🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <adbs2c$muk$1@gail.ripco.com>,
John M. Gamble <jgamble@ripco.com> wrote:
>In article <X%TJ8.3132$tz4.992571@twister.nyc.rr.com>,
> <cypher@punk.net> wrote:
>>In ny.general John M. Gamble <jgamble@ripco.com> wrote:
>>#   
>>#   February 28 1997: Last day libraries could order catalogue cards
>>#   from the Library of Congress.
>>
>>Curious, could you elaborate on this?
>>
>
>Not much to add.  The card catalogue has given way to the computer look-up
>system, and the LoC pretty much made it official when it stopped making the
>cards.
>
>It's just another milestone like, say, when the last buggy whip manufacturer
>went under (assuming that there was such a specialized concern, and
>assuming that no one really makes them now).  I liked card catalogues, it
>was interesting to see what other people were looking up by seeing the
>wear and tear on the cards, but on the other hand i also like being able to
>look up up catalogue entries for libraries a couple hundred miles away via
>the web.

Of course, there is no technical bar to designing the computer catalog in
such a way as to indicate to the user how many times the record has been
accessed before, or for that matter to break it down by the number of times
it has been accessed this week, this year, or ever, things which would be
very difficult to determine by simply looking at wear and tear.


>>    Library filter law currently overturned.
>
>Yup, good thing too.
>
>	-john
>
>February 28 1997: Last day libraries could order catalogue cards
>from the Library of Congress.