Archive for January, 2009

Cites & Insights Midwinter 2009 available

Friday, January 9th, 2009

Cites & Insights 9:2, Midwinter 2009, is now available.

The 34-page issue (PDF as usual) consists of either one essay or 132 essays, depending on your perspective:

A was for AAC: A Discursive Glossary, Rethought and Expanded (1-34)

That’s right! Five years after the Midwinter 2004 issue, “A is for AAC: A Discursive Glossary,” here it comes again, thanks to unanimous advice from those of you who chose to comment.

For 97 entries (out of roughly 100 in the 2004 issue), I’ve repeated portions of the 2004 commentary (preceded by Then: ) and added new commentary (preceded by Now: ) as appropriate.

Another 35 entries are wholly original to this issue (preceded by New: )

It’s a little longer than the 2004 edition (34 pages instead of 20). It’s mostly new material (roughly 63% new text).

Please don’t print out the HTML version

I’ve provided the whole thing in HTML–but for on-screen use only. Please, if you’re going to print it out, use the PDF: My tests show that the HTML version will require 45 pages rather than 34.


The last time I did this, one or two of you were disturbed because there wound up being two issues in 10 days. That’s not going to happen this time. The February 2009 issue will appear in February 2009. Right now, less than a third of it is even in draft form–and with a presentation to prepare for OLA, and notes to prepare for an OLA panel, in addition to ALA Midwinter and OLA to attend…well, you can be certain I’m not going to wrap the February issue up all that rapidly.

And don’t forget: six more early-bird shopping days…

The print and download prices of The Liblog Landscape 2007-2008: A Lateral Look go up on January 16, 2009. You still have a few days to order it at the current early-bird prices.

Walt at Random type ugly looking? Enable ClearType

Tuesday, January 6th, 2009

I’ve now gotten a couple of messages, and a couple of screenshots, related to “ugly” type in this blog, in FireFox, using Windows XP.

I don’t think FireFox is the culprit (since a bunch of people said it was just fine).

I would suggest that you make sure ClearType is enabled on your system. With Vista, ClearType is the default; with XP, you have to enable it. (I just tried turning off ClearType under Vista, and the type did indeed look pretty ugly, in much the way the screenshots suggest.)

Here’s how:

  • From the Start menu, choose Control Panel.
  • From the Control Panel, choose Appearance and Themes
  • From the Appearance and Themes panel, choose Display
  • From Display, choose the Appearance tab and click on the Effects button
  • There should be a choice, “Use the following method to smooth edges of screen fonts”
  • Chose “ClearType” from the select list, and make sure you click the box.
  • Apply.

It should make an enormous difference for the display quality of any typeface that has lots of thick-and-thin lines, which both Constantia and Book Antiqua do. (If you still have a CRT display, it may not make much difference…)

When I turned off smoothing, the type was, in fact, coarse and a little ugly. Turning it back on: Beautiful.

Hope that helps. Funny thing is, this should have been a problem even before I chose Constantia as the first-choice typeface…

Liblogs, library blogs, sponsorship and sales

Tuesday, January 6th, 2009

A while back, I posted about the possibility of sponsorship as a way for me to continue (and improve) research into library blogs and liblogs, how they’re used, when they succeed, how they’re changing.

The longer version of that discussion is here (on my personal website). I haven’t updated it, and probably won’t at this point. That discussion does not mention actual dollar amounts, and includes a “Complete sponsorship” possibility that is not available, at least not in 2009. (YBP will continue exclusive sponsorship of Cites & Insights, at least for this year.)

In the interests of transparency, I’ll add a few notes that do include dollar amounts. If you know of or work for somebody for whom sponsorship would make sense–a library school, a library vendor, a consortium, whatever–please pass this along. I’d be delighted to discuss the possibilities, via email (waltcrawford at or possibly at Midwinter (you can see my current schedule in a link on the right sidebar).

1. Library Blogs

The two books–public and academic library blogs–are both based on data from March through May 2007. I believe that set of data, and the work coming out of it, could serve as the basis for some worthwhile future investigation–not only how such blogs are changing but which ones seem to succeed, possibly aided by surveys or other contacts with some of the libraries. (Sponsorship by the right agency could also involved collaborative work…and if there are potential refereed articles arising, I don’t feel any particular need to be the one with my name on those articles, as long as I’m not actually writing them.)

But that course of investigation simply isn’t interesting enough to do on my own time with no expectation of income other than a few dozen book copies (and that’s what I’ve seen to date–neither book has sold close to 100 copies, and the Academic Library one hasn’t even hit 50). Yes, money is an issue…much more so than it used to be when I was fully employed.

I believe the only way this could work is as sponsored research, to the tune of around $15,000 a year. There’s the number. It might be negotiable.

On the other hand, I think the data will start to get a little cold if I haven’t gained an understanding by, say, April 2009 or so. I’d want to do a 2008 scan, and I’d also need to adjust other possibilities that use time. So, unless I see some likelihood of sponsorship by sometime this spring, I’ll set the library blog stuff aside, apart from anecdotal stuff I can do to add to C&I.

2. Liblogs

The situation is a little different here. The book is based on March through May 2007 and March through May 2008. It’s a much better book, I think, and it’s being received more warmly (not meeting the total cone of silence, until a couple of weeks ago, that the other books did). And, well, liblogs are (to me) a lot more interesting to look at and work with than most library blogs.

So there are two possible paths leading to an ongoing study, with or without the hypothetical Walt’s Big Book of Blogs:

  • Sponsorship–and here, $10,000 might be a plausible number. (It’s probably more work than the library blogs project, but it’s more interesting work.)
  • Sales–there aren’t a lot yet (still fewer than 50 copies), but it’s a good start for the first six weeks or so. I would say that the probability of my carrying this project forward another year, without sponsorship, would be roughly based on the combined sales of The Liblog Landscape 2007-2008 (print or download) and the bound volumes of C&I, as of the end of June 2009, using the following approximate formula: P = S/6, where P is the probability (in percentage), S is total sales. In other words, if the combined sales figure is 600 copies, it’s almost certain I’d carry it forward–and if it’s more than 300, it’s a better than even chance. (All of this, of course, dependent on sponsorship, and other things going on in my life, etc., etc.)

3. Walt at Random

I’m not going to hold my breath on sponsorship offers (and I don’t think I’d be willing to move this blog to The Library World’s Worst Blogging/Comment Platform, brought to you by Reed Elsevier, unless truly serious bucks were involved).

But I’m not opposed to the possibility of sponsorship, including a bannar ad. I believe we’d be talking about something on the order of $6,000 per year. If you’re wondering, over the last 366 days, Walt at Random had just over one million sessions and just over two million pageviews.

So there it is: Dollars and all.

Heat (or not)

Tuesday, January 6th, 2009

Dave Pattern‘s always doing something interesting…

This time, it’s HotStuff 2.0, “keeping track of what’s cooking in the biblioblogosphere.”

He’s pulled together a bunch of library-related blogs (hundreds more than in The Liblog Landscape 2007-2008), and automatically analyzes the RSS feeds “in an attempt to discover new and/or interesting topics.” (Well, only 308 of the blogs are currently active, but still…)

Every day, a blog post shows up with a single “hot” word–a word “that has seen a marked increase in usage over the last few days.” There’s also a “Word Wheel,” which I find a little inscrutable (hey, I’m a text person) but you may find fascinating.

Oh yes: And there’s one more feature, the Hot or Not page. Here’s Pattern’s description:

Just for fun, each active blog gains or loses points for each new blog post. Points are gained for using words that haven’t been used frequently in the past, but lost for using words that are declining in popularity. You can see the current scores on the Hot or Not page!

While I won’t be putting the Hot or Not widget on my sidebar, it is tempting. For whatever reason, the first time I checked it, this blog was #2. It’s down to #8 now, and probably headed steadily downhill…

Only 10 early-bird shopping days left!

Don’t forget: Come January 16, the Lulu prices for The Liblog Landscape 2007-2008 will go up to $35 (paperback) and $25 (download). You still have a few days to buy it at early bird prices.

A note on comment policy

Sunday, January 4th, 2009

It’s been a while since I discussed my “policy” for handling comments on posts here, and it was never a strong policy in any case. A situation arose recently where I had to enforce that policy, however, so:

I “start from yes.” While W.a.R. uses Spam Karma 2 to trap spam (and require me to go find and “unspam” legitimate comments with lots of links) and doesn’t display trackbacks, I don’t moderate all comments (at least not yet), and I don’t require “registration” for comments.


  • Legally actionable comments are not allowed. If you want to accuse a company or person, by name, of infringing copyright, this is not the place to do it. If you want to accuse someone of something illegal, this is not the place to do it. I’m pretty conservative about this one: If I think there’s any plausible legal issue, I’ll delete the comment.
  • Crude language and hate language are not allowed. This is not a public forum; it’s still my blog.
  • Personal attacks, particularly on anyone other than me, are generally not allowed.
  • I feel much freer to delete anonymous and pseudonymous comments than I do with named comments.
  • Comments that appear to be wildly offtopic or have even the whiff of spam or promotion will be deleted.

I think I’ve had to delete less than one comment a year (excluding stuff caught as spam). Want to disagree with me, even vehemently? The comment will stand (barring the issues above).

I know: clarifying when comments will be deleted isn’t a great way to start the new year. Sometimes it’s necessary.

Oops: I thought I published this as soon as I wrote it, but apparently not–it was written yesterday morning. The situation has been resolved, but the policy is still worth clarifying.


Sunday, January 4th, 2009

Speaking (twice) at OLA

A note for my (dozens? scores? more than one?) of Canadian readers:

I’ll be at the OLA SuperConference in Toronto this year. Attending pretty much the whole thing (arriving Wednesday afternoon, leaving Saturday early afternoon). Speaking twice:

  • Friday, 3:45-5:20 p.m. Session 1320, Shiny Toys or Useful Tools? (About liblogs and library blogs, with a few sidenotes about wikis. Some stuff from the books, some new checkpoints. Some of this may appear in the next-but-one issue of Cites & Insights.) Yes, I know there are, what, 28 other sessions at the same time–and, who knows, maybe I’d rather listen to John Dupuis (who’s on opposite me). [Dupuis’ session has been moved.] But anyway…
  • Saturday, 9:05-10:20 a.m., OLITA Spotlight Session, Top Tech Trends. One of three panelists. I’ve never met the other two panelists, but will assume they’re better trendspotters than I am. I’ll be working on possibilities (and maybe attending Midwinter’s LITA Top Tech Trends session to take notes…)

And attending some unknown number of sessions and social events, formal and otherwise. Right now, I have seven sessions and four social events marked as possibilities… It’s my first time at OLA, and I’m very much looking forward to it. And hope the weather and airports work out.

But I’ve also done something a little out of the ordinary, at least for me: Mounted a temporary page here, containing my current tentative schedules for both OLA SuperConference and the 2009 ALA Midwinter Meeting, which I’ll be leaving unusually early (because of OLA, but also because Frontier cancelled their mid-afternoon Denver-San Jose flight, and I wasn’t about to get back home at midnight…)

For OLA and ALA Midwinter both…

The curious among you will see that the ALA schedule is pretty skeletal, other than Saturday. It’s busier than my usual ALA “must do” schedule, to be sure, because I agreed to chair the LITA Publications Committee (and have since realized that I really have done more than my share of this LITA governance stuff, and am feeling to old for it…)

I’m sure some mandatory items will be added to that schedule, which I’ll attempt to keep up to date until shortly before the conference(s). (I’ll delete it post-OLA.)

Meanwhile, if you’d like to get together, feel free to send me email or leave a comment. No guarantees, I’m not a nightowl and not on an unlimited budget, but I’m certainly open to possibilities. (For all I know, a flood of invitations to vendor receptions may be on its way–but since that’s never happened in the past 33 years of attending ALA and Midwinter, I’m not holding my breath.)

If you missed the link above, here it is again–or just look over in the righthand margin, where it says “Midwinter 2009 and OLA 2009 schedules”

Maybe not the best ever, but perhaps the most surprising

Saturday, January 3rd, 2009

Issue of Cites & Insights, that is: Namely, August 2007, Volume 7, Number 9.


I’ve been treating old issues of Cites & Insights as though they were magazines I subscribe to–dropping one into the middle of the basket’o’new magazines, roughly once a month, and reading it when it comes to the front. (This is from the stack of “last year’s issues” that I get when I’ve replaced a year’s worth of individual issues with the full-year paperback.)

That gives me the “writer’s reading” sense I get with my columns in print magazines but hadn’t had with C&I: That is, reading the published version long enough after it’s written to distance yourself from it. That can be a pleasure…although, with C&I, there’s almost always some chagrin, as I catch typos that escaped the several passes during final copyediting and copyfitting.

Sometimes, I get to the end of an issue and say “Well, they can’t all be winners.” Usually, I find a mix of material I’m proud of and material that’s OK. Once in a while, I’m proud of the whole thing.

Right now, I’m about 17 months behind on this, which isn’t a bad interval. Which is to say, two days ago, the August 2007 issue emerged, and I read it over the past two days.


This is a really good issue. It’s distinctly unusual: No regular sections, five Perspectives (one of them Off-topic). The Perspectives really are personal, somewhat philosophical essays (each title begins “On,” usually a tipoff).

And they’re good. With or without “IMHO” or “IMNSHO” attached.

If you haven’t read the issue, you really should. (It’s one of the more widely downloaded, so there’s a good chance you already have. What the heck: You could read it again. The price is right.)

I even think it’s as timely now as it was in late July 2007.

The Surprise

What really surprises me, though, is how good the issue is under the circumstances.

Which is to say: I wrote those essays in July 2007, after coming back from ALA.

It’s fair to say that my morale was not exactly at a peak.

I knew I was out of a job as of the end of September.

After ALA and events leading up to it, the consequences of my introversion, failure to specialize sufficiently, lack of enough schmoozing and other personal shortcomings were clear: My “network” turned out to “notwork.” Lots of good wishes, zero possibilities for workable new full-time employment, or even substantial enough part-time possibilities to constitute a living.

(Peggy Sullivan forwarding the online ad that led to my current part-time gig came later that year.)

So how did I wind up writing four essays as thoughtful, sometimes eloquent, and non-self-pitying as those in this issue?

Whatever it was…

I don’t want to repeat the circumstances. I’d love to repeat the eloquence.

Meantime, I’ll do the best I can–at work, with C&I (I semi-apologize for the amount of navel-gazing from “real issue 102” to the January 2009 issue, and think this year will be better in several ways), with this blog, with my columns…

You can call that a New Year’s Resolution if you’re inclined, but I don’t do those. (I would never have projected that I’d actually keep up the “1.5 miles or more as part of a long lunch plus 1.5-2 miles uphill on a treadmill, at least five days a week” regimen, but it’s become a habit now, and I have so many more old movies to watch…)

Alfred Hitchcock: The Legend Begins, Disc 1

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

This four-disc DVD set is part of Mill Creek’s “Legends Series” and also a 20-movie pack. In this case, that means 18 early Alfred Hitchcock movies, all b&w, including six silents, and two episodes of Alfred Hitchcock Presents. But there’s an extra: 55 minutes of trailers from movies throughout Hitchcock’s career. This isn’t some beautifully-remastered retrospective—but you’re getting 18 movies, two TV episodes and an hour of trailers for $8.50 or so. As with some other newish Mill Creek sets, this one uses double-layer single-sided discs rather than double-sided single-layer discs, so the labels are a lot easier to read.

Disc 1

Starting the first disc, I see significant upgrades in the presentation. The menu is DVD-like, not stills with menu. Alfred Hitchcock directed all of these, so I don’t repeat that.

The Lady Vanishes, 1938, b&w. Margaret Lockwood, Michael Redgrave, Paul Lukas, Dame May Whitty, Cecil Parker, Linden Travers, Basil Radford, Mary Clare, Emile Boreo. 1:37.

What a start for a set! I’d only vaguely heard of this first-rate movie before.

The movie begins in some Central European hotel, where too many people are stuck because the train’s snowed in. Lots of comedy with two stuffy English types forced to share the maid’s room, three apparently-wealthy young women having a final get-together before one of them goes off to marry someone with title and money who she may not love, and a young man rehearsing some heavy-footed folk dancers in the floor over the young woman’s room. Oh, and the former nanny for some children, headed back to England.

Next day, they all head for the train—but the nanny’s mislaid a bag and the young woman helps her out. In the process, a flowerbox pushed off a ledge from above, and quite clearly intended for the nanny, strikes the young woman on the head, not quite knocking her out…but she’s swooning as the train pulls away. She and the nanny find themselves sharing a first-class compartment with an Italian couple and a stern older woman; at one point, the two go off to have tea, using a special tea the nanny carries with her, and there’s interaction with the Britishers.

All of which is just setup—because when the young woman wakes from a nap, the nanny’s gone. And everybody says she was never there.

Well now. What a start for an intriguing plot, enriched by a psychiatrist on the train (picking up a patient at the next station to take to a hospital), the young man’s presence in the crowded, smoky coach car, and lots more. Throw in a nun in high heels, magic boxes, adultery, two people who think cricket is more important than possible abduction, international intrigue… The plot turns out to be intricate, confusing, suspenseful, enriched with humor and the kind of thing that really needs a master director—which, fortunately, it has. There’s even a little romance.

Any time I feel the need to watch the last quarter of a movie on our regular TV because I’m too intrigued to wait another day, I know I’ve got a winner. In this case, the story’s interesting, the direction is…well, Hitchcock, the acting is good, the photography is…well, again, Hitchcock. Great stuff, pretty much a masterpiece and enormously entertaining. Oh, and the print’s about as good as “VHS-quality” ever gets. A winner and a classic: As good as they get. An easy $2.50.

The Farmer’s Wife, 1928, b&w, silent (with music). Jameson Thomas, Lillian Hall-Davis, Gordon Harker, Ruth Maitland. 2:09.

Hitchcock wasn’t always devoted to suspense, not even suspense-crosses such as The Lady Vanishes. This early silent (with music that’s at least partly specific to the movie, since the only vocal portion, a men’s chorus, arrives at the point that a male glee club is starting up in the movie) is pure comedy—a cross between romantic comedy and British rural comedy.

Here’s the plot, in its entirety. A farmer—that is, the master of the farm—is a widower. After his daughter weds (some years later?), he decides he should marry again. With the help of his housekeeper, an attractive younger woman who’s intelligent and has a good personality, he draws up a list of possibilities. Then he goes after each one—basically arriving at their doorstep (or in one case confronting them during a party at another previous possibility’s house), saying he wants to get married again, and telling them they’re the one. Maybe a trifle more of an actual request, but not much. He gets turned down, in some cases with laughter, in one with a hysterical fit (after he says something mean about the woman after she rejects him). Finally, dejected, he comes to realize that he should have been looking closer to home…and finds his wife. (Who, notably, is by far the prettiest, nicest and most suitable of the lot.)

That’s it. Oh, there’s lots of mild comedy turns along the way, including an extended party sequence involving his handyman, who he’s loaned to one of his potential mates to announce people at her party—and the outfit the farmhand’s required to wear, with pants that he can’t close and is holding up all the time. But that’s it. You’ve just read the entire plot, spoilers and all.

I like the more natural pacing of some older movies. I’m not quite sure that this story is enough to hold up for more than two hours, even with Jameson Thomas’ remarkable facial expressions. It’s one of those silents where I wonder whether sight-readers would get a lot more dialogue—or whether all that stuff that doesn’t show up on cards is just nonsense. (One IMDB review says this version was recorded at “the wrong speed,” but that seems unlikely given the natural pace of everything in the film. I should learn never to pay any attention to IMDB reviews…)

Well-directed, to be sure, also well photographed, well acted and generally a good print. But it’s a bit slight to get more than $1.50.

The Manxman, 1929, b&w, silent (orchestral score, not apparently related). Carl Brisson, Malcolm Keen, Anny Ondra, Randle Ayrton. 1:30.

A fisherman on the Isle of Man is best friends with a rising young barrister—and is wooing a barmaid, but her father forbids that because he’s poor. So he goes off to Africa to seek his fortune, telling the barrister to take care of her in the meantime. Which the barrister does, with predictable results—especially once they get a telegram saying the fisherman’s dead.

Well, he’s not. He comes back with his fortune. He marries the young woman (apparently she’s to gutless to say she doesn’t love him, or maybe that’s Just Not Done on the Isle of Man), who turns out to be expecting, albeit not with his child. Some time after the child is born, she leaves and convinces the barrister—on the road to becoming Deemster, which is apparently what the magistrate is called on the Isle of Man—to hide her away. But she pines for more affection, tells the Deemster he has to make a choice, and goes off to take the child away from the fisherman. Who won’t give up the child.

She jumps into the ocean, but is saved—and shows up in court (on the Deemster’s first official day) on the minor charge of attempted suicide. The fisherman also shows up…and the father finally figures out what’s going on. As you might expect, there is no happy ending.

Or maybe that was all that was happening. This silent really requires you to read lips to get much out of it, with titles few and far between. The leads all seem to emote mostly with their eyes, and the barrister and woman both seem perpetually semi-hysterical. I think this is one primarily for Hitchcock completists; it’s not terrible, but it doesn’t have a lot to recommend it. $1.00.

The Cheney Vase (Alfred Hitchcock Presents), 1955, b&w. Darren McGavin, Carolyn Jones, Patricia Collinge, Ruta Lee. 0:25.

Remember when half-hour TV shows actually had 25 minutes and 30 seconds of show? In the case of Alfred Hitchcock Presents, that seems to means a 22-minute pocket drama and lots of time for Hitchcock to do his schtick before and after.

A ne’er-do-well gets canned from his job at a museum and, using a forged letter of recommendation (his girlfriend is the museum head’s secretary), gets a job caring for a disabled elderly art patron and amateur artist—who has The Cheney Vase, which the museum (and a shady German art dealer) wants to buy. He figures he can nab the vase, sell it and take off…and for some reason feels he needs to isolate the woman while trying to find it.

There is, as you might expect, a twist.

Darren McGavin is good in the role, but despite Hitchcock and “golden age” credentials, I thought this was pretty ordinary stuff. The print’s decent. Given that it’s less than half an hour, I’d never give it more than $0.75 unless it was a masterpiece; being generous, I’ll say $0.35.

The Sorcerer’s Apprentice (Alfred Hitchcock Presents), 1962, b&w. Diana Dors, Brandon De Wilde, David J. Stewart. 0:25

A carnival magician with a devilish appearance steps out of his trailer and sees a person sprawled unconscious over a grating—and discovers it’s not a drunken bum but a sick teenager. Rescued, the teen turns out to be an escapee from some institution, a little simple-minded. He thinks the magician is the devil and his wife (and assistant, in the usual short outfit) is an angel.

She’s no angel; she’s carrying on with a highwire man (and the kid sees them together, but he’s extremely gullible, so…). He watches the magic act and is terrified when the magician’s sawing her in half. Later, she confides to him that the magician really is the devil and that the magic’s in the wand (two conflicting notions, but…). Somehow, this is enough to convince him to kill the magician—and, in what ensues, leave the boyfriend passed out, drunk, in the magician’s trailer, and, eventually, well, if the assistant in the saw trick is unconscious…

There have been many nasty little stories based on the sawing-the-woman-in-half trick. This is one of them. Yes, Robert Bloch wrote it; yes, it’s Hitchcock. But it’s basically a nasty little piece of work. Give the show’s sponsor credit: This episode was deemed unsuitable and never shown as part of the series (until syndication). It should have stayed lost. Not worth a dime, and a blemish on the disc.

Note: A briefly-present comment, deleted because it makes claims that are legally actionable, may be based on a misunderstanding.

Clearly, much of what Mill Creek Entertainment releases is in the public domain, and I give them credit for mining the public domain in a way that makes items readily accessible. But it’s also 100% clear that never, in any of its materials, does Mill Creek Entertainment assert that everything they release is in the public domain. All of the DVDs include the standard copyright warning (also on the boxes in many cases), and it’s fairly clear that some items from Mill Creek are not from PD materials.

Only 14 shopping days left (and a change note)

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

14 shopping days for early birds

Want The Liblog Landscape 2007-2008 for $22.50 (or $20 as a download)?

That price is good, only at Lulu, from now through January 15. After that, it goes up to $35 ($25 for the download).

If you really, truly hate shipping charges or avidly desire a book with an ISBN, you can buy the book at Amazon–but it’s already $35 there.

Why you should buy this book

…Let me say how great it is to see someone who tests hypotheses with data. And in a thoughtful way, not just reporting averages and percentages context-free and sitting back and waiting for the applause. Walt’s transparent about his methodology and why he made the choices he did.

I found this book to be a valuable read – and would think this would be the case for anyone interested in the liblog universe.

  • You’d like to see ongoing coverage of changes in the liblog landscape, and you recognize that–barring sponsorship–the only way that can happen is if people are willing to pay for the results.

A change note

As of now, as promised, Public Library Blogs: 252 Examples and Academic Library Blogs: 231 Examples are out of print at

The two books are still available (at the links in the previous paragraph) as $20 downloads, and will be available until it’s clear there are no more sales.

Want the print book, beautiful cover and all? You can still buy them at Amazon–for now. (Again, until it’s clear there are no more likely sales.)

(Future research in these areas? I believe sponsorship is the only possibility. Neither book is anywhere close to a hundred copies, although Academic Library Blogs finally passed three dozen–and it would take at least three hundred sales to even semi-plausibly justify the work.)