<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<title>Future publication of DCRMs</title>
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Palatino Linotype";
panose-1:2 4 5 2 5 5 5 3 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Georgia;
panose-1:2 4 5 2 5 4 5 2 3 3;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:14.0pt;
font-family:"Palatino Linotype","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Georgia","serif";
font-variant:normal !important;
color:#1F497D;
text-transform:none;
text-shadow:none;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;
vertical-align:baseline;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">Jackie,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">Thanks for your excellent points.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">LC just did a 3rd printing of DCRM(B) in late 2011. I’m guessing they’re still selling copies, to students in my RBS classes if nowhere else (-;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">DCRM(S) is more recent, and with almost certainly less demand. It would be interesting to know the rate of sales and at what point it would benefit LC to give up
the print for loss.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">Open access in itself isn’t an unqualified good. The value that publication in Cataloger’s Desktop adds to BSC documents in terms of integration, linking, formatting,
and overall convenience is not insignificant. RBMS is in no position to come even close to duplicating that functionality should we decided to self-publish.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">The question then becomes what’s most important. It sounds like we’re mostly agreed that Cataloger’s Desktop-only publication would be profoundly self-defeating.
I would prefer to have LC publish our manuals on Cataloger’s Desktop, with all its attendant functionality, along with the understanding that we could supply a flat electronic text file for free from our website. Seriously—is anyone going to cancel their Cataloger’s
Desktop subscription because they can get a pdf of DCRM(C) for free?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><br>
Inventory control: not sure how demanding of resources it is. Apparently the DCRM(B) 2nd printing had completely run out for a while (a couple of months, if I’m remembering correctly) before we knew about it. That’s because our CDS contact didn’t know about
it. Their staff level has been so mutilated over the past several years to leave no one with the “leisure” of paying attention to such things.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">I’m now reminded that as result of this OP crisis, we were going to institutionalize having the BSC chair request figures once a year from CDS. That’ll be something
to add to the new “BSC Manual” in development. (Audrey, are you listening?)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D">Deborah
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Jackie Dooley<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, 27 February, 2013 21:13<br>
<b>To:</b> DCRM-L<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [DCRM-L] Future publication of DCRMs<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:14.0pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">The writing is clearly on the wall that printed DCRMs are soon to be a thing of the past, and it sounds like nobody has a problem with that.
Huzzah for open access! If RBMS is the only entity involved in production, then the incredible amounts of time that you all spend can happily be added to your karma count instead of any energy being expended being frustrated that somebody else is trying to
make a profit (or even just break even) from your expert volunteer labor. <br>
<br>
A few observations and opinions:<br>
<br>
<b>Who should be the publisher going forward?: </b>Does it matter whether LC is the publisher? Do the manuals lose any cache’ if it’s not LC? I’m guessing the answers to both are no.<br>
<br>
<b>Communicating up the RBMS food chain: </b>Richard is right—the Publications Committee should be in the loop at this point. Should RBMS be the publisher? Do they care about printed versions? Would ACRL care what happens? My assumption would be that ACRL would
have no interest in being the publisher if RBMS only wants to make the DCRMs available as open-source content, but it’s not at all too soon for your Pubs experts, maybe even the Executive Committee, to weigh in. The cataloging standards are one of RBMS’s flagship
enterprises! Ceasing print and/or restricting their availability are big issues. Clearly availability via the Catalogers’ Desktop alone doesn’t serve the community.<br>
<b><br>
DCRM(G) in print:</b> I suggest that someone ask Peter Seligman to be more specific about exactly who/what would be affected by an 11th-hour cancellation of DCRM(G) in print. If the special collections cataloging community doesn’t give a hoot about print, who
does? Has there been publicity already? Are the presses standing by? Has a contract been signed that gives them the right to publish? Do they care whether they publish? Might the powers at LC be perfectly happy to have it cease to be their responsibility if
they thought about it rationally?<br>
<br>
<b>Selling off print runs so existing titles can be available as open access: </b>
It would be good to get data from LC about how many copies they’re selling of each title annually (hence what the income is), and how many copies are left in the print runs. Presumably this is public information. It’s conceivable that they spend more money
managing inventory than they selling copies. I’m pretty familiar with the Society of American Archivists’ publication practices and can report that they sometimes have a fire sale on pubs that no longer sell very many copies annually (no idea what the cutoff
is). Maybe there’s ALA/ACRL practice to be cited: did they care how many copies of
<i>Paper Terms</i> were still on hand after 30 years of selling only five/year before they let you put them online for free access? :) Is Peter a decision maker or a messenger?<br>
<br>
Best wishes to all— Jackie<br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">-- <br>
Jackie Dooley<br>
Program Officer, OCLC Research<br>
& President,<br>
Society of American Archivists<br>
<br>
<a href="dooleyj@oclc.org">dooleyj@oclc.org</a><br>
949.492.5060 (work/home) -- Pacific Time (GMT –8)<br>
949.295.1529 (mobile)<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>