[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Print-Only Subscription Trend
- To: <twilliam@bbl.usouthal.edu>, <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: Re: Print-Only Subscription Trend
- From: "Stephen Mears" <Stephen.Mears@hnehealth.nsw.gov.au>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 21:08:08 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Maybe it's also because many publishers, don't know about Duke University Press, don't allow the provision of inter library loans from electronic versions. Stephen Mears Information Services Librarian Gardiner Library Service Locked Bag 1 Hunter Region Mail Centre stephen.mears@hnehealth.nsw.gov.au www.gardinerlibrary.com >>> twilliam@bbl.usouthal.edu 07/11/06 7:38 am >>> Maybe because print-only is cheaper. We're still plugging ahead with our E-only policy. Tom Kim Steinle wrote: > In 2006 Duke University Press decoupled print and electronic > subscriptions and offered three format options: print plus electronic, > print-only and electronic-only. We have noticed a heavy uptake of the > print-only format (40% + across the board), which seems unusual given > the current buzz of libraries going electronic-only. Are librarians > intentionally selecting print-only? Or, is this a default that the > agent is selecting? We are concerned that libraries are inadvertently > losing electronic access. I would be curious as to know why so many > libraries are choosing print-only. > > Kimberly Steinle > Library Relations Manager > Duke University Press > Durham, NC 27701 > ksteinle@dukeupress.edu > www.dukeupress.edu
- Prev by Date: Re: Open Choice Singular Limits.
- Next by Date: Re: Print-Only Subscription Trend
- Previous by thread: Re: Print-Only Subscription Trend
- Next by thread: Re: Print-Only Subscription Trend
- Index(es):