I'm wondering whether you have concerns with the SD backfiles about full
content?
Have you checked for letters, etc?
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Mieko Yamaguchi [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 10:04 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Taking the plunge - moving to e-only
Personally I don't believe JSTOR is a good starting-point for moving to
e-only because I'm not confident we can afford to continue paying annual
subscriptions. It does not "replace" print unless your library had a good
collection of the journals covered dating back to the first volume and as
you point out there is the question of moving walls.
We purchased several ScienceDirect backfiles last year and hope to do so
again this year budget permitting. We will be withdrawing print volumes
covered by the backfiles from our stock during the summer vacation. With
ScienceDirect backfiles you know you've purchased the contents and you
don't have to keep on paying annual "subscriptions". We have also
purchased the Legacy Content from the American Physiological Society which
seems like a very good value.
Mieko
On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, Nicholas Lewis wrote:
> For example, would an archive "bundled" service, like JSTOR, be a good
> starting-point? Has anyone tried moving to e-only for a service like JSTOR
> and "withdrawn" any previously-purchased hard copy editions? (I realise
> this would not be pure e-only as the 5 year rolling wall applies). Are
> there any other bundled deals/services that are sufficiently reliable in
> terms of archiving, completeness, etc.?
-----
Mieko Yamaguchi [log in to unmask]
Technical Services Manager/System Coordinator +44 (0)1248 382970
Main Library, University of Wales Bangor, UK +44 (0)1248 382979 (Fax)
|