<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7654.12">
<TITLE>RE: [DCRM-L] Future publication of DCRMs</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>This semester I'm tutoring a distance-learning course (Dundee CAIS) "Understanding and Managing Rare Books", and once again, as in the previous three semesters this course has been run, access to DCRM(B) is a problem: most of our students work in organisations that do not have access to Cataloger's Desktop (they don't all work in libraries) and have found it too difficult or too expensive to acquire print copies. Free online DCRM(B) would be so helpful -- and such a good way to get people using it. <BR>
<BR>
Best wishes<BR>
<BR>
Brian<BR>
<BR>
****************************<BR>
Dr Brian Hillyard<BR>
Rare Book Collections Manager<BR>
National Library of Scotland<BR>
George IV Bridge<BR>
EDINBURGH EH1 1EW<BR>
E-mail: b.hillyard@nls.uk<BR>
Tel: 0131 623 3889<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu on behalf of Margaret F Nichols<BR>
Sent: Wed 27/02/2013 9:56 PM<BR>
To: Margaret F Nichols; Laurence S. Creider; DCRM Revision Group List<BR>
Cc: 'bsc@rbms.info'<BR>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Future publication of DCRMs<BR>
<BR>
Another thought (at the risk of wearing out my welcome): our DCRM modules may also be of interest to the international special collections cataloging community (we've heard expressions of interest in DCRM(MSS) from people in the UK and France, and surely there'd be interest in other DCRMs there too). Beyond the reach of Cataloger's Desktop, there may be lots of other librarians (and archivists) who would love to be able to see how we're doing things. Making our manuals accessible to them would be another advantage of publishing the DCRMs online via the RBMS website.<BR>
<BR>
Two cents more,<BR>
<BR>
Margaret<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Margaret F Nichols [<A HREF="mailto:mnr1@cornell.edu">mailto:mnr1@cornell.edu</A>]<BR>
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 4:22 PM<BR>
To: Laurence S. Creider; DCRM Revision Group List<BR>
Cc: DCRM Revision Group List; 'bsc@rbms.info'<BR>
Subject: RE: [DCRM-L] Future publication of DCRMs<BR>
<BR>
I find the wording of Peter Seligman's statement mildly promising: "CDS made an investment in printing the Books and Serials<BR>
publications; and the same will hold true for Graphics. Because the two earlier ones are still active products, for sale, and the Graphics publication will also be for sale, we cannot, at this time, agree to have the RBMS web site post those three manuals online."<BR>
<BR>
This suggests to me that once DCRM(B), (S), and (G) stop being actively sold, we might be able to post them online. In the meantime, I agree that it would be preferable to make future DCRM modules available for free if at all possible. I share Larry's dim view of ALA for charging a subscription fee for the RDA Toolkit. Not only does it impose an unfair financial burden on small libraries, year after year, but it also creates a financial incentive for them *not* to keep up with ongoing changes to RDA. With budgets getting ever tighter, I'll bet many libraries will eventually drop their RDA Toolkit subscription as a luxury they can no longer afford. And if they drop Cataloger's Toolkit too, those DCRM modules that are freely available on the RBMS website may be one of the few cataloging manuals that they can still access. Sigh ...<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
<BR>
Margaret<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
___________________________________<BR>
<BR>
Margaret F. Nichols<BR>
Rare Materials Cataloging Coordinator<BR>
Cataloging & Metadata Services in RMC<BR>
2B Kroch Library<BR>
Cornell University<BR>
Ithaca, NY 14853-5302<BR>
Tel. (607) 255-3530 * E-mail mnr1@cornell.edu<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Laurence S. Creider [<A HREF="mailto:lcreider@lib.nmsu.edu">mailto:lcreider@lib.nmsu.edu</A>]<BR>
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 3:14 PM<BR>
To: DCRM Revision Group List<BR>
Cc: DCRM Revision Group List; 'bsc@rbms.info'<BR>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Future publication of DCRMs<BR>
<BR>
Well, at least we know where LC stands. I am not nearly as concerned that the DCRM manuals be available in print format as that they be available at minimal or no cost. This means that the manuals must ultimately be available outside of Cataloger's Desktop. I have always felt badly about the fact that I could not refer catalogers directly to the DCRM manuals from the Directory of Web Resources as the site does to the controlled vocabularies.<BR>
<BR>
It seems like LC is dissolving the publishing relationship between RBMS and itself, and we should take advantage of that. Since there will be a turnover of existing DCRM modules as we adapt to RDA, BSC should take advantage of the opportunity and publish these materials on its own imprint. As a cataloger who is still outraged by ALA's attitudes towards making RDA available and forcing online access to AACR2 through the prices of RDA Toolkit, I believe that BSC should not publish through ALA or ACRL.<BR>
At this point, I think that we should take our own responsibility for distribution through the internet of these tools that we all use and not hand it off to a corporate body with less interest in making special collections materials available than in covering costs or making a profit.<BR>
<BR>
As a side note, I am not very impressed with Peter Seligman's argument (actually Congress's) about recovering production costs. How about the thousands of hours put in by members of the rare book cataloging community to provide the content and much of the display for these manuals? It is unlikely, but can we use this as a (moral) bargaining chip? The law may be the law, but sometimes the law is also an ass.<BR>
<BR>
There should be some interesting discussions at ALA.<BR>
<BR>
Larry<BR>
<BR>
P.S. I just saw Richard's note, which makes many good points. I would prefer doing something on the BSC level rather than the RBMS publication committee because there seems to be some sort of organizational law that the higher up in the structure you go, the less understanding there is of what life on the ground is like. The rare materials cataloging community has done a remarkably good job of keeping its focus on improving and making standards public. With the constantly changing membership of the section Publications Committee, we are likely to get a Pharoah who did not know Joseph and end up making bricks without straw.<BR>
<BR>
--<BR>
Laurence S. Creider<BR>
Interim Head<BR>
Archives and Special Collections Dept.<BR>
University Library<BR>
New Mexico State University<BR>
Las Cruces, NM 88003<BR>
Work: 575-646-4756<BR>
Fax: 575-646-7477<BR>
lcreider@lib.nmsu.edu<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, February 27, 2013 12:31 pm, Carpenter, Jane wrote:<BR>
> Manon,<BR>
><BR>
> The publication issues and options regarding the DCRM manuals are<BR>
getting<BR>
> more and more complex by the minute! Peter has just informed me that<BR>
any<BR>
> of the manuals in print--Books, Serials, Graphics-- cannot be made<BR>
available for free on the RBMS website.<BR>
><BR>
> "CDS made an investment in printing the Books and Serials<BR>
publications;<BR>
> and the same will hold true for Graphics. Because the two earlier ones<BR>
are still active products, for sale, and the Graphics publication will<BR>
also be for sale, we cannot, at this time, agree to have the RBMS web<BR>
site post those three manuals online.<BR>
> Congressional legislation mandates that we return the cost of<BR>
production<BR>
> plus an additional percentage back to the U.S. Treasury. So, we don't<BR>
have really any leeway here."<BR>
><BR>
> Unfortunately, I do understand that LC would be reluctant/unable to<BR>
provide free access through the RBMS website to publications that it is marketing for sale as print publications and for paid accessibility through Catalogers Desktop.<BR>
><BR>
> I asked him how LC would feel about allowing free access through the<BR>
RBMS<BR>
> website to DCRM manuals that AREN'T available in print. If<BR>
Cartographics,<BR>
> Music, and Manuscripts will be appearing only on CatDesk, would LC<BR>
> allow<BR>
RBMS to make those files available on its site? He responded that because<BR>
> CDS will not be publishing in print any DCRM publication after<BR>
> Graphics,<BR>
LC would have absolutely no say on whatever arrangements RBMS/BSC would wish to make. Ironically, it seems that those manuals without a print version could be made more widely available--through the RBMS<BR>
> website--than the ones with a print version.<BR>
><BR>
> Another possible option to consider might be the current model of the<BR>
RBMS<BR>
> Controlled Vocabularies, which is hosted on the RBMS site, but<BR>
"available"<BR>
> through a seamless link on CatDesk. This is the what the Standard<BR>
Citations Forms Revision Group is hoping to do with its new completely revised and expanded edition which is nearing completion, and is slated for publication sometime before year's end.<BR>
> I'm not sure putting all the manuals, Examples, and SCF on the RBMS<BR>
> site<BR>
is feasible for the Web Team as it stands now. It would certainly be a lot more work for them.<BR>
><BR>
> Annie's suggestion to explore the possibility of securing<BR>
> another/other<BR>
publisher(s) for the remaining DCRM manuals is worth considering. But again, if a publisher were selling the DCRM manuals, would they agree to have RBMS post it for free online? I'd also like to know if LC would post<BR>
> the manuals on CatDesktop if someone else were publishing them. I'll<BR>
wait<BR>
> to hear from Bruce Johnson on the CatDesk issues.<BR>
><BR>
> I'm becoming quite concerned about keeping multiple RBMS/BSC<BR>
publications<BR>
> uniformly accessible in this changing publication landscape, with some<BR>
available in print, some print and online, some online only, some through<BR>
> LC on CatDesk, some through RBMS but linked to Cat Desk.. This is<BR>
clearly<BR>
> a discussion topic for the BSC agenda at Annual. Perhaps BSC should<BR>
> set<BR>
up a Publications committee to ensure that BSC has a consistent and sustainable plan for making its manuals and other cataloging tools as widely and easily available as possible. Would this be something for the<BR>
> DCRM Steering Group to consider, if their charge were expanded? That<BR>
might be another option.<BR>
><BR>
> Jane C.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu [<A HREF="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu">mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</A>]<BR>
> On<BR>
Behalf Of Manon Theroux<BR>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 10:31 AM<BR>
> To: DCRM Revision Group List<BR>
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Future publication of DCRMs<BR>
><BR>
> Jane,<BR>
><BR>
> I like the idea of having them freely available on the RBMS website<BR>
> for<BR>
people to download (and print, if they want a print version). Is there some doubt that this can be done? (I notice the words "we hope"<BR>
> ...).<BR>
><BR>
> I would not want them to *only* be available through Cataloger's<BR>
Desktop.<BR>
> That would price out a lot of people/institutions. And there are times<BR>
when a print version is highly desirable.<BR>
><BR>
> If LC will remain the publisher, it would be good to confirm with them<BR>
whether they will still be responsible for contracting out the indexing.<BR>
And whether they can still do the graphical work to produce the covers (basing them on the existing DCRM covers). Although the covers wouldn't display in Cataloger's Desktop, it would be nice to be able to incorporate<BR>
> them into the versions of the DCRM documents posted on rbms.info (and<BR>
> I<BR>
should think it shouldn't be hard to create these cover images).<BR>
><BR>
> -Manon<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Manon Théroux<BR>
> Head of Technical Services<BR>
> U.S. Senate Library<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 12:33 PM, ANN W. COPELAND <auc1@psu.edu> wrote:<BR>
>> Jane,<BR>
>> Thank you for sharing this news. I wonder if we would seek another<BR>
publisher for the remaining 3 manuals when they are ready, or do they have to be LC to be including in Catalogers' Desktop? For instance, the Music Library Association does some publishing I believe.<BR>
>> Thanks, Annie<BR>
>> ________________________________<BR>
>> From: "Jane Carpenter" <jfcarpenter@library.ucla.edu><BR>
>> To: "dcrm-l@lib.byu.edu" <dcrm-l@lib.byu.edu><BR>
>> Cc: "Jose Fernando Pena" <Jose.Pena@liu.edu>, "bsc@rbms.info"<BR>
>> <bsc@rbms.info><BR>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:24:09 PM<BR>
>> Subject: [DCRM-L] Future publication of DCRMs Dear Colleagues, As<BR>
>> most of you already know, LC informed BSC this week that with the<BR>
exception of DCRM Graphics, all future DCRM publications will be online only. I'm passing on some additional information received today from Peter Seligman of LC's Consumer Products and Services Section of the Office of Business Enterprises, which now oversees print publications:<BR>
>> "Given the projected manuscript production and<BR>
>> delivery schedule, we felt that the Graphics publication was too far<BR>
along for us to suddenly inform everyone that we could no longer do it in print. Music and Cartographics were not quite so imminent. We're truly sorry to deliver this unexpected news but these are business decisions we must make. Yes--Bruce [Johnson] will be handling the three manuals inclusion in Cataloger's Desktop. As for the<BR>
>> sequester--who knows what effects it will have on everyone? The<BR>
>> Library<BR>
of Congress is planning for almost a week of unpaid staff furloughs, but nothing is written in stone."<BR>
>> So DCRM Graphics, currently undergoing close reading by BSC members<BR>
>> and<BR>
other BSC colleagues, will join the DCRM Books and Serials manuals already in print. However, all future DCRMs--Cartographics, Music, and<BR>
>> Manuscripts-- will be available only online through Catalogers<BR>
>> Desktop, and, we hope, through the RBMS website as well.<BR>
>> LC has always been an excellent partner with RBMS/BSC in publishing<BR>
these important cataloging tools, and I don't see that changing in the future.<BR>
>> As always, comments and discussion are welcome, Thanks, Jane Jane<BR>
>> Carpenter, Ph.D., M.L.I.S.<BR>
>> Chair, Bibliographic Standards Committee UCLA Library Special<BR>
>> Collections jfcarpenter@library.ucla.edu<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
<br><p><span style='font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;'><font size="2"></font></span> </p><p><span style='font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;'>Follow us on <a href="https://twitter.com/natlibscot"><font color="#0000ff">Twitter</font></a> and <a href="http://www.facebook.com/NationalLibraryOfScotland"><font color="#0000ff">Facebook</font></a></span></p><p><span style='font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;'><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></span> </p><p><font size="2">
</font><span style='font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;'>National
Library of Scotland, Scottish Charity, No: SCO11086<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><font size="2">
</font><span style='font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;'>This
communication is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the
addressee please inform the sender and delete the email from your system. The
statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
do not necessarily reflect those of National Library of Scotland. This message
is subject to the Data Protection Act 1998 and Freedom of Information
(Scotland) Act 2002. No liability is accepted for any harm that may be caused
to your systems or data by this message.</span></p><p><span style='font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;'><span style="color: navy;"><o:p></o:p></span></span> </p><p><font size="2">
</font><span style='color: navy; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt;'><a href="http://www.nls.uk/"><font color="#0000ff">www.nls.uk</font></a> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p><font size="2">
</font></p>
<br></BODY>
</HTML>