Previous by Date Index by Date
Threaded Index
Next by Date

Previous by Thread Next by Thread

Aggregator opinions

As a very small publisher (one scholarly journal) facing the dilemma of
how to effectively provide our journal to libraries electronically, we
have become very interested and concerned about what
librarians/libraries want/need/etc. and basically trying to figure out
what works well. A large majority (almost half) of our 9,000 subscribers
are libraries of one sort or another. We have been lurking on this list
for a while now and have also been attending lectures by librarians
regarding licensing, etc.

We have come to the conclusion that the best and easiest solution for
all parties involved is to offer our journal electronically via an
aggregator. We have chosen OCLC and may choose others additionally.
We've gotten OCLC's side of the story but have never heard from actual
users of their service and thought this might be a good place to solicit
opinions and generate discussion. For that matter we want to know what
librarians/libraries think of aggregators in general. 

[Answers to the following questions will be kept confidential and not
republished or disseminated in any fashion.]

What do librarians think about OCLC overall?

Are they easy to work with (re: licensing, access, offerings, technical
support, etc.)? 

Are their licenses reasonable?

I see Ovid building the same type of service. Do their offerings overlap
enough that libraries can choose one or the other?

Do libraries prefer working with aggregators as opposed to individual

Thanks in advance for you time and effort in responding.


Kathy King, Production Editor
Health Affairs
Suite 600
7500 Old Georgetown Road
Bethesda, MD 20814

T - 301-656-7401 x204
F - 301-654-2845
E -
I -
© 1996, 1997 Yale University Library
Please read our Disclaimer
E-mail us with feedback