A
Academic Search Premier,
118
archives and special collections,
21
cross-unit collaboration,
30,
34,
46,
49
improvement through data analysis,
83
troubleshooting,
18–19,
22–3,
27,
30,
34,
44,
48–50,
52,
60–1,
187
and cooperative collection development,
21
and resource management systems,
87,
103
new models for electronic resources,
21,
94
shift from ownership to access,
responsibilities related to electronic resources, ,
15,
33,
40,
129,
136
workflow and systems comparison to electronic resources,
58–9,
177,
185,
188
American Chemical Society,
154
American Libraries,
42,
47
American Library Association,
72
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation,
144
Association of Research Libraries (ARL),
25,
42,
47,
50,
147
B
bibliographic records
See MARC
Blackboard Collaborate,
162
Boston Library Consortium,
102
Bowling Green State University,
15–16
Brigham Young University,
78
portion dedicated to electronic resources,
11,
19,
47,
49,
54–5
relationship to systems, ,
bX Recommender Service,
103
C
Cambridge Scientific Abstracts,
101
and resource management systems,
87,
94–5
workflow/systems comparison to electronic resources,
51,
58–9,
185
Chronicle of Higher Education,
42
Claremont Colleges Library,
122
blurring with technical services,
24–5,
41
shift from ownership to access,
College & Research Libraries News,
42,
45–6
College Center for Library Automation,
162
collaborative technical services,
20–1
electronic resource management workflow,
49
consortia, university,
141–2
Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois,
150,
152
Consortium of Academic Libraries of Catalonia,
147
Consortium of Core Electronic Resources, Taiwan,
148
Copyright Clearance Center,
CORE (Cost of Resource Exchange),
82,
92
Cornell University,
12,
20,
72
Council of Atlantic University Libraries/Le Conseil des bibliothèques universitaires de l'Atlantique,
134–6
D
Danish National Library Consortium,
99
responsibilities,
18,
20,
24–5,
27,
59,
93,
110,
131,
153,
155
access and management,
16,
49,
64,
70–1,
74,
97,
101,
110,
148,
158
datasets (electronic resources),
24,
60,
90,
127
digital collections of primary materials, ,
34–5,
86,
90,
120
digital rights management (DRM), ,
21,
27,
90,
93,
153–4,
170,
177,
182–3,
185,
189
in resource management environment,
85,
87–8,
91,
94
DLF ERMI (Digital Library Federation Electronic Resource Management Initiative),
72–3,
75–6,
102
E
acquisition models and issues, ,
35,
60,
63,
102,
143,
155,
163–4,
175–8,
186–7
role of cataloging and metadata,
90,
152
acquisition models and issues, , ,
40,
43,
94
impact on existing workflow/staffing, ,
39–40,
42–4,
51–2,
60,
64,
80,
177,
184,
187
Electronic Book Center, OhioLINK,
150
Electronic Information for Libraries (eIFL.net),
149
with electronic resources
coverage,
43,
51,
53,
62,
70,
75–6,
80,
91,
128,
133,
151,
161
introduction to libraries,
1–2
Electronic Resources in Libraries listserv,
55
electronic resources librarian,
13–16,
29–30,
42–53,
55,
58,
69–74,
77,
93,
109–11,
128–9
Electronic Resource Management Initiative
See DLF ERMI
electronic resource management system (ERMS)
components shared with resource management systems,
87–8,
90,
92,
95,
103
extension across library,
27,
59
I
Independent Colleges and Universities of Florida,
163
Indiana State University,
29–32
Indiana University,
52,
89
Infor Library and Information Solutions,
99
INNOPAC library system,
144
effect on/role of technical services,
1–4,
95,
127,
136
integration with discovery services,
121,
128–9
interlibrary loan, ,
27,
33,
62,
76, ,
146,
154,
156,
188
International Coalition of Library Consortia (ICOLC),
153
IOTA (Improving Open URLs Through Analytics),
83
Iowa State University,
52
M
records, ,
8–9,
40,
44,
75,
103–4,
116–17,
124,
133–6,
177
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT),
41,
72
Memorial University Libraries,
134–6
effect of electronic resources,
2–3,
90–1
Microsoft Live Search Academic,
117
Modern Language Association,
119
N
National Information Standards Organization (NISO),
72
National Library of Australia,
116
National Library of Medicine,
119
NERL (Northeast Region Library) consortium,
61,
102,
157
opinions of (case studies),
62,
65,
98–9
North Carolina State University,
76,
115
Northwestern University,
16,
80
O
Ohio State University,
75
Old Dominion University,
51
OLE (Open Library Environment),
65,
88–9,
91
ONIX-PL (ONIX for Publications Licenses),
82,
92
relationship between technical and library systems,
129
relationship between technical and public services, ,
44,
46,
127
Ontario Council of University Libraries,
150–1,
157
next-generation library systems,
62,
87
role in patron-driven acquisitions,
Orange County Library System,
124
Orbis Cascade Alliance,
155
Oregon Health & Science University,
75
Oregon State University,
122
Oxford Reference Online,
179
Oxford University Press,
177
S
SaaS (software as a service),
25,
87,
91
Scholars Portal, OCUL,
150
print,
16,
29,
33–4,
43,
51–2,
55–6,
76,
100,
103,
161
units/departments, , ,
15–16,
26,
29–30,
33,
40–4,
50–2,
171,
184
SERU (Shared Electronic Resources Understanding),
82–3
Simon Fraser University,
76,
99
SirsiDynix SingleSearch,
135
Sony Reader PRS-505/Touch Edition PRE-600,
174
Stachowicz, Christine,
59–63
electronic resource workflow,
59
Statewide California Electronic Library Consortium,
151
SUSHI (Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative),
83
T
Taylor & Francis,
33,
177
blurring with access services, ,
15,
94,
187
blurring with public services,
6–8,
14–15,
19,
24,
41,
43–50,
54,
127–9,
131,
185–7
consortial consolidation of,
146
electronic resource management,
55,
73,
77
Texas A&M University,
15,
174
Tri-College Library Consortium,
150
Triangle Research Libraries Network,
60,
155
U
University of California Libraries system,
20
University of California, San Diego,
79
University of Colorado,
79
University of Denver,
178
University of Florida,
162
University of Hong Kong,
13
University of Indianapolis,
158–61
University of Michigan,
124
University of Nevada, Las Vegas,
12
University of Nevada, Reno,
50,
118
University of New South Wales,
15
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
59–63
University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
32–5
University of Northern Colorado,
26
University of Notre Dame,
80,
96–9
University of Otago,
131–4
University of Rochester,
116
University of Texas at Dallas,
179
University of Virginia,
116
University of Waikato,
131
University of Washington,
75
University of Western Australia,
75
University of Windsor,
79
usage statistics and analysis for collection development,
17–18,
24,
94,
179
for discovery layer selection,
133
V
data about vendors in systems,
70,
74,
77,
102
resource activation, ,
13
Villanova University,
116,
125
Virginia Tech University,
125
Virtual Library of Virginia (VIVA),
147–8