Some reactions to points others have made:
We here are not suddenly surprised about the gaps. We have been dealing with
the problem for a long time - current frustrations suggested a need to share
our concerns.
We have had similar problems with aggregators other than ingentaJournals,
as, for example, anyone who had to sort out Kluwer titles on SwetsNet will
know.
While libraries expect to have a checking-in process for issues of print
journals I doubt anyone has the resources, or has seen the need to duplicate
this for ejournals. Are we being too naive and trusting?! Should library
systems providers be extending their periodial checking processes to
encompass ejournals too?
I welcome Terry's note about a checking toolkit to be implemented on
ingentaJournalslater this year, and hope other services have the same plans.
However, I am sure we are all a little concerned that the onus has been, and
still is, on users to inform publishers and aggregators of omissions. We
have a contractual agreement with publishers for particular titles and
holdings, but I am unclear what the agreements are between publishers and
aggregators and aggregators and users. (The NESLI Model Licence says
publishers will make available the electronic copy 'not later than the start
of business hours on the day of publication of the printed version', but we
don't know what should happen next!). So where does the responsibility lie
to provide to users the complete holdings that libraries have paid for?
Would someone from NESLI or the DNER care to comment?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ian Winship
Learning Resources, University of Northumbria at Newcastle
City Campus Library, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK
----------------
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
phone: 0191 227 4150 fax: 0191 227 4563
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|