+ Page 111 + ----------------------------------------------------------------- Tuttle, Marcia. "The Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues." The Public-Access Computer Systems Review 2, no. 1 (1991): 111-127. ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1.0 Introduction Currently, serials librarians face two important issues: (1) unacceptably high journal subscription prices, and (2) the emergence of electronic publishing as a viable alternative to the traditional paper journal. An electronic serial, the Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues, serves as a case study that illustrates one way librarians are responding to both of these issues. This article documents one effort to use electronic technology to meet a critical scholarly need. 2.0 Brief History At the 1988 ALA Midwinter Meeting, the Publisher/Vendor-Library Relations Committee (PVLR) of ALA's Resources and Technical Services Division (now the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services) was called upon to assume leadership in the library profession's fight against high journal prices. To meet this challenge, it created a subcommittee. Members of the subcommittee were Deana Astle, Mary Elizabeth Clack, Jerry Curtis, Charles (Chuck) Hamaker, and Robert Houbeck, all of them active in and knowledgeable about serials pricing. Curtis was a subscription agent; the other members were academic librarians. In Spring 1988, Caroline Early, PVLR Chair, asked me to chair the unnamed subcommittee (later called the Subcommittee on Serials Pricing Issues), which was charged with collecting and disseminating information regarding serials prices. Members had been appointed and a meeting had been scheduled for the summer conference, but Early had not been able to find a chair. She and I speculated about a newsletter as an appropriate means of disseminating pricing information. We knew that Hamaker had edited an informal letter on this subject for collection development librarians. He was not able to continue this service because of mailing costs. I accepted Early's invitation to chair the subcommittee. At the July 1988 ALA Conference, the subcommittee met for the first time and took the following actions: + Page 112 + 1. Determined that its first concern was to serve as a clearinghouse for information about serials pricing. 2. Decided that dissemination of pricing information through a newsletter should be by both electronic and paper means. 3. Discussed publicity and distribution of a press release to generate both news about and an audience for the newsletter [1]. Having only limited experience with electronic mail on BITNET or DataLinx, subcommittee members were neophytes when it came to electronic publishing, but we very quickly decided that the newsletter we produced should be distributed in both electronic and paper versions [2]. In this way, it would get serials pricing news quickly to those who could receive it electronically, and it would also make the newsletter available to those who could not receive the electronic version. Simply making the decision to publish an electronic newsletter was exhilarating. The subcommittee had not considered questions of production, distribution, and publicity, but we had made a leap of faith in committing our group to go electronic. We had visions of a nationwide--no, worldwide--network of librarians and others concerned with serials prices. BITNET would carry the "official" edition of the newsletter, with other prospective outlets being DataLinx, EBSCONET [3], ALANET [4], and the paper edition. At this point, our excitement went to our heads, influencing other decisions. We did not want to be a real serial because we would not publish forever, but only until the pricing crisis abated. We anticipated that: (1) librarians' actions would lead to publishers' decisions to slow price increases and/or discontinue marginal titles, and (2) the U.S. dollar would gain enough strength to eliminate apparent increases in prices of foreign journals. Therefore, we did not want the newsletter to have an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN). Nor did we want it to have a regular frequency. If we could somehow avoid numbering the issues, then it would not be a serial and would not have to be bound by serials standards. (Yes, these decisions were being made by four serials librarians, another librarian, and a subscription agent!) The paper edition, in order not to be a serial, would be dated memos, not issues; however, it would have some regularity by being batched and distributed six times a year. In the paper edition, the news would be cold; it was intended only for persons and institutions without electronic mail capability. + Page 113 + Between the first meeting of the subcommittee and its next meeting six months later, the group wrote a press release introducing the Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues (subsequently referred to as the "Newsletter"), and it planned the content of the first issue. In February, ALA sent the press release to more than 200 journals and organizations. Announcements in the Chronicle of Higher Education and Library Hotline proved to be the most successful, bringing many inquiries and subscribers to all formats of the Newsletter. Several persons requested that issues be sent by telefacsimile, but this was not an option because of cost and time considerations. Interested persons, most of them librarians, began to submit notices and brief articles for publication. The first issue, dated February 27, 1989, went to about 150 addresses, nearly 100 of them in paper format. Minor editing on the word processor turned the very plain BITNET edition of the Newsletter into a fair printed product. The electronic mail system could not handle such niceties as brackets, underlining, bold print, and certain other symbols, so this information and a header were added before printing. I had the first nine-page issue photocopied and mailed at my library's expense. Immediately thereafter, my institution was placed under a spending freeze. The RTSD office then agreed to distribute up to 200 copies of each issue through December 1989. The only serious problem the subcommittee faced with the Newsletter was the expense of producing and distributing the paper edition. During the fall of 1989, the mailing list reached the maximum number of 200 paper subscribers that ALCTS had agreed to fund, and we had to turn down further requests to subscribe. Each paper mailing cost close to $800 in photocopying and postage charges. At the 1990 ALA Midwinter meeting, the ALCTS Board of Directors, on the advice of the Publications Committee, voted to discontinue the paper edition, effective the end of 1989. Cost and lack of timeliness were the two primary reasons given. Number thirteen was the last issue of the Newsletter to be distributed in paper format. + Page 114 + Our subscription lists grew steadily, and editorial contributions continued to arrive, primarily through BITNET. The first three issues appeared a month apart, then a fourth issue was ready in two weeks. The electronic publication schedule was, and would continue to be, irregular because the subcommittee members believed that it would be foolish to impose a communication schedule for this type of publication. >From the outset, the Newsletter went to DataLinx subscribers who requested it. A short time after the Newsletter was established, I was able to arrange for selective distribution to EBSCONET subscribers. It took longer to begin distribution of the Newsletter on ALANET. Most recently, Readmore Academic Subscription Services began to print and mail the Newsletter to customers who request it. 3.0 Contents of the Newsletter The Newsletter does not usually have true articles, and we have no intention of becoming a refereed journal. This would defeat our purpose. We interpret "serials pricing issues" very broadly, as is illustrated by our coverage of peer review issues, the merits of the academic reward system, and acquisitions meetings at ALA. Naturally, the Newsletter also covers specific price increases and ways libraries are coping with the situation. We are fortunate to have active subscribers who send "news" by both e-mail and regular mail. The Newsletter contains a variety of material. I ask readers to report on relevant meetings and events. I seek permission to abstract or reprint articles from internal or very small circulation documents. I include related press releases, usually in their entirety. I try to find authors for topics that are suggested by readers. Other types of contributions include readers' letters to journal publishers and publishers' responses; abstracts of items from the non-library press (Science and Nature are good sources); accounts of individual libraries' evaluation and cancellation procedures; and "Hamaker's Haymakers," an outgrowth of the previously mentioned collection development newsletter. + Page 115 + There is an informal, bulletin-board spirit about the Newsletter, with questions and answers flying back and forth electronically, with me in the middle. At times, I wish it were a bulletin board, where readers could have more freedom and news would go out quicker. However, an edited publication has significant benefits, and a bulletin board would only be accessible to BITNET and Internet users, limiting participation to persons having mailboxes on those networks. 4.0 Production and Distribution of the Newsletter I compose each issue on WordStar aiming for nine or ten single- spaced pages (25 to 30 KB). The first revision is usually done on-screen, but I eventually print a draft copy to revise. The final copy is output as an ASCII file, and it is uploaded to a campus mainframe computer using Kermit. From this computer, it is transmitted to users on BITNET and interconnected networks (e.g., Internet) via e-mail. This copy is also used for EBSCO distribution; another ASCII copy is customized for ALANET. The ALANET and EBSCO copies are sent via TYMNET. From the beginning, I have had to rekey the Newsletter into DataLinx. Issue distribution takes more time now than in the beginning, perhaps five hours to send copies to four different systems. It takes approximately four to five hours to edit each issue. Subscription list maintenance requires two or three hours a week. All together, each issue requires about fifteen to twenty hours of the editor's time. 4.1 BITNET Distribution For the distribution of the early issues, I created a simple list of e-mail addresses and nicknames, but this list soon grew to an unmanageable size. I conferred with our campus e-mail guru, who has been indispensable for a wide range of problems. He suggested using a list server for the Newsletter, a suggestion that had also been proposed by some of our subscribers. The list server would receive subscription and cancellation messages, and I could use it to send out each issue. However, at the time, I thought that the list server permitted users to distribute messages to the subscriber list, so I rejected the idea. Instead, a mail server was used. We named the list PRICES-L, and I gave the guru a file of subscriber addresses. Use of the mail server made distribution much easier. + Page 116 + Using my BITNET address, I had the ability to send and receive messages to and from Internet users. It was also possible to communicate with users on other national and international networks. Given these connections, the Newsletter attracted BITNET subscribers in Canada, France, Sweden, Chile, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Israel; BITNET and JANET subscribers in the United Kingdom; OZ subscribers in Australia; and ALANET subscribers in Australia and other countries. And the list keeps growing. The BITNET mailing list, which includes all the above-mentioned networks except ALANET, is now over 760 subscribers. When William Britten's article on library-related electronic bulletin boards and newsletters appeared, I was surprised to read that one could subscribe to the Newsletter simply by sending a mail message to LISTSERV@UNCVX1.BITNET [5]. I quickly sent an electronic message to the author telling him that it wasn't so. He indicated that this was not true; he had just done it and so had several other people. An inquiry revealed that users could subscribe to the Newsletter directly, through either LISTSERV@UNCVX1 or MAILSERV@UNCVX1. They just had to say: SUBSCRIBE Prices-L. Apparently, both a list server and a mail server had been set up to distribute the Newsletter. Nonetheless, I preferred users to subscribe through me because I sent a test message to them, a practice that proved worthwhile for ensuring that e-mail addresses were correct, especially the addresses of new e-mail users. 4.2 DataLinx Distribution When one of its officers was named to the subcommittee, the Faxon subscription agency welcomed the opportunity to distribute the Newsletter to interested DataLinx subscribers, and this was done. Unfortunately, DataLinx was based on a system designed many years ago for Faxon's internal use. It incorporated an old e-mail system, Courier, and it was not possible to upload documents to this system. In order to distribute the Newsletter to DataLinx subscribers, someone had to rekey the issue into Courier. This procedure could take as long as five hours, at the rate of eight to ten screens an hour. + Page 117 + After I had sent several issues in this way, Faxon arranged for me to upload the text in an ASCII file via Kermit to their mainframe computer in Westwood, Massachusetts. A Faxon employee then rekeyed the Newsletter and distributed it to the Courier subscriber list. We followed this procedure for a few issues, but the person in Westwood (as might be expected) did not have the same interest in the Newsletter as its editor. Typographical errors were more prevalent. Since the keying chore had to be incorporated into an employee's normal workload, issue transmission was delayed for several days. Although we had no reader complaints about this change, I was not happy with the situation. I decided to go back to the original plan, whereby I would key the issue. This turned out to be a good way to do some extra proofreading. By printing a copy of the final document to be transmitted to the other networks and using it to key the DataLinx edition, I was able to find and correct additional errors and inconsistencies in the network edition of the Newsletter. Since I was more conscious of mistakes in that edition, I spent more time proofreading each Courier screen, and this reduced mistakes in the DataLinx edition. Since I have resumed keying the DataLinx edition, I have usually not resented the extra time required. 4.3 ALANET Distribution The RTSD Executive Director had given me an ALANET account for Newsletter purposes, and I received a few inquiries about subscribing that way. ALANET distribution was important because it was the best way to reach publishers and subscription agents. Unfortunately, one attempt after another to upload the Newsletter to ALANET failed. I tried using ProComm to transfer the ASCII file via Telenet. The system would locate the file on my word processor, but it would not transfer it. Eventually, I made an arrangement with a former UNC-CH Library staff member who was working for EBSCO. When I sent him a message by ALANET that an issue was ready, he came by my office, picked it up on a floppy disk, took it to his home, and uploaded it to ALANET using another communications program. Very quickly, this procedure became tiresome. Finally, ALANET's Rob Carlson and I got together by telephone and figured out what was wrong; it was nothing more than changing a single setting on my copy of ProComm. + Page 118 + Because I had not gotten any responses from ALANET readers of the Newsletter, I had no idea how many people this edition reached and whether it was worth the money it cost ALCTS. At the end of a recent ALANET edition, I added a message asking readers to let me know if they used ALANET to access the Newsletter. Two weeks after the issue appeared, I had six responses, three of which informed me that they were planning to switch soon to BITNET. This level of readership may not justify the cost of the ALANET edition. However, I am concerned about readers in Australia who receive the Newsletter on ILANET; the ALANET edition is transferred to ILANET by Alan Ventress at the State Library of New South Wales. So far, we have found no way to establish communication between ILANET and BITNET. 4.4 EBSCONET Distribution >From the beginning, the subcommittee members wanted to have the Newsletter available to EBSCO customers. Had I been an EBSCONET subscriber, it might have been simpler to get each issue to the proper staff member at EBSCO. Instead, we agreed that I would send a paper copy of each issue to EBSCO, and personnel in Birmingham would summarize the contents on an EBSCONET message screen, then mail or fax complete issues to any EBSCONET customers who wanted them. Later, it proved far easier to upload each issue as an ASCII file to EBSCO's mainframe computer in the home office. EBSCO staff took over distribution from there. This procedural change saved me from having to make any paper copies of the Newsletter. Currently, EBSCONET distribution accounts for approximately 150 copies of the Newsletter. 4.5 Readmore Distribution The third distribution arrangement with a subscription agent was with Readmore Academic Subscription Services. After several abortive attempts to upload a copy of the Newsletter to Readmore's mainframe computer, I agreed to mail each issue as an ASCII file on a floppy disk to the agent's New York office. Starting with issue 30, Readmore personnel printed and distributed copies of the Newsletter to customers who requested this service. + Page 119 + 5.0 Copyright Questions The Newsletter has avoided the twin problems of intellectual property rights and subscription fees. The publisher does not charge for subscriptions. The only expense to subscribers is their cost for network access. In support of our mission, we have not copyrighted the contents of the Newsletter. Each issue carries this message: Readers of the Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues are encouraged to share the information in the Newsletter by electronic or paper methods. We would appreciate credit if you quote from the Newsletter. >From an early survey and from subscribers' messages and remarks, I know that many more people receive the Newsletter than are on the mailing list. It is also excerpted in local library newsletters and professional association publications. 6.0 Electronic Publishing Issues Both the producers and consumers of electronic publications would benefit from the establishment of more standards in this area. Some standards are already in place (e.g., ISSN), and they are just as appropriate for electronic serials as for paper serials. Other print-oriented standards are not appropriate for electronic publishing, and new standards need to be developed. For example, we were not surprised that readers wanted to cite the Newsletter. However, we were not prepared for their questions about a standard citation format. Users wanted to cite the Newsletter in general as well as specific articles and news notices. The subcommittee members were forced to face standards issues as they arose and to recognize that there were often no existing solutions. We responded as we thought appropriate. Standards will emerge as electronic publications mature, but a period of experimentation is, I believe, a necessary prerequisite to formal standards. + Page 120 + 6.1 ISSN At the start, the subcommittee members decided that they did not want an ISSN for the Newsletter because we saw it as a response to a current and probably temporary problem. Unfortunately, the rest of the library world did not view the situation that way. We eventually did have to get an ISSN. About six months after the first issue, Julia Blixrud, head of the National Serials Data Project at the Library of Congress, "invited" the Newsletter's editor to apply for an ISSN. Now, each issue displays the ISSN correctly--and proudly--in the upper-right-hand corner. 6.2 Format and Arrangement of Electronic Documents At the present time, no standard exists for the format and arrangement of electronic publications. We need a standard similar to the National Information and Standards Organization (NISO) standard on Periodicals: Format and Arrangement to regulate the presentation and appearance of electronic documents. We need to determine what elements are essential and where they should be placed for easiest access. As electronic journals and newsletters proliferate and their editors experiment with format and arrangement, a de facto standard may evolve, which could be later formalized by NISO. 6.3 Citation Format Librarians and other researchers are sticklers for the correct form of citation, and a large number of messages to the Newsletter concern the proper means of citing electronic publications. Sue Dodd, of UNC-CH's Institute for Research in the Social Sciences, may be the leading expert on bibliographic control of electronic publications. She electronically transmitted to me a copy of a talk she had given on this topic. This talk, which had examples of citations to electronic documents, made the point that electronic publications are, in this respect, just like any other publications. For example, the only unique requirement in citing the Newsletter is to note that it is electronic. Subscribers often ask how to cite specific items in the Newsletter. This appears to be a difficult decision to make. + Page 121 + The different electronic editions of the Newsletter do not have standard page numbers. Since users print out the Newsletter from different editions and use different methods to print it, page numbers on printed copies do not always match, and consequently they are meaningless. Moreover, a subscriber can very easily edit or reformat the electronic document before printing it. Citing line numbers in the electronic document is no more satisfactory. Besides being awkward to calculate, the length of the header in a BITNET message varies, and the header is counted in the total number of lines. If the issue is forwarded by the recipient to a colleague, the message header gets longer. Thus, just as with paper serials, we need a standard article identifier for electronic publications. There are other uses for such a standard identifier. I believe that much of the serials acquisitions of the future will be at the article level, not at the journal level, and it will not be limited to acquisitions and reference librarians. Library patrons will be acquiring their own materials electronically. Several groups are working on article identifiers for serials, including NISO and ADONIS. Either they will work together, or one group's recommendation will win out over the others and evolve into a standard. This identifier will be as important in electronic journal publishing as the ISSN is for all types of serials. 6.4 Downloading Different levels of user expertise in downloading, complicated by many different institutional mail systems, have led to frequent questions about downloading the Newsletter for redistribution and retention. We have carried a few instructional items, but too often what works at one institution and with one type of communications software is not generally applicable. Users get the best results when they seek assistance from their local computer center. + Page 122 + I have received inquiries about downloading the Newsletter to an institution's local network for internal distribution. The University of Michigan has done this, and I have discussed procedures with several other universities. John James at Dartmouth College sent this message: Not everyone at Dartmouth uses BITNET. This is our paperless method for handling the Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues. The BITNET copy is saved on the Library's file server. Staff can access the file server and read the newsletter online and, if desired, print portions of the text. The complete backfile resides on the file server [6]. 6.5 Security and Archiving Security and archiving are two issues that are not easily resolved. I have little idea of what people may do to the text of the Newsletter after I send it to them. It would be easy to change a few words and alter the sense of an item. As editor, I retain online and disk copies of each issue, and I understand that ALCTS downloads and prints an "archival" copy. I have no answers to these two questions, but they must and will be resolved. Perhaps a national archival database is the solution, possibly associated with the Copyright Office of the Library of Congress. 7.0 Reader Response Response from The Newsletter readers, nearly all of which has been positive and constructive, has been an unexpected and much appreciated aid to the subcommittee's publishing effort. I value this thoughtful comment from Chuck Hamaker: I really enjoyed the last Newsletter, particularly the "spot" announcements of how different libraries and librarians were reacting to serials price increases. It sounded active--for once--rather than just "Oh, my, how bad it is." Also, several people had clearly done some of their basic homework. It was good to see other libraries had tracked specific increases for their collections (although no one hazarded an overall estimate except UNC, if I remember correctly). The Newsletter gave a real sense of urgency and action, with a fair amount of competence in terms of reactions. I was quite frankly surprised. I think we've helped people focus some of their thinking over the last year [7]. + Page 123 + While it is exciting for me to assist new users (so soon after I was a new user myself!) and to make new e-mail friends, strange things have happened. For example, users' attempts to subscribe have gone out to the entire mailing list, leading to wonderfully exotic messages back--some of which have, in turn, gone to everybody, leading to more messages. In the early days of the Newsletter, a number of subscribers urged me to change the format to a bulletin board or a discussion group. Because I felt strongly that submissions should be edited, I refused to do this. After subscribing to two BITNET discussion groups, I am even more determined to retain the edited newsletter format. Without the intervention of an editor, a large number of messages are disseminated, many of which are careless and repetitive, leading to wasted time and frustration on the part of the reader. Several subscribers have encouraged me to continue the newsletter format for just this reason. For example, one subscriber writes: I subscribe to several listserv bulletin boards, which inundate me with information on lots of library issues and problems. They are a chore to keep up with, and I wonder why I make the effort. Your newsletter, on the other hand, is equally timely but much more succinct and to the point. You do a great job [8]. One electronic publication that combines the best in discussion groups and newsletters is the relatively new ACQNET, which is edited by Christian Boissonnas at Cornell University Library [9]. Boissonnas receives submissions at his e-mail address, edits them slightly (if at all), and batches them every few days into a sequentially-numbered issue of 150 to 200 lines. 8.0 The Future of the Newsletter The immediate success of the Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues is assured. + Page 124 + As stated earlier, the Newsletter has had very few commercial publishers as subscribers. In order for the Newsletter to accomplish its mission, publishers must be able to receive our "news" and to respond to it. In recent months, more and more publishers have made electronic contact asking to subscribe to the Newsletter. They often use CompuServe; however, increasingly, they have BITNET addresses through a nearby academic institution or through their own node. European publishers are beginning to subscribe either by using their own BITNET or JANET addresses or through other networks that I have not yet identified. In the United Kingdom, JANET now accepts commercial accounts. I hope this is a trend that will spread to the United States. This growing ability for publishers and librarians to communicate electronically is most welcome. Communication is essential if we are to resolve the controversy over journal prices. Many of the items in the Newsletter relate publishers' practices that seem unfair to librarians. It is only right that the publishers should be able to respond and fully explain their reasons for such practices. One editorial board member is able to print a limited number of paper copies that are sent to certain involved publishers, vendors, and librarians who have no access to electronic mail. I feel certain that others do the same. We are fortunate to be able to distribute the Newsletter through three subscription agents. Not only do we have the vendors' cooperation, but we know they read the Newsletter. We have had a number of valuable contributions from subscription agents. Several things will make the Newsletter better. More commercial publishers need to subscribe to the Newsletter and contribute responses to issues raised by librarians. We need to keep up with developments in electronic technology--especially standards. We need to seek additional means of distribution. We also need to participate in resolving issues common to all types of electronic publishing. + Page 125 + 9.0 Conclusion New electronic newsletters, bulletin boards, and journals are rapidly appearing on BITNET and other networks that will be part of the proposed National Research and Education Network (NREN). These electronic services differ in their purpose, editorial control, and sophistication. An OCLC/American Association for the Advancement of Science electronic publishing venture, which will launch a science journal on OCLC's EPIC System, is breaking new ground, with librarians and scientists cooperating in producing the new journal. Commercial publishers remain reserved about the short-range feasibility of electronic distribution of scientific research results; however, the ADONIS Project is a good example of the type of electronic publication service that may be highly appropriate for the coming national network. The project has expanded its coverage from 219 biomedical journals from a few publishers to more than 400 scientific journals from several publishers. Owners have listened to ADONIS users and responded to their requests for wider availability and personal computer access. The articles, in CD-ROM format, may soon be available to any purchaser, such as a library system or consortium, for use with a CD-ROM juke box. Libraries could subsidize access or charge for it, as they do for interlibrary loan, and scholars would be able to identify and download articles on their own workstations, paying a fee for retrieval, copying, and royalties. The system is not ready today, but something like this seems well suited for Internet and, in the future, NREN. Electronic publishing will not happen on a large scale until the value of a library is measured in terms of access as well as ownership. The academic reward system is beginning to regard quality over quantity, as is demonstrated by the increasing number of institutions limiting the number of publications considered in tenure and grant decisions. Compilers of library statistics must change their standard to adapt to current realities and possibilities. It will be a slow evolution, and its lack of speed will deter the migration to electronic access to information. + Page 126 + It is clear that electronic publishing has a crucial role to play in the national network, both as a way of refining scholarly research and in distributing its finished products. Electronic publishing efforts on networks are maturing, and they will provide a valuable base of experience that will ease the transition to retrieving journal article information through the NREN. Electronic publishers recognize the problems of access, control, security, and preservation, and we are working toward resolving them. As user demand and confidence increase, electronic publishing will continue to evolve as an alternative to paper publishing. Someone suggested that I include in my resume the fact that, as editor of the Newsletter, I am on the cutting edge of electronic publication. I am not sure I am ready to go quite that far, but the Newsletter is definitely a part of the developing electronic network, and those of us involved in its content and production are helping to ease the way for those coming after. And we're having a lot of fun doing it! Notes 1. Subcommittee on Serials Pricing Issues, meeting minutes, 10 July 1988. 2. DataLinx is a system providing access to the Faxon Company's publisher and title information files as well as to MARC serial records and other files. Part of DataLinx is Courier, an electronic mail service. 3. EBSCONET is EBSCO Subscription Services' online title and publisher information file. 4. ALANET is the online network of the American Library Association. 5. William A. Britten, "BITNET and the Internet: Scholarly Networks for Librarians," College & Research Libraries News 51 (February 1990): 103-07. 6. "From the Editor," Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues, no. 10 (30 September 1989). (Request from editor: TUTTLE@UNC.BITNET.) + Page 127 + 7. Charles Hamaker, BITNET e-mail message, 3 October 1990. 8. Margie Axtmann, BITNET e-mail message, 1 June 1990. 9. To subscribe to ACQNET, send a message to Christian Boissonnas at CPC@CORNELLC.BITNET. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Editor's Note: In May 1991, The Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues ceased to be an ALA publication. Marcia Tuttle is now the publisher of this electronic serial. ALA's ALCTS Division now publishes ALCTS Network News as its electronic newsletter. ----------------------------------------------------------------- About the Author Marcia Tuttle Serials Department C.B. #3938 Davis Library University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill,NC 27599-3938 Telephone: (919) 962-1067 FAX: (919) 962-0484 BITNET: TUTTLE@UNC.BITNET Faxon's DataLinx: TUTTLE ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Public-Access Computer Systems Review is an electronic journal. It is sent free of charge to participants of the Public-Access Computer Systems Forum (PACS-L), a computer conference on BITNET. To join PACS-L, send an electronic mail message to LISTSERV@UHUPVM1 that says: SUBSCRIBE PACS-L First Name Last Name. This article is Copyright (C) 1991 by Marcia Tuttle. All Rights Reserved. The Public-Access Computer Systems Review is Copyright (C) 1991 by the University Libraries, University of Houston, University Park. All Rights Reserved. Copying is permitted for noncommercial use by computer conferences, individual scholars, and libraries. Libraries are authorized to add the journal to their collection, in electronic or printed form, at no charge. This message must appear on all copied material. All commercial use requires permission. ----------------------------------------------------------------