on some convenient new pages before the weekend’s over.

Those two pages, though, were certainly the low end of what I could be doing with this domain. For almost a year now, this site has offered only my profile–essentially an edited HTML resume, along with the PDF original–and a second page with some relevant links. While each of those are important for my principal presence on the web, it only makes sense to get in the habit of blogging here and perhaps posting some longer writings and other projects as well.

For a few years I’ve used Blogger intermittently, and then last year I posted semi-regularly for a grad school student group I led on a WordPress blog installed and maintained by a colleague on her own site. When she completed her MLIS degree and moved on, I tried migrating the whole thing to the school’s servers. It seemed to work briefly, but our new webmaster and I soon found that mysterious environmental factors seemed to conspire against us. We gave up on the effort to host the blog on the university’s domain, and I put everything into a TypePad blog hosted by the national organization. I believe they’re still using that at this time. My point is that I have some experience with blogging generally, with blogging in WordPress, and even a little with administering WordPress; I do need, though, to expand and build upon that. Any returning visitors to this site are therefore likely to find the appearance evolving along with the content.

I’m obviously not only blogging here to develop my WordPress skills, though. While there are a great many subjects I’ll leave for other platforms, I do plan to discuss here matters relating in any way to library and information science. I often prefer “librarianship,” actually, but neither that nor even “library science” gives you quite as nice an acronym as LIS. Moreover, “library and information science” nicely connects the work in traditional libraries with the organization, retrieval, and use of information in other contexts. I’m a big fan of del.icio.us and of David Weinberger’s work, so I’ll certainly be exploring topics in that vein, as well as other LIS topics. And I’ll likely mention elements of my own life from time to time as well.

I hope you find it all as worthwhile as I do.