Subject:
|
Re: Modern Libraries (was Re: Bad news for TRU)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 30 Jan 2002 16:21:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
578 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Paul Ferguson writes:
> In lugnet.market.shopping, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> (snip of message which led to Scott Arthur's response)
>
> > As a heavy user, the modern library is where it is at. I can now usually
> > download obscure journal papers in seconds rather than waiting a couple of
> > weeks for hard copies to appear (usually it would be a "dud", or I had moved
> > on since then.) I can check to see if a book is on the shelf or reserve it
> > from my desk. If it is on the shelf, I can often find a review of it before
> > I lumber up to the library to get it.
> >
> > That said, I still request books heavily. If your library does not have a
> > book you want (or it is only on CD) - make a request!
> >
> > Scott A
>
> My experience is that all of this is PARTLY true. On the good side,
> as Scott suggests, you can often get articles from journals which wouldn't
> otherwise be easily available, with an important limitation -- THEY HAVE TO BE
> RECENT ARTICLES.
You are 100% correct (~ '88 is the best we get). For my field that is not
all that much of an issue - but for others it will be important.
Indecently, I work quite closely with the facility mangers at the National
Archives of Scotland, they are currently digitising a great deal of their
stock (the oldest is from 1127). Although this will help users, the main
reason was to reduce wear in the valuable texts.
Scott A
NAS : http://www.nas.gov.uk/homepage.htm
The 1127 document : http://www.nas.gov.uk/exhibitions.htm
> Nobody is going back, so far as I know, to digitize the vast
> amount of journals issued, say, before 1990. Now this is probably not a
> problem if you're working in the natural sciences, medicine, computer science,
> or the like. On the other hand, if you're really a medieval historian, like
> me, you still need journals from 100+ years ago, and you're going to have to do
> it the old-fashioned way. Go to a library that has them and get them off the
> shelf. Here's where Kerry's complaint comes in. Nowadays they're probably in
> dead storage in a "remote location," so as to make more room in the library for
> newfangled technology stuff, so you'll need to fill out a request, and wait
> several days for someone to go there, pull the book off the shelf, and drag it
> back.
>
> Back to the first hand, however, computer catalogs make it a whole lot easier
> to find out what libary to go to in the first place, sometimes. But keep in
> mind that many major institutions still haven't put their older holdings on
> line. My own old grad school library, with multiple millions of volumes, only
> had stuff electronically cataloged for items added since about 1980. If it
> came into the collection before that, it was in the card catalog, but not
> online. Consequently, many of our more "newbie" students, unused to the card
> catalog, kept thinking that things just weren't in the collection when, if
> fact, they were. So the advice of this old dog is to be sure to check with the
> reference people to find out what portion of any library's collection is
> actually listed in the on-line catalog.
>
> Oh, yeah, and when libraries do go back to put thier old card catalogs online,
> they often seem to hire outfits to do it that are cheap for a reason. The
> result is data entry by low-paid, unmotivated people that leads to (actual
> real-world example) stuff like the titles at the University of Pennsylvania
> which contain the word "Carolingian" but which were (last I looked) mistyped
> into the online catalog as "Garlovingian." Needless to say, searches on the
> real title brought up the ever-popular "no entries found" result.
>
> A good side has been the ease of interlibrary loan arrangements. Here in
> Ohio, where I live now , I can use to system to request most books from
> libraries all over the state, check on line for their arrival, and pick them up
> at my local university library about 3 days after the request. This wasn't
> remotely possible when I was in grad school during the bronze age of personal
> computers. (Anybody else out there remember CP/M?)
>
> P.S. Moved this to off-topic.debate, since it no longer has anything to do with
> shopping (or even LEGO).
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Modern Libraries (was Re: Bad news for TRU)
|
| (...) Register House in 1980-81 and again in 1987-88, trying not to put too much additional wear on documents from this period. Also lots of time nearby at the National Library of Scotland. Of course, troublemakers like me want to ensure that you (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Modern Libraries (was Re: Bad news for TRU)
|
| In lugnet.market.shopping, Scott Arthur writes: (snip of message which led to Scott Arthur's response) (...) My experience is that all of this is PARTLY true. On the good side, as Scott suggests, you can often get articles from journals which (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
