Can you give us some information on how you did this, getting around
Google's volume limiting checks?
( Would you like to write a short article for the Code4Lib Journal? :) )
Jonathan
Jackie Wrosch wrote:
> We do this. Example in our catalog
> http://portal.emich.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=58902
> Very few items actually have full-text available.
>
> On 9/14/07, Pons, Lisa (ponslm) <PONSLM_at_ucmail.uc.edu> wrote:
>
>> There is someone doing this already- is it Ann Arbor District? I can look
>> more if that is not it.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries on behalf of Andrew Gray
>> Sent: Fri 9/14/2007 12:32 PM
>> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
>> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Adding links to books in Google Book Search within
>> the OPAC
>>
>> On 14/09/2007, Tim Spalding <tim_at_librarything.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What do people here think of the following idea, both personally and
>>> what how you think other library people would respond:
>>>
>>> Embedding links to Google Booksearch Books within the standard OPAC.
>>>
>>> 1. Only books with the full text would be linked to, not "limited
>>> preview books."
>>> 2. Other similar resources could be added too (PG, Open Library, etc.)
>>>
>>> It seems to me this would be a service-check out a book before you get
>>> it. But I could imagine it would also touch a nerve.
>>>
>> Coincidentally, I was discussing doing this just yesterday... what was
>> suggested was putting this in place for our rare books and special
>> collections, slapping a Google Books link . A fair proportion of these
>> have been scanned by Google, and most of them are old enough that the
>> rights issue means they're likely to be fully accessible.
>>
>> Having the electronic copy is particularly useful for these, as
>> they're are the ones we prefer to avoid giving out to people; the
>> electronic copy can serve as a proxy if you want to work with it
>> outside the library. Where a book is actually available to be loaned,
>> I think the electronic text is somehow less important, or at least a
>> lower priority to list.
>>
>> For Gutenberg, which concentrates more on works than actual "copies of
>> books", the dynamic is a bit different; the sensible idea would be to
>> link to it [or to a local copy?] and call it an ebook, I think.
>>
>> --
>> - Andrew Gray
>> andrew.gray_at_dunelm.org.uk
>>
>>
>
>
--
Jonathan Rochkind
Digital Services Software Engineer
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
410.516.8886
rochkind (at) jhu.edu
Received on Fri Sep 14 2007 - 14:51:10 EDT