Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Really? Has anyone out there in the industry even noticed? What *might* get noticed is a change in communication formats, but not in rules. This is what I have been thinking about for a while as I read these discussions: What if we gave a standard and nobody came, but some other powerful, oblivious standard came for us? Cindy
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Am 23.11.2013 17:55, schrieb Melissa Powell: ... There is no 'choice', the rules have changed. They *got* changed. This is the first step to compliance with the rest of the information industry. Really? Has anyone out there in the industry even noticed? What *might* get noticed is a change in communication formats, but not in rules. As Mac and James indicated, there *are* choices. These will likely be taken, to varying degrees, by those who see no choice but to avoid compliance. And the result will be more variety in the local systems and, very likely, in OCLC data as well. How does that bode for interoperability? This could have been avoided if access to the rules were free or not much more expensive than with AACR. RDA *might* become a success, but not in the way the access to it is now prohibitively expensive for too many libraries. Not to speek of other communities. Or are there many registered and paying users now who are not libraries? RDA will not be a success for reasons James has listed, but certainly not because of the text being monopolized. This is incompatible with the ideals of libraries. B.Eversberg
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Ahoj! Has anybody, other than libraries - or, specifically, library cataloguers - adopted, or plan to adopt RDA? Google? Amazon As a secondary question; if all the people mwho think that they understand RDA were to disappear overnight . would anybody be able to learn RDA from scratch? Ford Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 10:16:33 +0100 From: e...@biblio.tu-bs.de Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Am 23.11.2013 17:55, schrieb Melissa Powell: ... There is no 'choice', the rules have changed. They *got* changed. This is the first step to compliance with the rest of the information industry. Really? Has anyone out there in the industry even noticed? What *might* get noticed is a change in communication formats, but not in rules. As Mac and James indicated, there *are* choices. These will likely be taken, to varying degrees, by those who see no choice but to avoid compliance. And the result will be more variety in the local systems and, very likely, in OCLC data as well. How does that bode for interoperability? This could have been avoided if access to the rules were free or not much more expensive than with AACR. RDA *might* become a success, but not in the way the access to it is now prohibitively expensive for too many libraries. Not to speek of other communities. Or are there many registered and paying users now who are not libraries? RDA will not be a success for reasons James has listed, but certainly not because of the text being monopolized. This is incompatible with the ideals of libraries. B.Eversberg
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
On 11/23/2013 5:55 PM, Melissa Powell wrote: snip This cataloging consultant/trainer who works with small libraries is piping in. I am grateful for the price reduction for the rest of us--with the new pricing structure I can actually get RDA access to these small and rural libraries. On the other hand: makes it tough for us on the consortial level because the costs have changed for larger places.. As far as the comment early in this discussion about how hard it was to convince administrators, here is where we as catalogers need to be better about communicating what we do. There is no 'choice', the rules have changed. This is the first step to compliance with the rest of the information industry. When I tell directors that, they are shocked. Duh. Then they comply. /snip You tell them that they have no choice and they follow what the consultant says. Do you tell them about Mac's cheat sheets? I wonder what those libraries decide to give up (and will continue to give up) for RDA? Fewer staff hours? Buying fewer materials? Maybe the staff will be expected to pay for it out of their own pockets. Of course, most small libraries do very little original cataloging unless they have local materials or something unique so the utility of actually subscribing may be nominal. The unavoidable costs come from dealing with the changes to the headings, as we have seen with changing the cataloging abbrevations that has already proven to be too much for many, and there is absolutely zero discussion as to any actual advantages to the users for the purposes of access. We only know that there are suddenly two forms of name that the public must search under until the retrospective conversion happens. And that costs even more money. Who is going to pay for that? In the meantime, the only people being hurt are the searchers who are supposed to search under two forms. Either they never find out and make lousy searches, or they discover that their searches miss a lot (most?) and conclude that the library's tools just don't work. Other changes have been with the new 33x fields in MARC format (will they ever be implemented in a coherent way?), and then the really big change that will come from Bibframe, but at least that is still years away. We are seeing only the very beginnings of the costs. There are *always* choices and many choose to cope with RDA however they can. Not everybody is able to squirrel money away and many are stretched as thin as they can now. You just cannot get away from making the business case, sooner or later. -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Melissa, Perhaps as a consultant you can speak to directors/deans of libraries with that DUH attitude, but I can say that as a cataloger, I would never approach my dean with that attitude. As James stated, there are *always* options ... and in this economic environment where we are being stretched too thin, administrators do have to plan on figuring out what to let go of in order to pay for X ... and I do value being employed! :-) Julie On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Melissa Powell meli...@biblioease.comwrote: This cataloging consultant/trainer who works with small libraries is piping in. I am grateful for the price reduction for the rest of us--with the new pricing structure I can actually get RDA access to these small and rural libraries. On the other hand: makes it tough for us on the consortial level because the costs have changed for larger places.. As far as the comment early in this discussion about how hard it was to convince administrators, here is where we as catalogers need to be better about communicating what we do. There is no 'choice', the rules have changed. This is the first step to compliance with the rest of the information industry. When I tell directors that, they are shocked. Duh. Then they comply. Melissa What will kill our profession is not ebooks, Amazon, or Google, but a lack of Imagination. R. David Lankes Melissa M. Powell, MLIS Independent Librarian www.biblioease.com 970-218-4753 Webcast Producer/Publishers Weekly Instructor/Lyrasis Editor/Biblio Tech Review LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Skype: thelibrarygirl Google+: Melissa Powell -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 5:42 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change On 11/23/2013 12:53 AM, J. McRee Elrod wrote: snip James said: Of course, when the time comes for retrospective conversion of the millions of records in that awful, terrible legacy data ... Surely you jest. Most of our library clients prefer the awful terrible 'legacy data' to the strange (to them) RDA records. Our AACR2 compatible export is very popular. Most of our e-publisher and aggregator clients feel they must be with it, and go with the new standard. /snip Yes, I am joking. But if we are to make all of these relators and relationships useful for the public, the simple undeniable fact is: incredible retrospective conversions will have to be done and I have never heard of estimates of how much those will cost. The RDA subscriptions are peanuts by comparison. Was any of that discussed during the decision making for RDA? Maybe it wasn't discussed then, but it sure will be in the future! You can only ignore it for so long. Catalogers, of all people, should know that if you decide to make a new index, e.g. actor or editor, it is not enough to say that all new records will now have that coding because the search *cannot* find it in the earlier records of your database. That is why I keep saying that the misnamed legacy data is so awful and terrible. Nobody wants to talk about it so: it's off the agenda. It's more fun to come up with new relator terms than to figure out if they of any real use and what the consequences will be for that legacy data (that we don't discuss). -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html -- Julie Renee Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com 559-278-5813 “Those who bring sunshine to the lives of others cannot keep it from themselves.”... James Matthew Barrie
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
I think the best thing to do in all of this is look at the big picture. Smart discussions occurred when we began automating. What do we give up? The better question is, What does this change? Based on that you start looking at how the staff workflow changes, how the organizational flow changes, what shifts are occurring. By doing this it is no longer 'what are we giving up?' but 'what are we changing/shifting?' Using this method we can often find savings elsewhere rather than giving up staff or cutting the budget. not always but often. This is happening and the sooner we on the ground take the reins the better it is for us. I am working with folks that are researching and creating programs and methods that could loose us from the chains of the ILS and conglomerates like OCLC, which most little libraries can't afford anyway. This time we need to be the ones making the choices and decisions so we aren't in the position of being dictated to by the vendors. We need to be one step ahead and learning, understanding, and creating. Melissa Original Message Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change From: Julie Moore julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com Date: Nov 24, 2013 10:02 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA CC: Melissa, Perhaps as a consultant you can speak to directors/deans of libraries with that DUH attitude, but I can say that as a cataloger, I would never approach my dean with that attitude. As James stated, there are *always* options ... and in this economic environment where we are being stretched too thin, administrators do have to plan on figuring out what to let go of in order to pay for X ... and I do value being employed! :-) Julie On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Melissa Powell meli...@biblioease.comwrote: This cataloging consultant/trainer who works with small libraries is piping in. I am grateful for the price reduction for the rest of us--with the new pricing structure I can actually get RDA access to these small and rural libraries. On the other hand: makes it tough for us on the consortial level because the costs have changed for larger places.. As far as the comment early in this discussion about how hard it was to convince administrators, here is where we as catalogers need to be better about communicating what we do. There is no 'choice', the rules have changed. This is the first step to compliance with the rest of the information industry. When I tell directors that, they are shocked. Duh. Then they comply. Melissa What will kill our profession is not ebooks, Amazon, or Google, but a lack of Imagination. R. David Lankes Melissa M. Powell, MLIS Independent Librarian www.biblioease.com 970-218-4753 Webcast Producer/Publishers Weekly Instructor/Lyrasis Editor/Biblio Tech Review LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Skype: thelibrarygirl Google+: Melissa Powell -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 5:42 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change On 11/23/2013 12:53 AM, J. McRee Elrod wrote: snip James said: Of course, when the time comes for retrospective conversion of the millions of records in that awful, terrible legacy data ... Surely you jest. Most of our library clients prefer the awful terrible 'legacy data' to the strange (to them) RDA records. Our AACR2 compatible export is very popular. Most of our e-publisher and aggregator clients feel they must be with it, and go with the new standard. /snip Yes, I am joking. But if we are to make all of these relators and relationships useful for the public, the simple undeniable fact is: incredible retrospective conversions will have to be done and I have never heard of estimates of how much those will cost. The RDA subscriptions are peanuts by comparison. Was any of that discussed during the decision making for RDA? Maybe it wasn't discussed then, but it sure will be in the future! You can only ignore it for so long. Catalogers, of all people, should know that if you decide to make a new index, e.g. actor or editor, it is not enough to say that all new records will now have that coding because the search *cannot* find it in the earlier records of your database. That is why I keep saying that the misnamed legacy data is so awful and terrible. Nobody wants to talk about it so: it's off the agenda. It's more fun to come up with new relator terms than to figure out if they of any real use and what the consequences will be for that legacy data (that we don't discuss). -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
On 11/24/2013 9:20 PM, Melissa Powell wrote: snip I think the best thing to do in all of this is look at the big picture. Smart discussions occurred when we began automating. What do we give up? The better question is, What does this change? Based on that you start looking at how the staff workflow changes, how the organizational flow changes, what shifts are occurring. By doing this it is no longer 'what are we giving up?' but 'what are we changing/shifting?' Using this method we can often find savings elsewhere rather than giving up staff or cutting the budget. not always but often. This is happening and the sooner we on the ground take the reins the better it is for us. I am working with folks that are researching and creating programs and methods that could loose us from the chains of the ILS and conglomerates like OCLC, which most little libraries can't afford anyway. This time we need to be the ones making the choices and decisions so we aren't in the position of being dictated to by the vendors. We need to be one step ahead and learning, understanding, and creating. /snip These are some very good questions you are asking and I would ask if you would share some of your thoughts. I would add a question that should rank very high in importance: how has it changed for the public? As always, if you don't make something that the public wants, even though all the so-called experts may love what you are doing, it will make absolutely no difference. History is full of such examples. It is what the public wants that overrides everything else. I particularly like your statement: ... so we aren't in the position of being dictated to by the vendors and here I would add: nor by any other groups that are self-interested. Each group must be expected to lay out a good case and not just proclaim: You have no choice--or as was stated by some others, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItHcsIHshhs -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
On 11/23/2013 12:53 AM, J. McRee Elrod wrote: snip James said: Of course, when the time comes for retrospective conversion of the millions of records in that awful, terrible legacy data ... Surely you jest. Most of our library clients prefer the awful terrible 'legacy data' to the strange (to them) RDA records. Our AACR2 compatible export is very popular. Most of our e-publisher and aggregator clients feel they must be with it, and go with the new standard. /snip Yes, I am joking. But if we are to make all of these relators and relationships useful for the public, the simple undeniable fact is: incredible retrospective conversions will have to be done and I have never heard of estimates of how much those will cost. The RDA subscriptions are peanuts by comparison. Was any of that discussed during the decision making for RDA? Maybe it wasn't discussed then, but it sure will be in the future! You can only ignore it for so long. Catalogers, of all people, should know that if you decide to make a new index, e.g. actor or editor, it is not enough to say that all new records will now have that coding because the search *cannot* find it in the earlier records of your database. That is why I keep saying that the misnamed legacy data is so awful and terrible. Nobody wants to talk about it so: it's off the agenda. It's more fun to come up with new relator terms than to figure out if they of any real use and what the consequences will be for that legacy data (that we don't discuss). -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
This cataloging consultant/trainer who works with small libraries is piping in. I am grateful for the price reduction for the rest of us--with the new pricing structure I can actually get RDA access to these small and rural libraries. On the other hand: makes it tough for us on the consortial level because the costs have changed for larger places.. As far as the comment early in this discussion about how hard it was to convince administrators, here is where we as catalogers need to be better about communicating what we do. There is no 'choice', the rules have changed. This is the first step to compliance with the rest of the information industry. When I tell directors that, they are shocked. Duh. Then they comply. Melissa What will kill our profession is not ebooks, Amazon, or Google, but a lack of Imagination. R. David Lankes Melissa M. Powell, MLIS Independent Librarian www.biblioease.com 970-218-4753 Webcast Producer/Publishers Weekly Instructor/Lyrasis Editor/Biblio Tech Review LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Skype: thelibrarygirl Google+: Melissa Powell -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 5:42 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change On 11/23/2013 12:53 AM, J. McRee Elrod wrote: snip James said: Of course, when the time comes for retrospective conversion of the millions of records in that awful, terrible legacy data ... Surely you jest. Most of our library clients prefer the awful terrible 'legacy data' to the strange (to them) RDA records. Our AACR2 compatible export is very popular. Most of our e-publisher and aggregator clients feel they must be with it, and go with the new standard. /snip Yes, I am joking. But if we are to make all of these relators and relationships useful for the public, the simple undeniable fact is: incredible retrospective conversions will have to be done and I have never heard of estimates of how much those will cost. The RDA subscriptions are peanuts by comparison. Was any of that discussed during the decision making for RDA? Maybe it wasn't discussed then, but it sure will be in the future! You can only ignore it for so long. Catalogers, of all people, should know that if you decide to make a new index, e.g. actor or editor, it is not enough to say that all new records will now have that coding because the search *cannot* find it in the earlier records of your database. That is why I keep saying that the misnamed legacy data is so awful and terrible. Nobody wants to talk about it so: it's off the agenda. It's more fun to come up with new relator terms than to figure out if they of any real use and what the consequences will be for that legacy data (that we don't discuss). -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Melissa Powell said:
There is no 'choice', the rules have changed.
While there is no choice that we must cope with RDA records derived
from national cataloguing agencies and bibliographic utilities,
several choices do remain:
1) Will RDA be implemented for local original cataloguing? Many
libraries will continue to use AACR2 for Aunt Madge's donated
scrapbook I suspect.
2) If RDA is implemented, which options will be followed? We have,
for example, clients which will accept RDA records, but minus entry $e
relator terms (apart from illustrators of children's material), and
added entry $i.
3) If creating RDA records, will they be done as monkey see, monkey
do, and/or by utilizing the MRIs, cheat sheets, local procedures, and
other online helps reported on this e-list and Autocat? Will the
print version be purchased?
In addition to cost, there is the matter of the time it takes to find
a rule in RDA, and then to figure out what it is saying. We can not
afford the time required. and give the turn-a-round our clients
demand. E=publishers and agregators demand that we provide the
records by the time the titles are to be released.
As as has pointed out by others, AACR2 was a one time purchase. The
RDA Toolkit is an ongoing overhead.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370 ($ 1075) * 20 concurrent users: $ 3060 ($ 1225) * 25 concurrent users: $ 3825 ($ 1450) Try as I may, I can't see how the new pricing model will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. What I see instead is a drastic rise in prices which will hit every library which needs more than two concurrent users. My guess is that many larger libraries won't be able or willing to buy the number of concurrent users which would be needed according to the number of catalogers. Heidrun On 13.11.2013 21:14, schrieb James Hennelly: Effective January 1, 2014 RDA Toolkit will be extending a new pricing model for site subscriptions. This change will make implementation of RDA: Resource Description Access more accessible for small cataloging departments and will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. Learn more at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange. James Hennelly Managing Editor ALA Digital Reference 1-800-545-2433, ext 5051, or312-280-5051 jhenne...@ala.org mailto:jhenne...@ala.org -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Are you serious?! This is outrageous! Do you know how difficult it was to lobby to get RDA Toolkit for our libraries in the first place? (Many administrators did not really see the need to move from AACR2 to RDA in the first place.) I thought the pricing was high before -- for a basic tool that every cataloger needs. This comes at a time when many libraries are experiencing a crisis in cataloging -- where administrators are looking for reasons to completely get rid of technical services and outsource everything. And now we have to come back with this price structure for a basic tool? RDA is going to be the death of us catalogers! This is not only a problem for large libraries, but also medium libraries. This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or just catalog blindly without access to the rules. This is *VERY* disappointing. Julie Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370 ($ 1075) * 20 concurrent users: $ 3060 ($ 1225) * 25 concurrent users: $ 3825 ($ 1450) Try as I may, I can't see how the new pricing model will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. What I see instead is a drastic rise in prices which will hit every library which needs more than two concurrent users. My guess is that many larger libraries won't be able or willing to buy the number of concurrent users which would be needed according to the number of catalogers. Heidrun On 13.11.2013 21:14, schrieb James Hennelly: Effective January 1, 2014 RDA Toolkit will be extending a new pricing model for site subscriptions. This change will make implementation of RDA: Resource Description Access more accessible for small cataloging departments and will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. Learn more at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange. James Hennelly Managing Editor ALA Digital Reference 1-800-545-2433, ext 5051, or 312-280-5051 jhenne...@ala.org -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germanywww.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi -- Julie Renee Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com 559-278-5813 “Those who bring sunshine to the lives of others cannot keep it from themselves.”... James Matthew Barrie
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
What?!!! Thanks for passing on this information. I made others aware here so we could plan accordingly... --- Lizzy Walker, MLS Assistant Professor, Metadata and Digital Initiatives Librarian http://works.bepress.com/lizzy_walker/ 316-978-5138 Wichita State University Libraries 1845 Fairmount St. Wichita, KS 67260-0068 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Julie Moore Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:16 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change Are you serious?! This is outrageous! Do you know how difficult it was to lobby to get RDA Toolkit for our libraries in the first place? (Many administrators did not really see the need to move from AACR2 to RDA in the first place.) I thought the pricing was high before -- for a basic tool that every cataloger needs. This comes at a time when many libraries are experiencing a crisis in cataloging -- where administrators are looking for reasons to completely get rid of technical services and outsource everything. And now we have to come back with this price structure for a basic tool? RDA is going to be the death of us catalogers! This is not only a problem for large libraries, but also medium libraries. This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or just catalog blindly without access to the rules. This is VERY disappointing. Julie Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.demailto:wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370 ($ 1075) * 20 concurrent users: $ 3060 ($ 1225) * 25 concurrent users: $ 3825 ($ 1450) Try as I may, I can't see how the new pricing model will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. What I see instead is a drastic rise in prices which will hit every library which needs more than two concurrent users. My guess is that many larger libraries won't be able or willing to buy the number of concurrent users which would be needed according to the number of catalogers. Heidrun On 13.11.2013 21:14, schrieb James Hennelly: Effective January 1, 2014 RDA Toolkit will be extending a new pricing model for site subscriptions. This change will make implementation of RDA: Resource Description Access more accessible for small cataloging departments and will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. Learn more at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange. James Hennelly Managing Editor ALA Digital Reference 1-800-545-2433tel:1-800-545-2433, ext 5051, or 312-280-5051tel:312-280-5051 jhenne...@ala.orgmailto:jhenne...@ala.org -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bihttp://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi -- Julie Renee Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno julie.renee.mo...@gmail.commailto:julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com 559-278-5813 Those who bring sunshine to the lives of others cannot keep it from themselves. ... James Matthew Barrie
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
I would also like to note that LIS schools will now be charged for access to the Toolkit. In my case this will make it very difficult to provide access to the Toolkit for my students. I am not sure why ALA Publishing decided to require LIS schools to purchase access but I know I will have to find alternative ways to provide access for my students. June June Abbas, Ph.D. Professor School of Library and Information Studies College of Arts and Sciences The University of Oklahoma 401 W. Brooks, Bizzell Library Norman, OK 73069 405-325-3921 jmab...@ou.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Walker, Elizabeth [lizzy.wal...@wichita.edu] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:25 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change What?!!! Thanks for passing on this information. I made others aware here so we could plan accordingly... --- Lizzy Walker, MLS Assistant Professor, Metadata and Digital Initiatives Librarian http://works.bepress.com/lizzy_walker/ 316-978-5138 Wichita State University Libraries 1845 Fairmount St. Wichita, KS 67260-0068 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Julie Moore Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:16 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change Are you serious?! This is outrageous! Do you know how difficult it was to lobby to get RDA Toolkit for our libraries in the first place? (Many administrators did not really see the need to move from AACR2 to RDA in the first place.) I thought the pricing was high before -- for a basic tool that every cataloger needs. This comes at a time when many libraries are experiencing a crisis in cataloging -- where administrators are looking for reasons to completely get rid of technical services and outsource everything. And now we have to come back with this price structure for a basic tool? RDA is going to be the death of us catalogers! This is not only a problem for large libraries, but also medium libraries. This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or just catalog blindly without access to the rules. This is VERY disappointing. Julie Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.demailto:wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370 ($ 1075) * 20 concurrent users: $ 3060 ($ 1225) * 25 concurrent users: $ 3825 ($ 1450) Try as I may, I can't see how the new pricing model will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. What I see instead is a drastic rise in prices which will hit every library which needs more than two concurrent users. My guess is that many larger libraries won't be able or willing to buy the number of concurrent users which would be needed according to the number of catalogers. Heidrun On 13.11.2013 21:14, schrieb James Hennelly: Effective January 1, 2014 RDA Toolkit will be extending a new pricing model for site subscriptions. This change will make implementation of RDA: Resource Description Access more accessible for small cataloging departments and will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
I completely agree with Julie. Instead of considering whether to increase our number of users, we will most likely have to scale back to a bare minimum and hope we can still work efficiently. On that note, does anyone know if we can get usage statistics from the Toolkit. When scaling back, it would be good to know how often we hit our peak. Zora Breeding Vanderbilt University From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Julie Moore Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:16 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change Are you serious?! This is outrageous! Do you know how difficult it was to lobby to get RDA Toolkit for our libraries in the first place? (Many administrators did not really see the need to move from AACR2 to RDA in the first place.) I thought the pricing was high before -- for a basic tool that every cataloger needs. This comes at a time when many libraries are experiencing a crisis in cataloging -- where administrators are looking for reasons to completely get rid of technical services and outsource everything. And now we have to come back with this price structure for a basic tool? RDA is going to be the death of us catalogers! This is not only a problem for large libraries, but also medium libraries. This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or just catalog blindly without access to the rules. This is VERY disappointing. Julie Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.demailto:wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370 ($ 1075) * 20 concurrent users: $ 3060 ($ 1225) * 25 concurrent users: $ 3825 ($ 1450) Try as I may, I can't see how the new pricing model will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. What I see instead is a drastic rise in prices which will hit every library which needs more than two concurrent users. My guess is that many larger libraries won't be able or willing to buy the number of concurrent users which would be needed according to the number of catalogers. Heidrun On 13.11.2013 21:14, schrieb James Hennelly: Effective January 1, 2014 RDA Toolkit will be extending a new pricing model for site subscriptions. This change will make implementation of RDA: Resource Description Access more accessible for small cataloging departments and will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. Learn more at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange. James Hennelly Managing Editor ALA Digital Reference 1-800-545-2433tel:1-800-545-2433, ext 5051, or 312-280-5051tel:312-280-5051 jhenne...@ala.orgmailto:jhenne...@ala.org -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bihttp://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi -- Julie Renee Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno julie.renee.mo...@gmail.commailto:julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com 559-278-5813 Those who bring sunshine to the lives of others cannot keep it from themselves. ... James Matthew Barrie
[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
You can access usage statistics through the Administartion System http://admin.rdatoolkit.org/. More information is available in the RDA Toolkit help. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l’information qu’il contient est réservée à l’usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n’avez aucun droit d’utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] de la part de Breeding, Zora [zora.breed...@vanderbilt.edu] Envoyé : 22 novembre 2013 10:30 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change I completely agree with Julie. Instead of considering whether to increase our number of users, we will most likely have to scale back to a bare minimum and hope we can still work efficiently. On that note, does anyone know if we can get usage statistics from the Toolkit. When scaling back, it would be good to know how often we hit our peak. Zora Breeding Vanderbilt University From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Julie Moore Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:16 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change Are you serious?! This is outrageous! Do you know how difficult it was to lobby to get RDA Toolkit for our libraries in the first place? (Many administrators did not really see the need to move from AACR2 to RDA in the first place.) I thought the pricing was high before -- for a basic tool that every cataloger needs. This comes at a time when many libraries are experiencing a crisis in cataloging -- where administrators are looking for reasons to completely get rid of technical services and outsource everything. And now we have to come back with this price structure for a basic tool? RDA is going to be the death of us catalogers! This is not only a problem for large libraries, but also medium libraries. This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or just catalog blindly without access to the rules. This is VERY disappointing. Julie Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.demailto:wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370 ($ 1075) * 20 concurrent users: $ 3060 ($ 1225) * 25 concurrent users: $ 3825 ($ 1450) Try as I may, I can't see how the new pricing model will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. What I see instead is a drastic rise in prices which will hit every library which needs more than two concurrent users. My guess is that many larger libraries won't be able or willing to buy the number of concurrent users which would be needed according
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
I asked ALA for useful usage statistics back in March 2013 so we could make evidenced-based decisions on our renewal in April. At the time, they said none was available but they would be working on it. Zora's question prompted me to look again in the Toolkit Admin site (http://admin.rdatoolkit.org) and it appears there now is one available that we can generate ourselves. Look under Reports, then click on Peak Concurrency Report, which, if I'm reading it correctly, should be showing the highest number of people logged at the same time each month. ---Chris. ___ [Description: Description: Description: signatures] Christopher Cronin Director of Technical Services University of Chicago Library 1100 E. 57th Street Chicago, IL 60637 Phone: 773-702-8739 Fax: 773-702-3016 Skype: christopher-cronin E-mail: cron...@uchicago.edumailto:cron...@uchicago.edu ___ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Breeding, Zora Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:31 AM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change I completely agree with Julie. Instead of considering whether to increase our number of users, we will most likely have to scale back to a bare minimum and hope we can still work efficiently. On that note, does anyone know if we can get usage statistics from the Toolkit. When scaling back, it would be good to know how often we hit our peak. Zora Breeding Vanderbilt University From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Julie Moore Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:16 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change Are you serious?! This is outrageous! Do you know how difficult it was to lobby to get RDA Toolkit for our libraries in the first place? (Many administrators did not really see the need to move from AACR2 to RDA in the first place.) I thought the pricing was high before -- for a basic tool that every cataloger needs. This comes at a time when many libraries are experiencing a crisis in cataloging -- where administrators are looking for reasons to completely get rid of technical services and outsource everything. And now we have to come back with this price structure for a basic tool? RDA is going to be the death of us catalogers! This is not only a problem for large libraries, but also medium libraries. This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or just catalog blindly without access to the rules. This is VERY disappointing. Julie Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.demailto:wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370 ($ 1075) * 20 concurrent users: $ 3060 ($ 1225) * 25 concurrent users: $ 3825 ($ 1450) Try as I may, I can't see how the new pricing model will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. What I see instead is a drastic rise in prices which will hit every library which needs more than two concurrent users. My guess is that many larger libraries won't be able or willing to buy the number of concurrent users which would be needed
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Thanks!! From this report, it looks like we can easily decrease our access by at least 2 concurrent users. Very helpful information! Zora From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Paradis Daniel Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:41 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change You can access usage statistics through the Administartion System http://admin.rdatoolkit.org/. More information is available in the RDA Toolkit help. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] de la part de Breeding, Zora [zora.breed...@vanderbilt.edu] Envoyé : 22 novembre 2013 10:30 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.camailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change I completely agree with Julie. Instead of considering whether to increase our number of users, we will most likely have to scale back to a bare minimum and hope we can still work efficiently. On that note, does anyone know if we can get usage statistics from the Toolkit. When scaling back, it would be good to know how often we hit our peak. Zora Breeding Vanderbilt University From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Julie Moore Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:16 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change Are you serious?! This is outrageous! Do you know how difficult it was to lobby to get RDA Toolkit for our libraries in the first place? (Many administrators did not really see the need to move from AACR2 to RDA in the first place.) I thought the pricing was high before -- for a basic tool that every cataloger needs. This comes at a time when many libraries are experiencing a crisis in cataloging -- where administrators are looking for reasons to completely get rid of technical services and outsource everything. And now we have to come back with this price structure for a basic tool? RDA is going to be the death of us catalogers! This is not only a problem for large libraries, but also medium libraries. This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or just catalog blindly without access to the rules. This is VERY disappointing. Julie Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.demailto:wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
On 11/22/2013 4:29 PM, Abbas, June M. wrote: snip I would also like to note that LIS schools will now be charged for access to the Toolkit. In my case this will make it very difficult to provide access to the Toolkit for my students. I am not sure why ALA Publishing decided to require LIS schools to purchase access but I know I will have to find alternative ways to provide access for my students. /snip Well, I guess your students will come to understand the term monopoly. Of course, when the time comes for retrospective conversion of the millions of records in that awful, terrible legacy data to update the relators and relationships, *that* is when libraries will see the major costs. And I am sure there will be other sundry costs thrown in along the way. -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
If the cost of changing that awful legacy data is prohibitively high, what good are all the wonderful things that cannot be fully implemented. Price change is one thing, product changes another. If the Toolkit continues to be unfinished, unstable, untried, what's to say how much, or little it may be worth when all is said and done. Same copy of AACR2 which I held since 1978, I still hold, and can still consult for records that are AACR2 compliant. When divided by 35 years, cost per year is low indeed. Information gleaned only awhile ago from the Toolkit may be changed already. Thus true cost of it, with its rate of obsolescence, is high indeed. Jack Franciscan University of Steubenville James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com 11/22/2013 1:02 PM On 11/22/2013 4:29 PM, Abbas, June M. wrote: snip I would also like to note that LIS schools will now be charged for access to the Toolkit. In my case this will make it very difficult to provide access to the Toolkit for my students. I am not sure why ALA Publishing decided to require LIS schools to purchase access but I know I will have to find alternative ways to provide access for my students. /snip Well, I guess your students will come to understand the term monopoly. Of course, when the time comes for retrospective conversion of the millions of records in that awful, terrible legacy data to update the relators and relationships, *that* is when libraries will see the major costs. And I am sure there will be other sundry costs thrown in along the way. -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
James said:
Of course, when the time comes for retrospective conversion of the
millions of records in that awful, terrible legacy data ...
Surely you jest. Most of our library clients prefer the awful
terrible 'legacy data' to the strange (to them) RDA records. Our
AACR2 compatible export is very popular.
Most of our e-publisher and aggregator clients feel they must be with
it, and go with the new standard.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Julie Moore posted:
This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers
who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper
and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or
just catalog blindly without access to the rules.
This is *VERY* disappointing.
Bernhard has made the same very important point.
SLC is happy with the MRIs and cheat sheets; much less time consuming than
trying to puzzle out what RDA is saying, Toolkit or print.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
