I think we're leaning a little heavy on T & F here. They did announce these changes here on Serialst by means of a message from Ashleigh Bell with Subject: Change in print frequency for selected T&F journals, posted to this discussion list on 1/17/06. That announcement was followed by some back and forth that included links to http://www.tandf.co.uk/libsite/print_less.pdf The pdf lists the titles and provided information ahead of time on which online issues were going to be combined into which print issues. As far as I'm concerned, T & F did everything they could to tell us what to expect (as Jeanette asked for). The only thing I don't like was the combination pattern for Inhalation Toxicology. All other titles have an equal number of online issues being combined in each print issue (i.e. 9 online become 3 print, 12 online become 4 print, etc). For Inhalation Toxicology, they combine 14 online issues into 4 print issues so we can't predict a print issue for every 3 online issues. That said, the rest were very straight forward. While my ideas are my own and only my own, I will list my affiliation as usual. J. J. Shore Systems Librarian - MEDLINE Quality Assurance National Library of Medicine Bethesda, MD, USA shorej@cablespeed.com On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 15:01:41 -0500 "Skwor, Jeanette" <skworj@UWGB.EDU> wrote: > Mr. Lucas states: > ------------------------------------- > Yes, if T & F has > changed the groupings of the print issues then this can >create a > check-in problem, however this can be overcome by using >our expertise > and knowledge of the situation. We can correct the >prediction in our > systems, alert our staff, and watch the site for 2007. >That is one of > our jobs. > ------------------------------------- > > Am I in the minority who does not consider it part of >her job to search > publishers websites to see if they are changing the >frequency from that > which is printed in the issue I have in hand? > And if I am, where are the rest of you finding the time? > > Or am I totally not understanding something? > > > Thanks, > > Jeanette Skwor > > -----Original Message----- >From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum > [mailto:SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of John Lucas > Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 2:01 PM > To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU > Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Taylor & Francis, Haworth, and >pages per volume > > Here is just my $ .02 worth. Actually more than that. > > When I first found out about these titles, as I recall >there was an > announcement on the T & F site, and I thought some >mention of it on > SERIALIST. I checked and found 2 or 3 titles >affecting us, I do not > recall the titles now, however the 'proposed' print >schedules for those > titles seemed uniform (nos. 1-4, nos. 5-8) but may have >changed. > > I believe T & F indicated that the electronic issues >would come out as > they had previously no. 1, no. 2, no. 3 etc. (possibly >on the same time > frame). > > If that is the case, then citations sent to the indexes >and abstracts > (Medline, et al.) would reflect that electronic issue >and not the print > which comes out later. > > This would be similiar to e-only journals such as the >BioMed Central > titles where issues are closed off and the next issue >opened. > > The printed 'archive' issues would be combined. Yes, >if T & F has > changed the groupings of the print issues then this can >create a > check-in problem, however this can be overcome by using >our expertise > and knowledge of the situation. We can correct the >prediction in our > systems, alert our staff, and watch the site for 2007. >That is one of > our jobs. > > The number of titles doing this was small, and I assume, >a test to see > if this model had possibilities. Obviously there would >have to be some > tweaking and if T & F feels this can be debugged to save >them some costs > as Barbara believes (I also) then this would be expanded >to include more > of their journals. > > Please forgive 'fuzziness' in my thoughts, as I am >engrossed with Annual > report. > > > > > John Lucas > > Serials Librarian > University of Mississippi Medical Center 2500 North >State St Jackson, MS > 39216-4505 > > (PH) (601) 984-1277 > (FAX) ( 601) 984-1262 > JLUCAS@ROWLAND.UMSMED.EDU > >>>> Dietsch.Barbara@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV 7/13/2006 12:56 PM >>> > Actually Bill, I don't think it is the end of the >matter. You've been > discussing philosophies and opinions from a publisher's >point of view. > > I requested practical comments on how library workers >were handling the > print/online enumeration discrepancies in their >day-to-day work. We > have to come up with a solution on how to deal with this >problem, and it > is a problem for serials technical staff. > > I don't think this situation is about "policy" per say, >but how do > librarians and library patrons deal with decisions made >by publishers > which often are not logical or straightforward for the >user. > > But..........another spin on >philosophies..........basically, you are > selling a product, and if the customer is unhappy with >changes or > inconsistencies with the product, it is of benefit to >both the producer > and consumer to give feedback on how it affects them and >why. Both > Haworth and Taylor & Francis are for-profit publishers. > You are selling > a product to make money. Librarians and library users >are one segment > of your customer base. > > Serialists send your suggestions and comments on >practical solutions to > this unavoidable and irritating irregularity. > > Thanks! > > barb > > barb dietsch | serials coordinator > epa library | unc contract staff > 109 tw alexander drive | mail code c267-01 research >triangle park, nc > 27711 > phone: 919.541.0726 > fax: 919.541.1405 > dietsch.barbara@epa.gov > > > > > > > William Cohen > > > <bcohen7719@AOL. > > > COM> > To > > Sent by: > SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU > > "SERIALST: > cc > > Serials in > > > Libraries > Subject > > Discussion Re: [SERIALST] >Taylor & Francis, > > Forum" Haworth, and pages >per volume > > <SERIALST@LIST.U > > > VM.EDU> > > > > > > > > > 07/13/2006 11:44 > > > AM > > > > > > > > > Please respond > > > to > > > "SERIALST: > > > Serials in > > > Libraries > > > Discussion > > > Forum" > > > <SERIALST@LIST.U > > > VM.EDU> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve: > > I respectfully disagree, and totally. Your own history >in this > area is completely documented, and I think librarians >can decide on > their own what policy they choose. > > Let us consider this an end to the matter. > > Thank you for your constructive help. > > Bill Cohen, Publisher > The Haworth Press, Inc. > www.HaworthPress.com
