Previous by Date Index by Date
Threaded Index
Next by Date

Previous by Thread Next by Thread

Re: Lexis/Nexis UNIVerse

I am not involved with the licencing part. I believe there is an
arrangement with the CIC, and IU just decided to get it earlier.
Why don't you talk with the CIC and see if ND can join it for L-N
"consortial pricing"?

As to your question about full text searching, (if this is beyond the
subject of this group, I apologize and we can carry on our conversation
elsewhere.) that's why I said there is not enough documentation available. 

But based on our experiment, the Additional Terms field IS doing full text
searching. The best way to prove it is to find an article that has a
unique Headline and enter that headline in both the topic field and in
the additional terms field. Since the relationship between the two
search box is an "AND," you should retrieve only that one article.
Try the following:

Hoosier author tells how a white Pennsylvania girl raised by Indians

exactly as it is given here, that is, as a phrase search, in both
the topic and additional terms.

Strictly speaking, full text search is NOT possible, because one is
required to enter a term in the topic field.

Indiana University Libraries

> Jian,
> Thanks for your feedback from IU...but the Topic problem is not so much
> confusing as that it doesn't allow full text searching. And while other
> segments can be searched in the Additional terms field, I don't actually
> think full text document searching is possible. I'd be glad to hear
> otherwise, though.  I have some information regarding consortial pricing,
> where the fte charge goes down considerably as the 'base' number of users
> increases. I'm pretty sure that L/N said the 'consortium' could be
> completely ad-hoc. Does this interest you (or anyone out there)? Though at
> the moment I'd have to say some of our interest is being diminished by the
> lack of full text searching, and other problems. 
> Carole Richter
> I believe I recall something about consortial pricing, and L/N not caring
> who included themselves in the grouping, but that may have been more in
> reference to the coming change in fee structure for traditional access.
© 1996, 1997 Yale University Library
Please read our Disclaimer
E-mail us with feedback