[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Report of Library E-Book Acquisitions Survey
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Report of Library E-Book Acquisitions Survey
- From: Laval Hunsucker <amoinsde@yahoo.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 22:46:31 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Is it really a good idea to elevate caring about revenue ("sales") to the status of caring about metadata (as, and in fact apparently more than, e.g. librarians, or even researchers, care about metadata)? If so, why? Or have I misunderstood? Laval Hunsucker Breukelen, Nederland ----- Original Message ---- From: Joseph Esposito <espositoj@gmail.com> To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 3:29:44 AM Subject: Re: Report of Library E-Book Acquisitions Survey Michael, These are excellent notes. One comment: You ask if publishers want to get into the metadata/cataloguing game. That's 2 separate questions. Some publishers will get into the cataloguing game, however reluctantly. But all publishers will get into the metadata game. They have no choice. No one else cares as much about this as they do. They also are dealing with the decline if not outright collapse of the bricks-and-mortar sales channel, which puts greater pressure on online sales. For online sales all a publisher has is metadata; there is no point-of-sale merchandising possible (except as expressed through metadata). In this instance, libraries are not the primary concern, but if a publisher develops robust metadata for Amazon and other online venues, why would it be withheld from a library? Joe Esposito
- Prev by Date: RE: Report of Library E-Book Acquisitions Survey
- Next by Date: RE: Dramatic Growth of Open Access
- Previous by thread: RE: Report of Library E-Book Acquisitions Survey
- Next by thread: Re: Dramatic Growth of Open Access
- Index(es):