This picture by Norby from Flickr says it all.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Thing Five: More Fun with Flickr
Mashups integrating Flickr are fun to play with. It's cool how imaginative people are. Being bored is a thing of the past when you have so much to explore on the Internet. I did the obvious and spelled out Booker at the bottom of the blog. Scroll down to see it.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Thing Four B - Part Two
Thanks to Vanessa, my go-to girl for this link that answers the question of how to find those elusive picture url's. Here it is in case anyone else is interested:
http://www.flickr.com/help/photos/#68
http://www.flickr.com/help/photos/#68
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Thing Four B: Photosharing with Flickr
Booker II was looking very plain before we put the hand prints on her. I took this right after she got her name put on, so at least she wasn't completely naked.
I already had a Yahoo account, so I logged in and at that point it was easy to create a Flickr account and upload to it, then add it to my blog. Now I have pics of both my girls!
I am having a hard time figuring out what to use for each photo's url. If you know how to get at that info, I'd like a clue. I am thinking there has to be a url for the picture, not just the whole flickr page, right? I shouldn't work on these things at the end of the day when I am tired, clearly.
Thing Four A: Photosharing with Flickr
Imagine my surprise when I searched Flickr for "Booker" photos and found one I didn't even know existed of Booker I at a school carnival two years ago. Here it is. I did not know that Booker was such a unique name for a bookmobile, but apparently so. I stopped when I got to the first one, so I am curious to see how many more pictures Flickr may have of my current ride and/or her predecessor.
That really brings home how all-encompassing photo sharing has become more than anything else. I sure do miss the old girl. The photo is by Northfield.org, by the way. Thanks for the m
emories!
That really brings home how all-encompassing photo sharing has become more than anything else. I sure do miss the old girl. The photo is by Northfield.org, by the way. Thanks for the m
emories!
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Thing 3: Learn About RSS
I'm on Thing Three and I have yet to come across something that my 17 year old son isn't already an expert on! Having him show me his RSS - he uses Sage through Firefox - helped me understand what I was doing in this process. I Ixquicked "Compare Bloglines and Google Reader" and came across this web site http://lifehacker.com/software/google-reader/geek-to-live-from-bloglines-to-google-reader-205786.php. I didn't want to leave it to chance that I would choose the best of the two RSS options and I figured if this woman had helped build a feed reader herself, she should know what she's talking about. She recommended Google, so I went with that.
Imagine my surprise when I tried to add my own library's web site and it did not have a feed! I will suggest that we create one so we can better serve our patrons who are interested in library news.
This was a relatively simple process for me. I can't wait to find and add more bookmobile blogs so I can have that touchstone. I have not yet been able to attend the annual bookmobile conference and I would like to be more connected to those other unique librarians who also do what I do. It would be nice to see how others have solved some of the problems we face as mobile librarians.
FYI - Two things I have discovered about Blogger as I have added more posts: The spellcheck doesn't work for some reason and in order to copy and paste to use spell check elsewhere, you have to highlight the text and hit Ctrl + C.
Imagine my surprise when I tried to add my own library's web site and it did not have a feed! I will suggest that we create one so we can better serve our patrons who are interested in library news.
This was a relatively simple process for me. I can't wait to find and add more bookmobile blogs so I can have that touchstone. I have not yet been able to attend the annual bookmobile conference and I would like to be more connected to those other unique librarians who also do what I do. It would be nice to see how others have solved some of the problems we face as mobile librarians.
FYI - Two things I have discovered about Blogger as I have added more posts: The spellcheck doesn't work for some reason and in order to copy and paste to use spell check elsewhere, you have to highlight the text and hit Ctrl + C.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Thing Two - What is Libray 2.0?
Wow. Watching Stephen Abram and reading John Blyberg's blog on Library 2.0, both made me feel way behind the eight ball as well as really stupid. When I came to "The Ongoing Web Revolution" I was so grateful to find a well-written, non-presumptious elucidation on the topic that I am sorry to say figuring out who the author was is going to take more than just the few minutes I have before I need to go to bed. Unfortunately, I chose to post a few pertinent thoughts as a priority. I'm not sure I chose well.
Never mind the distractions disrupting Abram's video, the niggling question of the lack of an Australian accent and his obvious penchant for loving to hear himself use little-known vocabulary. He made some good points. At least I think he did. He was awfully sure of himself.
And never mind Blyberg's disregard for proper grammer and blithe disdain of spell-check as well as his presumption that his reader is going to know whatever acronym he tosses off. His closing sentence was so compellingly simplistic, ("It may not be the right label, but whatever IT is, it IS") that I had to forgive him.
The biggest question I can think of to ask now is, "What should a librarian be in the midst of all this?" Merrian Webster's definition of a librarian is, "A specialist in the care or management of a library." Seems to me that definition falls way short. It makes me think of someone who is tending a machine and ignoring the person who needs that machine to save his life.
Maybe my problem lies in the assumption I am making about the definition of a library. Let me check. Nope. Good old Merriam backs me up. It says, "a place in which literary, musical, artistic, or reference materials (as books, manuscripts, recordings, or films) are kept for use but not for sale." This is where I would normally gloat about being correct in my assumption, but, sadly, I think Merriam and I are both missing something here.
Shouldn't libraries be places - real and/or virtual - which provide people the information and resources they need? Wouldn't that then make librarians people who help other people access, understand and use these resources and information? The role of collection caretaker, inherently understood, then takes a backseat to the role of enabler.
I'm not sure I've got a firm grasp on it yet. It bears thinking about quite a bit more. Perhaps Library 2.0 (and beyond) is the toolbox I can fish around in to become the enabler I envision.
Never mind the distractions disrupting Abram's video, the niggling question of the lack of an Australian accent and his obvious penchant for loving to hear himself use little-known vocabulary. He made some good points. At least I think he did. He was awfully sure of himself.
And never mind Blyberg's disregard for proper grammer and blithe disdain of spell-check as well as his presumption that his reader is going to know whatever acronym he tosses off. His closing sentence was so compellingly simplistic, ("It may not be the right label, but whatever IT is, it IS") that I had to forgive him.
The biggest question I can think of to ask now is, "What should a librarian be in the midst of all this?" Merrian Webster's definition of a librarian is, "A specialist in the care or management of a library." Seems to me that definition falls way short. It makes me think of someone who is tending a machine and ignoring the person who needs that machine to save his life.
Maybe my problem lies in the assumption I am making about the definition of a library. Let me check. Nope. Good old Merriam backs me up. It says, "a place in which literary, musical, artistic, or reference materials (as books, manuscripts, recordings, or films) are kept for use but not for sale." This is where I would normally gloat about being correct in my assumption, but, sadly, I think Merriam and I are both missing something here.
Shouldn't libraries be places - real and/or virtual - which provide people the information and resources they need? Wouldn't that then make librarians people who help other people access, understand and use these resources and information? The role of collection caretaker, inherently understood, then takes a backseat to the role of enabler.
I'm not sure I've got a firm grasp on it yet. It bears thinking about quite a bit more. Perhaps Library 2.0 (and beyond) is the toolbox I can fish around in to become the enabler I envision.
Thing One
Right up front, I'm going to tell you that titling this post Thing One makes me laugh. Let me explain. First, I created this blog solely because I am participating in the "23 Things on a Stick" program for Minnesota librarians. I am supposed to use it to post my thoughts about each step in the program. While I understand that this is a way for the 23 Things folks to tell whether or not each participant has completed each step, it does seem like it would get really boring for them to read the same things over and over again, even if it is fun for each of us to rave about how interesting and/or informative we are finding the process.
Second, I am unabashedly planning to use this blog in the future as a place to talk about my job as a bookmobile librarian. It just seems strange to create a blog that will be obsolete in a few weeks. Plus, I love a challenge, and creating a blog that would be pertinent for the program as well as beyond was simulataneously challenging and appealing to my practical nature.
So what's fiunny about that you're wondering. Nothing! I often ramble around before coming to the point. Here comes the funny part. Any Dr. Seuss fans out there will recall Thing One and Thing Two from The Cat in the Hat. They were twin helpers who contributed to the general havoc wrought by The Cat upon Sally and her brother's (did he have a name?) home one rainy afternoon. Every time I think about Thing One, my pea brain remembers those Things from that book and I chuckle inwardly while mentally composing a post about Thing One as opposed to Thing one. I can't be the only person out there who secretly wishes they could unabashedly run amok like Thing One and Thing Two do. Do you?
So, before I descend completely into a rhyming, off-topic diatribe, perhaps I should stop wasting my 23 Things (can you imagine if The Cat had brought that many?) reader's time and fulfil my duty by saying that creating this blog has been a really interesting and informative process! Perhaps the statement is uncalled for since it's obvious I am having a good time here. I may not be entertaining anyone else, but I am clearly enjoying myself.
Who knows, I may feel compelled to flesh out the formative rhyming couplets in my brain as I contemplate Thing One. In the future, at least for the time-being, I will indicate when a post is going to be off-topic, i.e., does not pertain directly, (or in some small way at least), to the "23 Things" program. And if you see a new post titled "Thing One Revisited" you may want to steer clear.
Second, I am unabashedly planning to use this blog in the future as a place to talk about my job as a bookmobile librarian. It just seems strange to create a blog that will be obsolete in a few weeks. Plus, I love a challenge, and creating a blog that would be pertinent for the program as well as beyond was simulataneously challenging and appealing to my practical nature.
So what's fiunny about that you're wondering. Nothing! I often ramble around before coming to the point. Here comes the funny part. Any Dr. Seuss fans out there will recall Thing One and Thing Two from The Cat in the Hat. They were twin helpers who contributed to the general havoc wrought by The Cat upon Sally and her brother's (did he have a name?) home one rainy afternoon. Every time I think about Thing One, my pea brain remembers those Things from that book and I chuckle inwardly while mentally composing a post about Thing One as opposed to Thing one. I can't be the only person out there who secretly wishes they could unabashedly run amok like Thing One and Thing Two do. Do you?
So, before I descend completely into a rhyming, off-topic diatribe, perhaps I should stop wasting my 23 Things (can you imagine if The Cat had brought that many?) reader's time and fulfil my duty by saying that creating this blog has been a really interesting and informative process! Perhaps the statement is uncalled for since it's obvious I am having a good time here. I may not be entertaining anyone else, but I am clearly enjoying myself.
Who knows, I may feel compelled to flesh out the formative rhyming couplets in my brain as I contemplate Thing One. In the future, at least for the time-being, I will indicate when a post is going to be off-topic, i.e., does not pertain directly, (or in some small way at least), to the "23 Things" program. And if you see a new post titled "Thing One Revisited" you may want to steer clear.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Valentime's Day
Yesterday was Valentine's Day. At least, I think it was. When I asked some of the kids at my day care stops what day it was, they told me "Valentime's Day!" Close enough. When I asked them what Valentime's Day was about, the most frequent reply was, "Candy!" Not quite close enough.
Oh, a small minority knew it was about love. (And by small, I mean one.) I kept it simple. I didn't tell the candy lovers they were wrong, because they weren't, but I did say that what Valentime's Day is mostly about is letting the people you love know you love them. They generally blinked their surprise as they mulled this over. Their average age is 4, after all. This was a simple idea, easy to understand, and it made perfect sense. When you're four, of course you tell the people you love that you love them! Doesn't everybody? They don't yet know that this honest expression of emotion often becomes stilted as children grow up. I sure do love those kids, and I told them so.
Assuming that someone knows you love them is okay on the surface. Letting them know takes the guesswork out of it. Sure, I know my grandmother loves me, but every time we part or finish a telephone conversation, she tells me, "I love you." There's no mistaking the truth and the depth of her feeling. I can hear it in her voice. I can see it on her face. I can feel it in her hug. She really loves me.
I hope the people I love know it. I think I may need to work on telling them and showing them. I read a book in which some of the characters had worked out a secret signal to say "I love you" without having to say it out loud. As they held hands, they would gently squeeze the other person's hand three times. I - love - you. It's not a perfect system, but it's a place to start.
Oh, a small minority knew it was about love. (And by small, I mean one.) I kept it simple. I didn't tell the candy lovers they were wrong, because they weren't, but I did say that what Valentime's Day is mostly about is letting the people you love know you love them. They generally blinked their surprise as they mulled this over. Their average age is 4, after all. This was a simple idea, easy to understand, and it made perfect sense. When you're four, of course you tell the people you love that you love them! Doesn't everybody? They don't yet know that this honest expression of emotion often becomes stilted as children grow up. I sure do love those kids, and I told them so.
Assuming that someone knows you love them is okay on the surface. Letting them know takes the guesswork out of it. Sure, I know my grandmother loves me, but every time we part or finish a telephone conversation, she tells me, "I love you." There's no mistaking the truth and the depth of her feeling. I can hear it in her voice. I can see it on her face. I can feel it in her hug. She really loves me.
I hope the people I love know it. I think I may need to work on telling them and showing them. I read a book in which some of the characters had worked out a secret signal to say "I love you" without having to say it out loud. As they held hands, they would gently squeeze the other person's hand three times. I - love - you. It's not a perfect system, but it's a place to start.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
