Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change

2013-12-03 Thread Cindy Wolff


"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

2013-11-25 Thread ford davey
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

2013-11-25 Thread Bernhard Eversberg

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

2013-11-24 Thread James Weinheimer

On 11/24/2013 9:20 PM, Melissa Powell wrote:


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.



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

2013-11-24 Thread Melissa Powell
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 
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 wrote:

> 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:
> 
> > 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.
> 
>
> 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

Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change

2013-11-24 Thread Julie Moore
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 wrote:

> 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:
> 
> > 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.
> 
>
> 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

2013-11-24 Thread James Weinheimer

On 11/23/2013 5:55 PM, Melissa Powell wrote:


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.



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

2013-11-23 Thread J. McRee Elrod
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

2013-11-23 Thread Melissa Powell
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:

> 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.


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

2013-11-23 Thread James Weinheimer

On 11/23/2013 12:53 AM, J. McRee Elrod wrote:


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.



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

2013-11-22 Thread J. McRee Elrod
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/
  ___} |__ \__


Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change

2013-11-22 Thread J. McRee Elrod
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

2013-11-22 Thread Jack Wu
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  11/22/2013 1:02 PM >>>
> 
On 11/22/2013 4:29 PM, Abbas, June M. wrote:




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.


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

2013-11-22 Thread James Weinheimer

On 11/22/2013 4:29 PM, Abbas, June M. wrote:



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.





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

2013-11-22 Thread Breeding, Zora
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.ca<mailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca>
http://www.banq.qc.ca<http://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<mailto: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<mailto: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 
mailto: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:

Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change

2013-11-22 Thread Christopher Cronin
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.edu<mailto: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.CA<mailto: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 
mailto: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 th

[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change

2013-11-22 Thread Paradis Daniel
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.ca<mailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca>
http://www.banq.qc.ca<http://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 
mailto: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 

Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change

2013-11-22 Thread Breeding, Zora
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 
mailto: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<mailto:jhenne...@ala.org>



--

-

Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.

Stuttgart Media University

Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany

www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi<http://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi>



--
Julie Renee Moore
Head of Cataloging
California State University, Fresno
julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com<mailto: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

2013-11-22 Thread Abbas, June M.
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 
mailto: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

2013-11-22 Thread Walker, Elizabeth
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 
mailto: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<mailto:jhenne...@ala.org>



--

-

Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.

Stuttgart Media University

Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany

www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi<http://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi>



--
Julie Renee Moore
Head of Cataloging
California State University, Fresno
julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com<mailto: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

2013-11-22 Thread Julie Moore
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

2013-11-22 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller
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 




--
-
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi