ACQNET v4n042 (August 14, 1994) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acqnet-v4n042 ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 4, No. 42, August 14, 1994 ======================================= (1) FROM: Marc Langston SUBJECT: Lebanese Vendors (2 lines) (2) FROM: Stephen Clark SUBJECT: Networking _BIP+_ (8 lines) (3) FROM: Bob Schatz SUBJECT: Acquisitions Librarians/Vendors of Library Materials Discussion Group: Some thoughts (31 lines) (4) FROM: Christie Degener SUBJECT: Report of an ALCTS Preconference (49 lines) (1)--------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marc Langston (U. of Mass, Amherst) Subject: Lebanese Vendors Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 13:03:51 -0400 (EDT) Can anyone recommend a good vendor for books published in Lebanon? If so, please contact me via e-mail. Thanks. (2)---------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen D. Clark (William & Mary) Subject: Networking _BIP+_ Date: Tue, 09 Aug 1994 13:44:38 +0000 I have heard several instances of problems with _Books-In-Print Plus_ on a network. Are there any success stories out there? We are contemplating putting this up on an SCSI Express CD-ROM network, and I would like to find out whether folks have been able to do so with no problems. Please respond to me rather than ACQNET. Thank You, Stephen (3)---------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bob Schatz (Academic Book Center) Subject: Acquisitions Librarians/Vendors of Library Materials Discussion Group: Some thoughts Date: Wed, 03 Aug 1994 16:22:31 +0000 (GMT) Over the years, in reflection of changing realities, the ALA/ALCTS/AS Acquisitions Librarians/Vendors of Library Materials Discussion Group has also changed. Originally two separate groups, the Booksellers Discussion Group and the Acquisitions Discussion Group, the two bodies merged to become the Acquisitions Librarians/Booksellers Discussion Group before evolving into its current state. For some time, even given my own brilliant contributions to the conversation, I have felt that this discussion group has dealt with only limited facets of the acquisitions/materials supply picture. Some items seem to get discussed at every meeting and other items not at all. For me, part of the problem is the focus of the group as represented by its name (which for me implies its mission). While at one time all our jobs were centered upon the "what" of acquisitions, over time our realities have shifted to the "how." In the larger context of how materials are acquired and supplied, the role of organizations little represented in the discussion group, namely, system vendors and cataloging utilities, should not be overlooked. While a name change in and of itself will not immediately make our discussions more fruitful, I think it will help communicate the desire on the part of participants that systems and utility types join us. As such, I would like to propose that the group rename itself the Acquisitions Process Discussion Group. While I know that not all ACQNET readers participate in this ALA group, this seemed to me the most productive place to share these thoughts. [ed. note: Please feel free to respond to ACQNET if you have ideas you want share concerning the above] (4)---------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christie Degener (UNC-CH Health Sciences Lib.) Subject: Report of an ALCTS Preconference Date: Thu, 11 Aug 1994 17:21:35 -0400 "Closing the Loop: Reconceptualizing Acquisitions in the Electronic Age" This preconference was sponsored by the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services, Acquisitions Section, Technology for Acquisitions Committee, and was held during the morning of Friday, June 24, 1994, at the ALA Annual Conference in Miami Beach, FL. Marion Reid (California State University, San Marcos) presented the keynote address, "Closing the loop: how did we get here and where are we going?" Marion drew upon her own experience as an acquisitions librarian and some nine hours of interviews with fifteen vendors to provide an overview of the major events that have influenced the work of acquisitions librarians. The current environment features changes in the roles of the major players, expansion in the types of information being acquired, and utilization of multiple technologies to manage and provide access to information. She finished by showing an overhead illustrating the increasing interconnectedness of all users/managers of information, providing one possible interpretation to "closing the loop." The second half of the preconference consisted of a panel discussion, "Practical realities." Five panelists gave their views on the effects of automation on various library and vendor operations, as well as the effects of automation on the library -vendor relationship. Leslie Straus (Innovative Interfaces, Inc.) cited numerous examples of "blurred boundaries." The work of acquisitions staff now requires much more cooperation and coordination with cataloging, public services, circulation, and library systems staff. Gary Shirk (Yankee Book Peddler) described "new vendor realities" from the bookseller's perspective: coping with soaring expectations for service, expanding library contacts to include systems and/or financial staff, participating in standards development, and ensuring that representatives are much more knowledgeable about libraries. Amira Aaron (Readmore, Inc.) reviewed progress on the development of library-vendor interfaces and discussed several examples of EDI/X12 transactions being tested. Albert Simmons (Reed/Bowker) spoke on the role of publishers as a primary source of new bibliographic information and encouraged librarians to become knowledgeable about standards being developed to enable access to and transfer of bibliographic information. Ron Ray (University of the Pacific) questioned whether librarians should be so interested in "closing the loop" (especially since this brought the image of a hangman's noose to his mind), and suggested that reconceptualizing acquisitions and the development of creative new relations with partners could better be accomplished by "breaking the loop." A brief question and answer period concluded the second half of this preconference. ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 4, No. 42 ****** END OF FILE******