Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 13:12:55 -0400
From: David Goodman <dgoodman@PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject: Re: Library Holdings vs Full-text Databases (Judy McConnell)

First, many of the Proquest Direct titles are not truly full text in the usual
sense, but rather just the words without the pictures. This cannot be told
from any of their listings; you have to go to the actual tables of contents of
individual issues for every individual title. For example, "Biochemistry and
Cell Biology, ottawa" is listed as full text, but if you try it you will find
that at best the articles consist of the ascii text only, with the graphs
replaced by the word "Graph" . This of course makes the content useless for
almost any purpose I can think of, because the graphs are where the
information is. (For the more recent articles, there isn't even that--just the
abstract) .

But in any case Proquest does not have the rights to essentially any of its
journals on a permanent basis. It has a temporary license from the publisher
to display the content. You cannot be sure that any journal will still be
there next year. And in fact in all recent years, a number of titles have
become unavailable.

This is not a specific problem with Proquest, but also applies to Ebsco and
all other similar integrators. If your library is concerned only with
providing a convenient source of information for current undergraduate papers,
this may be good enough. If your library would like to know that the material
will still be there 10 years from now, that's another matter.

On the other hand, if you are talking about just replacing duplicate
subscriptions, that might be a very good idea.

Note that this is different from buying electronic journals from the
publishers such as Ideal or Science Direct. In these cases, your contract can
be expected to contain the right of permanent access, and a guarantee that the
access will be available, even if the publisher goes out of business.. (To
what extent you can absolutely rely on the guarantee and the potential
difficulties caused by various loopholes and exceptions is another matter.)

ERCELAA@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 11:28:27 -0500
> From: Judy McConnell <jmcconne@PCT.EDU>
> Subject: Library Holdings vs Full-text Databases
>
> Greetings,
>
> First of all let me thank all of you who responded to my query on
> "Compact Shelving"  - appreciated your time and feedback.
>
> Now I would like to know if any one has created a Policy for
> maintaining current titles (both paper and/or microfilm) that are also
> in a full-text database?
>
> We subscribe to Proquest Direct and have dropped a few of our current
> subscriptions for titles in full-text and have continued to purchase
> microfilm.
>
> As our library is now experiencing space and budget constraints, we
> want to develop a policy for maintaining or discontinuing the purchase
> of duplicate (and sometimes triplicate) subscriptions for titles in
> full-text.  I think that we are not quite comfortable yet in
> relinquishing our control and yet it maybe time to "just do it".
>
> I would be interested in what others have done, and what problems or
> advantages or disadvantages they have experienced.
>
> Thanks in Advance,
> Judy McConnell
>
> Judy F. McConnell
> Assistant Professor
> Serials Librarian
> Penn College Library DIF #69
> One College Avenue
> Williamsport, PA 17701-5799
> Phone: 570-320-2400  X7458
> Fax: 570-327-4503
> E-mail: jmcconne@pct.edu

--
David Goodman
Biology Librarian
and Co-chair, Electronic Journals Task force
Princeton University Library
Princeton, NJ 08544-0001
phone: 609-258-3235
fax: 609-258-2627
e-mail: dgoodman@princeton.edu