[BC] libraries vs on-line research

[Thomas G. Osenkowsky]

When a claim of "being the first" or "Number One" it
is impoirtant to qualify exactly to what is being referred.
Paul Davis' "I Go Crazy" rated high on the Billboard
year end chart not because it reached #1 (it peaked
at #7) but was on the charts for 40 weeks. A song can
be #1 on a single chart or cross over to multiple charts.
Longevity and mass appeal can influence how one
quantifies the popularity of a song.

Was KDKA the first commercial station on the air?
The first to air a Presidential address? The first 50 kw
station? The first to air a female voice? The first what?

Indeed there are numerous formulae for statistics and
probability. Assigning ratings can be open to wide
interpretation, hence the need to be very specific about
what and how methodologies are employed.

I recall a news story a few years ago that found numerous
errors in text books used in NYC schools. Science and
math books! There is one classic text on Directional
Antennas with errors in vertical form factors and impedance
calculations. I had a paper published once that in print
removed the "h" in front of "cos". The "h" represented
hyperbolic, for hyperbolic cosine. Readers using the
published equation will get incorrect results. This is the
worst possible publication error.

Tom Osenkowsky, CPBE