Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

Abstract from the Website: "This paper is the third in a series of studies emanating from the UK JISC-funded RoMEO Project (Rights Metadata for Open-archiving). It considers previous studies of the usage of electronic journal articles through a literature survey. It then reports on the results of a survey of 542 academic authors as to how they expected to use open-access research papers. This data is compared with results from the second of the RoMEO Studies series as to how academics wished to protect their open-access research papers. The ways in which academics expect to use open-access works (including activities, restrictions and conditions) are described. It concludes that academics-as-users do not expect to perform all the activities with open-access research papers that academics-as-authors would allow. Thus the rights metadata proposed by the RoMEO Project would appear to meet the usage requirements of most academics."

Findings: IPod touch coudl access 84% of Yale's ebook collection Kindle, Sony Reader, etc. could only access 24% of ebook collection

This article mostly covers the process of mass digitization. One of the recommendations at the end of the article states, " A "digital lending right" should be created to provide universal access to all out-of-print works, through collaboration between national governments and creative communities. This would remove a barrier to the mass democratization of information access and make a contribution to the survival of some threatened languages."

As anyone who has worked in optimization recently knows, stripping the randomness out of a computing system is a bad idea. Harnessing randomness is what optimization is all about today. (Even algorithms designed for convergence make extensive use of randomness, and it is clear that library research in particular thrives on it.) But it is evident that much of the technologization of libraries is destroying huge swaths of randomness. First, the reduction of access to a relatively small number of search engines, with fairly simple-minded indexing systems -- most typically concordance indexing (not keywords, which are assigned by humans) -- has meant a vast decrease in the randomness of retrieval. Everybody who asks the same questions of the same sources gets the same answers. The centralization and simplification of access tools thus has major and dangerous consequences. This comes even through reduction of temporal randomness. In major indexes without cumulations - the Readers Guide, for example - substantial randomness was introduced by the fact that researchers in different periods tended to see different references. With complete cumulations, that variation is gone.

This lengthy New York Times Magazine article discusses mass scanning projects and their impacts in many areas: linking, tagging, and accessibility, among others. Ultimately, author Kevin Kelly imagines that all digitized books will be linked together as on universal book. He discusses the impact of copyright law on existing works and the inevitable out of print "orphans," and Google's plan to scan all the orphans and allow snippets to be accessed under the fair use doctrine. This assumption by Google that it can scan first and find copyright owners later results in a lawsuit that the author describes as a "clash of business models." Business models based on copies are obsolete as business models based on value and searchability take their places.

"Oxford Scholarship Online is a vast and rapidly expanding cross-searchable library which now offers quick and easy access to the full text of 2,557 Oxford books. In addition to Economics and Finance, Philosophy, Political Science, and Religion, Oxford Scholarship Online now provides access to new Oxford books in Biology, Business and Management, Classical Studies, History, Law, Linguistics, Literature, Mathematics, Music, Physics, and Psychology and Social Work."

"Measuring the Impact of Networked Electronic Services (MINES) is an online, transaction-based survey that collects data on the purpose of use of electronic resources and the demographics of users. As libraries implement access to electronic resources through portals, collaborations, and consortial arrangements, the MINES for Libraries™ protocol offers a convenient way to collect information from users in an environment where they no longer need to physically enter the library in order to access resources."

"MyiLibrary™ is Ingram Digital Group's online eBook and eContent resource for academic, medical, professional and corporate libraries the world over. Our unique aggregation platform offers organizations the ability to acquire and access digital content on an individual title, publisher-specific or subject collection basis, based on their unique requirements and resources. With nearly 160,000 titles currently available, covering all major academic disciplines, and an additional 1,000 titles being added weekly, MyiLibrary has the most comprehensive online eContent resource available on the market today. We work with the world's leading commercial publishers including McGraw Hill, John Wiley, Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, Springer and Elsevier, as well as exclusive access to intergovernmental publications from groups such as The International Atomic Energy Agency, the International Labour Organization and the World Health Organization."

Planets, Preservation and Long-term Access through Networked Services, is a four-year project co-funded by the European Union under the Sixth Framework Programme to address core digital preservation challenges. The primary goal for Planets is to build practical services and tools to help ensure long-term access to our digital cultural and scientific assets. Planets started on 1st June 2006. This website makes available project documentations and deliverables as Planets progresses so that these can be shared with the libraries, archives and digital preservation community.

This is an e-book by Wendy Pradt Lougee. The Table of Contents on this Website lists the following discussion topics: Collection Development, Federation, Library as Publisher, Information Access, Communities and Collaboratories, Access and the Semantic Web, User Services, Virtual Reference Systems, Information Literacy, Organizational Models, Library as Place

FULLTEXT SOURCES ONLINE (FSO) (ISSN 1040-8258) is a directory of publications that are accessible online in full text, from 29 major aggregator products. FSO lists 40,231 periodicals, newspapers, newsletters, newswires, and TV or radio transcripts. It covers topics in science, technology, medicine, law, finance, business, industry, the popular press and more. FSO also lists the URLs of publications with Internet archives, noting whether access to them is free or not.

All of this isn't to say I'm pessimistic about the future of libraries. It really doesn't matter if we stop providing content in the same way. It might be the best thing to happen to public libraries. Yes, there will be some access equality issues that need sorting, but if we don't have to concern ourselves with making sure people have access to content we'll have more time to create excellent programs and experiences based around content and conversation.

Fulltext Sources Online is an index published by Information Today, updated weekly online and available twice a year in a print version. FSO "is a directory of over 42,000 full-text newspapers, journals, magazine, newsletters, and transcripts from 30 aggregators and content providers." Subscribers have access to all aspects of the index, while non-subscribers can search for free with only limited access to results.

" Duke University Press is attempting to shake things up with its new program, the e-Duke Books Scholarly Collection. Modeled on the pricing structure of the e-Duke Journals Scholarly Collection, e-Duke Books offers online access to at least 100 new titles per year to subscribing libraries, in addition to access to many of the press's backlist titles."

access vs ownership

Volume 64 of the Encyclopedia of Library and information Science: Access Versus Ownership discussion. There are articles in this volume that touch upon all aspects of our project.

Now, most of the attention on changes in scholarly publishing has been focused on e-journals. We wish to expand that circle of light so that it takes in the indexing of serials. The index, as every scholar knows, is critical to the quality of the research. The value of a library's serial collection is only as good as its indexing. What scholar has not wondered about the impact of overlapping, inconsistent, and incomplete indexing services on their work? When the weaknesses of the current indexing services are matched against the potential of open-access systems, we may have a tipping point in convincing scholars that the profession would be far better served by open-access publishing systems. We argue that a primary candidate for scholarly publishing's tipping point is the coherence, integration, and precision that these open-access systems can bring to the scholarly exchange and enhancement of knowledge, especially when compared to the current state of the serial index and the hit-and-miss of full-text Web searches.

There is a chart of costs of some electronic indexes, although it may be outdates (2000-01). This article examines the degree of overlap between different academic databases.

How will scholars have access to print collections if libraries go digital? "This working group was convened in December 2007 to advance the work originally begun under the auspices of the North American Storage Trust, to develop a common understanding of the inter-institutional agreements necessary to promote cost-effective management of legacy print collections. The committee was charged with compiling and synthesizing policy documentation for shared print collections so that common requirements might be identified."

Abstract from the Website: "This paper is the second in a series of studies (see Gadd, E., C. Oppenheim, and S. Probets. RoMEO Studies 1: The impact of copyright ownership on author-self-archiving. Journal of Documentation. 59(3) 243-277) emanating from the UK JISC-funded RoMEO Project (Rights Metadata for Open-archiving). It considers the protection for research papers afforded by UK copyright law, and by e-journal licences. It compares this with the protection required by academic authors for open-access research papers as discovered by the RoMEO academic author survey. The survey used the Open Digital Rights Language (ODRL) as a framework for collecting views from 542 academics as to the permissions, restrictions, and conditions they wanted to assert over their works. Responses from self-archivers and non-archivers are compared. Concludes that most academic authors are primarily interested in preserving their moral rights, and that the protection offered research papers by copyright law is way in excess of that required by most academics. It also raises concerns about the level of protection enforced by e-journal licence agreements"

Peter Suber's predictions for the growth of open access in 2009.

Definitions of Open Access.