[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Tempestuous Arguments
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: RE: Tempestuous Arguments
- From: Ann Okerson <ann.okerson@yale.edu>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:11:37 -0400 (EDT)
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
A reply to Mr. Sampson from Mr. Krumenaker... Ann Okerson ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:46:56 -0400 From: Larry Krumenaker <larrykga@mindspring.com> To: Ann Okerson <ann.okerson@yale.edu> Subject: RE: Tempestuous Arguments There are two possible answers to this question. 1) I believe Mr. Sampson's analysis occured with a title list that was 2-3 months after mine and we all know that online inventories are in continual flux. He could have a list with more embargoed titles now....because they've added more at EBSCO since the files I received. I would have to ask for a new listing from my sources of the files to check out this speculation. Or, 2) is it *possible* that there were embargoed titles in EBSCOhost's non-full text listings(?) which were eliminated by my removal of non-full text. I don't have access to EBSCOhost directly so I can't verify this particular speculation on the spot. If so, it doesn't change my analysis figures since I'm only concerned with full text. Larry
- Prev by Date: RE: Tempestuous Arguments
- Next by Date: RE: Tempestuous Arguments
- Prev by thread: RE: Tempestuous Arguments
- Next by thread: RE: Tempestuous Arguments
- Index(es):