Who's Who Online combines the latest instalment of that hardy annual, Who's Who, with the historical riches contained within the various retrospective volumes. I have to say at the outset that, although I am of an age and educational background which makes me more used to having my professional reading matter presented in printed form, I have no qualms about or distaste of reference sources in an online form. The standard comment made by many of my contemporaries about modern society's demand for instantly digestible knowledge in a short, easily comprehensive form may be valid in many instances, but, if they can have quick access to a set of reliable facts, such as are presented in works of this kind, why should they find that objectionable? All too often one sees printed reference works such as Who's Who gathering dust on the open shelves of a library or the spines showing the effects of frequent, careless handling. Although it may appear trite to say so, with an online resource such as this both of these dispiriting features are obviated.
The combination of information referred to in the first sentence is only one part, but a significant one, of this work's many benefits, for the technology behind it makes it possible to bring together at the click of a mouse thematic information which would need a very tedious and time‐consuming search in a printed volume. Taking up the suggested question posed in the preliminary material, “How many in Who's Who went to Durham University?”, I discovered among the names listed there an entry for David Roderick Shukman, the BBC's environment and science correspondent since 2003, whose contributions are always well researched and presented. Being a Scot, I was led on from this particular research approach to look at the similar information gathered under various Scottish universities, including Edinburgh. There I found an entry for Barbara Scott Young, created a Life Peer in 1997 with the delightful title, drawing on her upbringing in Perthshire, of Baroness Young of Old Scone, who has done sterling work for several ornithological and wildlife bodies. A Classics graduate of Edinburgh, she has worked for an impressive number and variety of private and public bodies in her career to date, a fact which seems to validate the assertion of my Professor of Humanity, i.e. Latin, at the University of Glasgow that, armed with an Honours degree in that discipline, particularly from a Scottish university, the world is one's oyster.
In a section entitled, “What not to look for in an online resource”, are listed what I assume are common complaints by users. Many of these complaints are unfamiliar to me, as I use, or certainly set out to use, online works mainly to search for specific information. This means that one at least of these assumed common complaints is totally lost on me, that listed under the rubric “You get no extra goodies”. These include the lack of links to a chat reference service and of such facilities as crossword solvers and weekly quizzes. I have found no evidence that this work offers none of these, but, if it does not, that would engender no criticism from me.
Although I do not know what other works were submitted for the award, Outstanding Electronic Reference, awarded by CILIP/Nielsen BookData, I can find nothing in this one to cause me to disagree with the panel of judges. For someone who is not the most technically minded, I found no difficulty whatsoever in navigating my way round the various search options. Both the cross‐referencing system and the layout of each entry, with the adjacent ones listed handily in the left hand margin next to the entry displayed, are beyond reproach.
