Lieser’s brief book review endorses the annual directory’s practical value before proposing a specific improvement to its organization. She regards the 1930 edition, like its predecessors, as indispensable for those working in administration or economic affairs. Her criterion is usability: authoritative information should also be readily accessible.
Eine Anregung sei gestattet: Es würde für viele die Benützung dadurch wesentlich vereinfacht werden, daß die Namen der Funktionäre in den Ämtern, abgesehen von ihrer Anführung im systematischen Teil, auch alphabetisch geordnet abgedruckt würden.
English translation: May one suggestion be permitted: for many, use would be substantially simplified if the names of officials in the offices, in addition to being listed in the systematic section, were also printed in alphabetical order.
The proposed alphabetical listing would supplement, rather than replace, the systematic arrangement. This modest recommendation supplies the review’s critical substance: a directory organized by administrative structure could better serve readers who need to locate a person by name. Lieser’s endorsement thus leads directly to a concrete proposal for improving everyday consultation.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian