[bksvol-discuss] Re: Very Outdated Bookshare Listings on NLS
- From: "Gerald Hovas" <GeraldHovas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:51:13 -0500
Evan,
I still think this is something which should be addressed, but I wouldn't
expect to see it looked into very soon even though I too believe it has the
potential to attract new members. BTW, it wasn't the NLS catalog which
made me aware of Bookshare, but one of my library's Reader Consultants.
You have a good point about RFB&D. Let me know if you notice that their
data is being kept up to date.
Gerald
_____
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Evan Reese
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 10:30 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Very Outdated Bookshare Listings on NLS
Thanks, Gerald. I didn't mean to imply that Bookshare wasn't making the
information available, but something more along the lines that someone at
Bookshare might want to talk to whomever at NLS to find out what the problem
is.
Also, I hadn't thought about the circulation issue. It certainly may be
true in my case, though. Since I am now getting books from Bookshare that
will be out eventually from NLS, I won't be borrowing them from my regional
library. Considering how often I have to go on a waiting list for books
from there, however, I don't have much sympathy for them if they lose
circulation in this neighborhood at least, since they apparently can't keep
up with the demand as it is. I do see though that this might be a possible
problem in other parts of the country.
Still, I would wonder what the point is of having the listings at all then.
I suppose it is better to have some rather than none, but personally, I
would rather have none than this half-baked version.
I will attempt to check on some listings from RFB&D to see how current they
are on the NLS database. If what you say about possible efforts to protect
their circulation is true, then either their listings should be behind as
well, or if they are more current than Bookshare's, their efforts at
protecting their circulation are slipshod. However, it may also be true
that they don't see their patrons borrowing from RFB&D as cutting into their
circulation as much as patrons downloading books from Bookshare, since
RFB&D's target audience is somewhat different. Either way, Bookshare
suffers, and the question arises as to why the database was set up in the
first place if Bookshare is seen as a possible problem for them. Perhaps it
didn't occur to them at the time, but did later.
Thanks.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gerald <mailto:GeraldHovas@xxxxxxxxxxx> Hovas
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: john.g@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 7:06 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Very Outdated Bookshare Listings on NLS
Evan,
I'm not sure, but I believe it may be more of an NLS issue of not updating
their database than Bookshare not making the information available to NLS.
I would expect NLS to have already automated the process, but perhaps that
is the reason why the info is not being updated. Keep in mind too that It's
also possible that NLS decided that updating the data is not in its best
interest if it's losing patrons to Bookshare. While patrons wouldn't truely
be lost, having their patrons subscribing to Bookshare could affect the
number of books being borrowed which could in turn affect their budget.
I have it on my list of fixes/upgrades/issues and will bring it up sometime
when I talk to the staff. I'm also copying John on this response to make
sure the staff doesn't overlook your post so they'll know that it makes a
difference in regards to attracting new members.
HTH
Gerald
_____
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Evan Reese
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 8:09 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Very Outdated Bookshare Listings on NLS
I noticed some months ago that the listings that come up doing searches on
the NLS site with "all" in the Locations field contained Bookshare listings
that were outdated, meaning that books that I knew were in Bookshare's
collection were not listed there. I just checked it again this afternoon,
and those listings don't seem to have changed at all! I joined Bookshare in
mid-January, and my first submission was added to the collection on January
20, but that book does not come up on the NLS site. In fact, none of the
books I have submitted or validated since then appear there. I know of one
book - "Redemption Ark" by Alastair Reynolds which was published here before
I joined that does not appear there. So unless the books I have submitted
or validated are being specifically excluded somehow, the listings that come
up on NLS site with respect to Bookshare books are at least six months out
of date.
This is not an idle complaint. I was attracted to Bookshare because I found
books listed in my NLS searches as being from Bookshare that I was very
interested in reading. The original reason I had set Location to "all" in
the search was mainly to net books from RFB&D without having to go and do
the same search up there. I had heard of Bookshare from another source, but
did not pay much attention until I began finding interesting listings in the
NLS search results. I would be very surprised if other people did not have
a similar story.
I want Bookshare to grow, and I assume that the people who work for
Bookshare would also like it to grow. The more members it has, the more
submissions from more people with diverse interests. Also, many of these
people may become volunteers and can help get more books of high quality
into the collection. Bookshare has added about 2000 books in the time I
have joined, which are probably not coming up in any search results of
potential new members. As I say, I don't know how many potential members
that would be, but it seems to me that it is unlikely that I would be the
only person that came to Bookshare as a result of seeing books of interest
in NLS search results.
I also don't know who on the staff would be responsible for looking into
this, but I would expect that someone up there would be interested in seeing
why they are so far out of date. This would seem to be one of those
processes that could be automated. It doesn't sound unreasonable to expect
to have monthly or even weekly updates, at night when Net traffic is low.
Especially now that we have the NY Times bestsellers in the collection, I
would bet that that would attract some people who don't want to wait for NLS
to get them out. Also, I know how impatient I can be when a new book in a
series is out and I don't want to wait the interminable-seeming time for it
to finally come out on tape. I am sure that there others who feel the same.
If people who are not members of Bookshare see that these kinds of books are
available here, they may be motivated to join up.
Of course, this all assumes that at least some people will change the
default setting in NLS searches from "NLS Only" to "all", and I don't know
how many people that would be. But nevertheless, I would think that
Bookshare would want to have more current listings than six months old. Why
bother to have this relationship with NLS if the listings are going to be
that far behind?
Other related posts:
