Disqus - Latest Comments for ksclarke

Re: AT&T to Verizon: “There’s a Lawsuit for That”

Ross2893 — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:30:17 -0000

well there are comparisons online and when it comes to browser speed over the 3g network, as to be expected the iphone wins. go check it out on youtube.

Re: AT&T to Verizon: “There’s a Lawsuit for That”

ksclarke — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:08:28 -0000

Ross, you'll notice my comment was a question. We do need to see it come out and watch its adoption.

As for eco system (Ed's comment)... that's also something I'm looking forward to see. There seems to be a pretty robust system growing around the Android platform to me.

Re: AT&T to Verizon: “There’s a Lawsuit for That”

Ross2893 — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:44:24 -0000

The Motorola Driod Is An unproven device, let's wait until it actually comes out and goes head to head w/ the iphone before we throne it the "Iphone killer"

Re: AT&T to Verizon: “There’s a Lawsuit for That”

Ed — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:09:27 -0000

Where? The eco system is incomplete. I don't see it getting a lot of major developers because of the different type of phones.

Re: AT&T to Verizon: “There’s a Lawsuit for That”

ksclarke — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:49:53 -0000

the better phone? http://phones.verizonwireless.com/motorola/droid/

Re: How to deal with intense frustration

FamManLib — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:09:16 -0000

Kevin, agreed. I don't handle that whole "lack of control" thing very well,
obviously. And at the same time I realize that there is very little over
which I truly have any control...

Re: How to deal with intense frustration

ksclarke — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 10:32:40 -0000

I think I'd agree that the ultimate answer is patience. For me, frustration is also a result, sometimes, of confusing the things over which I have control. I like the serenity prayer ("grant me the serenity to accept the things I can't change, courage to change the things that I can, and the wisdom to know the difference") as a practice for dealing with these particular things/times. Patience is a part of that of course, but there is also the desire for wisdom.

Re: Free is good

ksclarke — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:09:55 -0000

Wow, free is great! Nice find.

Re: Upgrading Wordpress

Kevin S. Clarke — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:06:16 -0000

Turn off all your plugins and turn them back on one by one. I had several break with the new version. Other than that, though, no problems...

Re: Future of MARC

Kevin S. Clarke — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 22:30:12 -0000

I agree we'll be using MARC for awhile (I think the shift away from it has started though -- mostly because we've started looking at really reorganizing the data in MARC). I was wondering, though, more about the expression of relationships between parts of the record. I know this is done to some extent in linking fields in MARC. I just wonder if there aren't better ways (richer relationships which could be brought out given a different markup standard in which to put them).

As for other levels, one possible place would be dates. I assume we'd want to have dates in a standard format and consistently handled across our new data structures. There is a lot of information about dates in MARC that is sort of encoded in the data itself ([19uu] or 1943? -- indicating ranges, certainty, etc.) Would dates move into a field so that subfields could be used to indicate additional information? If so, how do the dates get related to other aspects of the record (it's currently in subfields to indicate a relationship with data in other subfields in the same field)?

Using MARC in such a different manner though would be just as hard on our current systems. It's not the MARC that is central to our current systems. If there really is a separation between MARC and our content standards, then MARC is just the transmission format (and input/export modules are pretty easy to swap out). It's the data in MARC (the content standard) that keeps us using MARC in my opinion; if we swapped out the content standard(s) -- the tough part -- swapping out the MARC piece would be relatively easy, I think.

Not sure if this is coherent or not. My mind is thinking about the packing I should be doing for my flight out tomorrow morning to Access 2007. :-)

Re: Future of MARC

Kevin Clarke — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:47:46 -0000

Hi Nicole,

Interesting... it sounds like you're saying if we fix the content standard(s) we would want to put the new data back into MARC (now better organized than it was in its original MARC form)?

Two questions... Would you say the fixed fields should be continued to be used or just the variable length ones? Also, you don't think our new content standard(s) would need any more depth than field/subfield? Thanks.

Re: Good News

Kevin S. Clarke — Sat, 05 May 2007 20:37:28 -0000

Congratulations! I work in Firestone Library at Princeton. I hear the PTSEM folks have some very interesting plans (and that position did look really interesting!) Anyway, welcome to the area... it's good to have another code4lib'ber around.