April 2006 - LIS-Forum - ncsi.iisc.ernet.in

Electronic Check Point System ( Installation)
by Krishnamurthy M 05 Apr '06

05 Apr '06

Dear Colleagues, Indian Statistical Institue,Bangalore Center Library has introduced the Electronic Check Point System. This allows inventory is protected by the most advanced electronic Article Surveillance (EAS) technology, designed with the realities of day- to-day business. When a " live" checkpoint target enters the sensors radio frequency detection field, a signal is interrupted, triggering an alaram that alerts to a possible lifting attempt. M.Krishnamurthy -- Dr.M.Krishnamurthy Librarian Indian Statistical Institute 8th Mile Mysore Road R.V.C.E. Post Bangalore 560059 Ph:91-80-28483002/3/4/4 Fax: 91-80-28484265

1 0

Fw: [BOAI] decision on open access at the 8th COP of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Curitiba, March 31
by Subbiah Arunachalam 05 Apr '06

05 Apr '06

----- Original Message ----- From: Donat Agosti To: 'BOAI Forum' Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 5:27 PM Subject: [BOAI] decision on open access at the 8th COP of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Curitiba, March 31 [sorry for cross-posting with American Scientist open Access Forum] Dear colleagues COP-8, the follow-up conference of the parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity, ended on March 31 with a decision of importance for our work. Here the excerpt: SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND THE CHM: Discussions on scientific and technical cooperation and the CHM (UNEP/CBD/COP/8/4/Rev.1, 17, 17/Add.1, and 18) took place in WG-II on Thursday, 23 March, and Tuesday, 28 March. A decision was approved by WG-II on 28 March. On scientific and technical cooperation, delegates highlighted collaboration with other initiatives, with Colombia stressing repatriation of information. Canada urged parties to provide free and open access to information and, supported by the EU, suggested reference to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. Brazil expressed concern about the cost implications of CHM activities, and delegates agreed to take notes of Brazil's reservation in the decision. Final Decision: In the decision (UNEP/CBD/COP/8/L.5), the COP adopts the annexed CHM updated strategic plan for the period 2005-2010 and the CHM work programme up to 2010. THE COP INVITES PARTIES AND OTHER GOVERNMENTS, AS APPROPRIATE, TO PROVIDE FREE AND OPEN ACCESS TO ALL PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE PUBLIC-GOOD RESEARCH RESULTS, ASSESSMENTS, MAPS AND DATABASES ON BIODIVERSITY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION It also requests parties, and invites other governments and donors, to continue providing financial and technical support to develop national and regional CHMs. The COP requests the Executive Secretary to prepare a report on progress made in the implementation of the strategic plan of the CHM and its work programme for 2005-2010, for COP-10 consideration. Donat Dr. Donat Agosti Research Associate, American Museum of Natural History and Smithsonian Institution Email: agosti(a)amnh.org Web: http://antbase.org Skype: agostileu CV: http://antbase.org/agosticv_2003.html Dalmaziquai 45 3005 Bern Switzerland +41-31-351 7152  ----- Original Message ----- From: mailto:agosti@amnh.org Donat Agosti To: mailto:boai-forum@ecs.soton.ac.uk 'BOAI Forum' Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 5:27 PM Subject: [BOAI] decision on open access at the 8th COP of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Curitiba, March 31 [ sorry for cross-posting with American Scientist open Access Forum] Dear colleagues COP-8, the follow-up conference of the parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity, ended on March 31 with a decision of importance for our work. Here the excerpt: SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND THE CHM: Discussions on scientific and technical cooperation and the CHM (UNEP/CBD/COP/8/4/Rev.1, 17, 17/Add.1, and 18) took place in WG-II on Thursday, 23 March, and Tuesday, 28 March. A decision was approved by WG-II on 28 March. On scientific and technical cooperation, delegates highlighted collaboration with other initiatives, with Colombia stressing repatriation of information. Canada urged parties to provide free and open access to information and, support ed by the EU, suggested reference to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. Brazil expressed concern about the cost implications of CHM activities, and delegates agreed to take notes of Brazil s reservation in the decision. Final Decision: In the decision (UNEP/CBD/COP/8/L.5), the COP adopts the annexed CHM updated strategic plan for the period 2005-2010 and the CHM work programme up to 2010. THE COP INVITES PARTIES AND OTHER GOVERNMENTS, AS APPROPRIATE, TO PROVIDE FREE AND OPEN ACCESS TO ALL PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE PUBLIC-GOOD RESEARCH RESULTS, ASSESSMENTS, MAPS AND DATABASES ON BIODIVERSITY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION It also requests parties, and invites other governments and donors, to continue providing financial and technical support to develop national and regional CHMs . The COP requests the Executive Secretary to prepare a report on progress made in the implementation of the strategic plan of the CHM and its work programme for 2005-2010, for COP-10 consideration. Donat Dr. Donat Agosti Research Associate, American Museum of Natural History and Smithsonian Institution Email: agosti(a)amnh.org Web: http://antbase.org Skype : agostileu CV: http://antbase.org/agosticv_2003.html Dalmaziquai 45 3005 Bern Switzerland +41-31-351 7152

1 0

India should adopt "Open course ware"
by arun＠mssrf.res.in 05 Apr '06

05 Apr '06

Friends: Many universities around the world, following MIT's Open Course Ware project, are providing their course material free on the Internet. In China and Japan universities take the trouble to translate the material into Chinese and japanese. As far as I know, not a single university in India has taken to providing the course ware on the Net for people to use. Of course IGNOU broadcasts over radio and television a large number of programmes under its Gyan Vani programme. Leading universities and university teachers should come forward to make thie courses available to students (and others interested to learn) on the Net. That could be one small step in making India a knowledge society. Subbiah Arunachalam -------------------- >From MIT's Open Course Ware site 8. China Quality OCW (CNQOCW) ---------------------------------------------------------------- China Open Resources for Education (CORE), MIT OCW's Chinese language translation partner, now offers links to more than 450 China Quality OpenCourseWare (CNQOCW) courses for use and sharing in China and globally. In addition, CORE has translated 110 MIT OCW courses into Simplified Chinese, which are available at http://www.core.org.cn/OCW_CN/Global/all-courses.htm 9. Japan OCW Alliance ---------------------------------------------------------------- The leading nine universities in Japan -- Hokkaido University, Keio University, Kyoto University, Kyushu University, Nagoya University, Osaka University, Tokyo Institute of Technology, the University of Tokyo, and Waseda University -- have formed the Japan OCW Alliance. These six universities now offer open access to more than 100 courses, in both English and Japanese. 10. FETP OCW in Vietnam ---------------------------------------------------------------- Inspired by the MIT OCW initiative, the Fulbright School Economics Teaching Program (FETP) in Vietnam launched FETP OpenCourseWare in 2003, the first "opencourseware" project to launch after MIT OCW opened in September 2002. The Fulbright School participates with other academic institutions in Vietnam to promote the use of innovative long-distance learning activities.

1 0

Need for mandating OA - Evidence from Australia
by arun＠mssrf.res.in 05 Apr '06

05 Apr '06

Friends: Here is additional for the need for mandating from Australia. We in India (and other developing countries) should not delay any further. We should go ahead and mandate OA for all publicly funded research. Best wishes. Subbiah Arunachalam ------------------- >From Peter Suber's blog OA mandates work better than requests Arthur Sale, Comparison of content policies for institutional repositories in Australia, First Monday, April 2006. Abstract: Seven Australian universities have established institutional repositories (containing research articles, also known as eprints) that can be analyzed for content and which were in operation during 2004 and 2005. This short paper analyses their content and shows that a requirement to deposit research output into a repository coupled with effective author support policies works in Australia and delivers high levels of content. Voluntary deposit policies do not, regardless of any author support by the university. This is consistent with international data.

1 0

Copyright Law Amendment
by Padmanabha Vyasamoorthy 04 Apr '06

04 Apr '06

Dear Friends The Indian Copyright Act is being amended and the government is asking for views of the public. Please visit www.copyright.gov.in and follow the Link Amendment to Copyright Act to send your views. Librarians have a lot of concerns and they must be addressed now. The form needs some expertise in legal matters. I suggest that some 'active' associations like KALA, ALSD or ILA or IASLIC collect views quickly and send it to government. -- Dr P Vyasamoorthy, SENIORS (Society for Enriched Information of Relevance to Seniors), 30, Gruhalakshmi Colony, Secunderabad 500018 Phone 27846631

1 0

Mandating OA
by Subbiah Arunachalam 04 Apr '06

04 Apr '06

Friends: The European Commission has just released a report that talks about guaranteeing open access to all publicly-funded research. We in India should adopt a much more progressive step and mandate instant open access for all publicly funde research, meaning that papers should be made available via open access the same day as they are published. We have already lost much time. We cannot afford to lose any more time. Arun [Subbiah Arunachalam] EC recommmends OA archiving for publicly-funded research The European Commission has released its lengthy (108 pp.) and long-awaited report, Study on the Economic and Technical Evolution of the Scientific Publication Markets in Europe. (Thanks to INIST-CNRS.) The report is dated January 2006 but was not apparently released until today. The underlying inquiry was announced in June 2004. Excerpt: Aware of current public debates that reveal worries about the conditions of access and dissemination of scientific publications, the European Commission's Directorate- General for Research has commissioned a study that seeks: (i) to assess the evolution of the market for scientific publishing; and (ii) to discuss the potential desirability of Europeanlevel measures to help improve the conditions governing access to and the exchange, dissemination and archiving of scientific publications (taking into account all actors/ stakeholders of the sector)....The report considers the specificities of the market for current journal issues. In doing so, it discusses the broad facts about the market; it undertakes a quantitative analysis of journal prices; it discusses the implications of technological innovation on pricing strategies and the dynamics of entry; and it analyzes the implication of these developments in terms of competition policy. It also discusses the various alternatives for disseminating and accessing scientific publications. This includes the question of access to research results on individual web pages or in public repositories, the development of openaccess journals as well as other alternatives, such as pay-per-view, the question of the longterm preservation of electronic publications and the use of standards to ensure interoperability between systems....[M]uch of scientific activity is publicly funded: the output of research is typically not bought by journals but 'donated' by publicly-funded researchers; so are to a large extent refereeing services for the evaluation of research; and finally, journals are bought by publicly-funded researchers or, more often now, by publicly-funded libraries. It is therefore crucial for public authorities to form a view on the relative efficiency of the scientific publication process.... In view of the libraries' ongoing budgetary difficulties and of the opportunities provided by information technologies, and acknowledging the significant part of public funds involved in the scientific publishing process, a movement in favor of open access to scientific information has gained scale in the research community and research-related organizations. Declarations in favor of open access, such as Budapest Open Access Initiative and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, were signed by thousands of individuals and by major research institutions and research funding bodies around the world. These concerns about access to research results have been echoed by the civil society (e.g. at the World Summit on the Information Society) and by political bodies at national and international levels (e.g. the OECD Declaration on Access to Research Data from Public Funding). In the UK, the House of Commons (2004) recommended that public funding agencies require open access to publicly-funded research through deposit of the publications in the authors' institutional repositories. Following these declarations and recommendations, several important research funding bodies have established policies urging their funded researchers to publish in open access journals, offering to pay the publication fees if any, and/or to deposit their articles in an open access repository (e.g. the US National Institutes of Health, the UK Research Councils, the Wellcome Trust, CERN.). These policies have raised publishers and learned societies' concerns about the potential threat on their existence and activities: they fear that as articles become freely available in open archives and as search, access and retrieval facilities are enhanced by search engines and interoperability, journal subscriptions will be cancelled, thereby undermining the viability of their journals. Starting from this global economic and research-policy context, this report provides an independent analysis of the conditions regarding access and dissemination of research results, with a view to maximizing societal returns on R&D investments.... The evidence discussed in Sections 3 to 5 points however to a market where publishers do enjoy market power. This means that access can be improved significantly before one has to start worrying about threatening this reader/library-pay model. At present, immediate access can be achieved through individual web pages, through open access repositories or archives collecting e-prints deposited by their authors, and through open access journals which rely on various sources of income. In some countries, public authorities have funded large-scale projects to develop portals providing free online access to selected scholarly journals published in their countries (e.g. SciELO in Latin American countries, J-STAGE in Japan, various projects in India). As an increasing volume of research output from outside Europe becomes openly accessible, it raises the question of the visibility and accessibility, and of the subsequent potential impact, of European research as most articles by European researchers are published in subscription-based journals. In this respect, policies like those put in place by the U.S. NIH, the UK Research Councils or the Wellcome Trust - which promote open availability of research results no later than 12 months after publication - could be emulated across Europe, after discussions with the publishers. The aim could be to ensure that published European-funded research (at EU, national, or regional levels) be deposited in standardized open archives some time after publication. Recent surveys show that a majority of researchers seem willing to self-archive their articles if induced to do so by their employer or funding body....It is worth noting that, if the research funding authorities want to 'give a chance' to the author-pay model, they have to allow for a 'level-playing field' in comparison with the reader/library-pay model, that is, provide funding for publication costs and not only for library budgets....[T]here is a central role for funding bodies to define policies which will improve access and dissemination of publications, especially in terms of self-archiving requirement.... RECOMMENDATION A1. GUARANTEE PUBLIC ACCESS TO PUBLICLY-FUNDED RESEARCH RESULTS SHORTLY AFTER PUBLICATION. Research funding agencies have a central role in determining researchers' publishing practices. Following the lead of the NIH and other institutions, they should promote and support the archiving of publications in open repositories, after a (possibly domain-specific) time period to be discussed with publishers. This archiving could become a condition for funding. The following actions could be taken at the European level: (i) Establish a European policy mandating published articles arising from EC-funded research to be available after a given time period in open access archives, and (ii) Explore with Member States and with European research and academic associations whether and how such policies and open repositories could be implemented. Also see the HTML splash page for the report. The EC is soliciting comments on the report; please send them to rtd-scientific-publication(a)cec.eu.int by June 1, 2006. Peter Suber's Comment. This is big. Recommedation A1 doesn't directly call for an OA mandate to publicly-funded research, but it does call for a "guarantee" of OA, asserts that OA archiving "could become a condition of funding", and proposes that a mandate is one action that "could be taken at the European level". If the authors are distinguishing a guarantee from a mandate, then I'd like to hear more about it. But "even" a guarantee would be extremely welcome. Moreover, the recommendation calls for OA "shortly after publication". I hope this report strengthens the final draft of the RCUK policy, triggers the adoption of OA policies at the national level across Europe, and increases the odds that the nascent European Research Council will mandate OA to ERC-funded research. Friends: The European Commission has just released a report that talks about guaranteeing open access to all publicly-funded research. We in India should adopt a much more progressive step and mandate instant open access for all publicly funde research, meaning that papers should be made available via open access the same day as they are published. We have already lost much time. We cannot afford to lose any more time. Arun [Subbiah Arunachalam] EC recommmends OA archiving for publicly-funded research The http://europa.eu.int/comm/index_en.htm European Commission has released its lengthy (108 pp.) and long-awaited report, http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/science-society/pdf/scientific-publicati… Study on the Economic and Technical Evolution of the Scientific Publication Markets in Europe . (Thanks to http://www.inist.fr/openaccess/ INIST-CNRS .) The report is dated January 2006 but was not apparently released until today. The underlying inquiry was http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/research/press/2004/pr1506en.cfm announced in June 2004. Excerpt: Aware of current public debates that reveal worries about the conditions of access and dissemination of scientific publications, the European Commissions Directorate- General for Research has commissioned a study that seeks: (i) to assess the evolution of the market for scientific publishing; and (ii) to discuss the potential desirability of Europeanlevel measures to help improve the conditions governing access to and the exchange, dissemination and archiving of scientific publications (taking into account all actors/ stakeholders of the sector)....The report considers the specificities of the market for current journal issues. In doing so, it discusses the broad facts about the market; it undertakes a quantitative analysis of journal prices; it discusses the implications of technological innovation on pricing strategies and the dynamics of entry; and it analyzes the implication of these developments in terms of competition policy. It also discusses the various alternatives for disseminating and accessing scientific publications. This includes the question of access to research results on individual web pages or in public repositories, the development of openaccess journals as well as other alternatives, such as pay-per-view, the question of the longterm preservation of electronic publications and the use of standards to ensure interoperability between systems....[M]uch of scientific activity is publicly funded: the output of research is typically not bought by journals but donated by publicly-funded researchers; so are to a large extent refereeing services for the evaluation of research; and finally, journals are bought by publicly-funded researchers or, more often now, by publicly-funded libraries. It is therefore crucial for public authorities to form a view on the relative efficiency of the scientific publication process.... In view of the libraries ongoing budgetary difficulties and of the opportunities provided by information technologies, and acknowledging the significant part of public funds involved in the scientific publishing process, a movement in favor of open access to scientific information has gained scale in the research community and research-related organizations. Declarations in favor of open access, such as Budapest Open Access Initiative and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, were signed by thousands of individuals and by major research institutions and research funding bodies around the world. These concerns about access to research results have been echoed by the civil society (e.g. at the World Summit on the Information Society) and by political bodies at national and international levels (e.g. the OECD Declaration on Access to Research Data from Public Funding). In the UK, the House of Commons (2004) recommended that public funding agencies require open access to publicly-funded research through deposit of the publications in the authors institutional repositories. Following these declarations and recommendations, several important research funding bodies have established policies urging their funded researchers to publish in open access journals, offering to pay the publication fees if any, and/or to deposit their articles in an open access repository (e.g. the US National Institutes of Health, the UK Research Councils, the Wellcome Trust, CERN). These policies have raised publishers and learned societies concerns about the potential threat on their existence and activities: they fear that as articles become freely available in open archives and as search, access and retrieval facilities are enhanced by search engines and interoperability, journal subscriptions will be cancelled, thereby undermining the viability of their journals. Starting from this global economic and research-policy context, this report provides an independent analysis of the conditions regarding access and dissemination of research results, with a view to maximizing societal returns on R&D investments.... The evidence discussed in Sections 3 to 5 points however to a market where publishers do enjoy market power. This means that access can be improved significantly before one has to start worrying about threatening this reader/library-pay model. At present, immediate access can be achieved through individual web pages, through open access repositories or archives collecting e-prints deposited by their authors, and through open access journals which rely on various sources of income. In some countries, public authorities have funded large-scale projects to develop portals providing free online access to selected scholarly journals published in their countries (e.g. SciELO in Latin American countries, J-STAGE in Japan, various projects in India). As an increasing volume of research output from outside Europe becomes openly accessible, it raises the question of the visibility and accessibility, and of the subsequent potential impact, of European research as most articles by European researchers are published in subscription-based journals. In this respect, policies like those put in place by the U.S. NIH, the UK Research Councils or the Wellcome Trust which promote open availability of research results no later than 12 months after publication could be emulated across Europe, after discussions with the publishers. The aim could be to ensure that published European-funded research (at EU, national, or regional levels) be deposited in standardized open archives some time after publication. Recent surveys show that a majority of researchers seem willing to self-archive their articles if induced to do so by their employer or funding body....It is worth noting that, if the research funding authorities want to give a chance to the author-pay model, they have to allow for a level-playing field in comparison with the reader/library-pay model, that is, provide funding for publication costs and not only for library budgets....[T]here is a central role for funding bodies to define policies which will improve access and dissemination of publications, especially in terms of self-archiving requirement.... RECOMMENDATION A1. GUARANTEE PUBLIC ACCESS TO PUBLICLY-FUNDED RESEARCH RESULTS SHORTLY AFTER PUBLICATION. Research funding agencies have a central role in determining researchers publishing practices. Following the lead of the NIH and other institutions, they should promote and support the archiving of publications in open repositories, after a (possibly domain-specific) time period to be discussed with publishers. This archiving could become a condition for funding. The following actions could be taken at the European level: (i) Establish a European policy mandating published articles arising from EC-funded research to be available after a given time period in open access archives, and (ii) Explore with Member States and with European research and academic associations whether and how such policies and open repositories could be implemented. Also see the HTML http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/06/414&forma… splash page for the report. The EC is soliciting comments on the report; please send them to mailto:rtd-scientific-publication@cec.eu.int rtd-scientific-publication(a)cec.eu.int by June 1, 2006. Peter Suber's Comment . This is big. Recommedation A1 doesn't directly call for an OA mandate to publicly-funded research, but it does call for a "guarantee" of OA, asserts that OA archiving "could become a condition of funding", and proposes that a mandate is one action that "could be taken at the European level". If the authors are distinguishing a guarantee from a mandate, then I'd like to hear more about it. But "even" a guarantee would be extremely welcome. Moreover, the recommendation calls for OA "shortly after publication". I hope this report strengthens the final draft of the RCUK policy, triggers the adoption of OA policies at the national level across Europe, and increases the odds that the nascent European Research Council will mandate OA to ERC-funded research.

2 1

Re: [LIS-Forum] GOC Conversion Rates - April '2006
by ++ Mukesh Anand ++ 04 Apr '06

04 Apr '06

GOC Rates are published by us for the convenience of the Libraries adopting these rates. Both RBI Rates and GOC Rates are being adopted by various libraries depending upon their account policies. As a library supplier, we have customers opting for either GOC or RBI rates, and our effort is cater to the requirements of both, in a prompt and efficient manner. Best Regards Mukesh Anand www.monitorinfo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "R.K.SHUKLA" <milanramakant(a)hotmail.com> To: "++ Mukesh Anand ++" <mukesh(a)monitorinfo.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 2:06 PM Subject: Re: [LIS-Forum] GOC Conversion Rates - April '2006 > Is there any relevence of GOC, when we can have a conversion rate from RBI > site. moreover by accepting GOC rate we are inviting audit objectins as > these are much higher > > r.k.shukla > librarian Delhi College of Engineering > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "++ Mukesh Anand ++" <mukesh(a)monitorinfo.com> > To: <lis-forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in> > Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 2:21 PM > Subject: [LIS-Forum] GOC Conversion Rates - April '2006 > > > Dear Librarian > > GOC Conversion Rates - April '2006, has been posted > on weblog / links given below: > > http://www.monitorlinks.typepad.com > > http://del.icio.us/newbooks > > > Thanks > - - > > Mukesh Anand > Director - Marketing > MONITOR INFORMATION SERVICES > http://www.monitorinfo.com > Library Suppliers of Science, Technology & Management Publications > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> _______________________________________________ >> LIS-Forum mailing list >> LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >> http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum >> > > GOC Rates are published by us for the convenience of the Libraries adopting these rates. Both RBI Rates and GOC Rates are being adopted by various libraries depending upon their account policies. As a library supplier, we have customers opting for either GOC or RBI rates, and our effort is cater to the requirements of both, in a prompt and efficient manner. Best Regards Mukesh Anand http://www.monitorinfo.com www.monitorinfo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "R.K.SHUKLA" < mailto:milanramakant@hotmail.com milanramakant(a)hotmail.com > To: "++ Mukesh Anand ++" < mailto:mukesh@monitorinfo.com mukesh(a)monitorinfo.com > Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 2:06 PM Subject: Re: [LIS-Forum] GOC Conversion Rates - April '2006 > Is there any relevence of GOC, when we can have a conversion rate from RBI > site. moreover by accepting GOC rate we are inviting audit objectins as > these are much higher > > r.k.shukla > librarian Delhi College of Engineering > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "++ Mukesh Anand ++" < mailto:mukesh@monitorinfo.com mukesh(a)monitorinfo.com > > To: < mailto:lis-forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in lis-forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in > > Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 2:21 PM > Subject: [LIS-Forum] GOC Conversion Rates - April '2006 > > > Dear Librarian > > GOC Conversion Rates - April '2006, has been posted > on weblog / links given below: > > http://www.monitorlinks.typepad.com http://www.monitorlinks.typepad.com > > http://del.icio.us/newbooks http://del.icio.us/newbooks > > > Thanks > - - > > Mukesh Anand > Director - Marketing > MONITOR INFORMATION SERVICES > http://www.monitorinfo.com http://www.monitorinfo.com > Library Suppliers of Science, Technology & Management Publications > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> _______________________________________________ >> LIS-Forum mailing list >> mailto:LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >> http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum >> > >

1 0

Professional trainee for NLSIU
by Mailing List Manager 04 Apr '06

04 Apr '06

Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:34:34 +0530 (IST) From: Mailing List Manager <mailman(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in> Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 06:21:24 +0000 From: chandrashekhar navalgund <cnavalgund(a)hotmail.com> A Professional Trainee is required at National Law School of India University Library which is a well equipped modern Law Library. Monthly stipend of Rs. 3000/- would be paid. Those who are willing to work on shift basis may send in their resume immediately through email to the Librarian , N L S I U (cun(a)nls.ac.in) Short listed candidates would be called for interview. C U Navalgund Librarian N L S I U Nagarbhavi Bangalore - 72

1 0

Digital Library Software
by veena bhat 04 Apr '06

04 Apr '06

Dear Sir/ Madam, Our institution is purely Academic. We want to build a Digital Library. Which Digital Library software is best for Academic Library? On which basis I need to select the software? Plz, suggest me. Thanks and Regards, Veena Bhat International Institute of Information Technology, Pune --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. Dear Sir/ Madam, Our institution is purely Academic. We want to build a Digital Library. Which Digital Library software is best for Academic Library? On which basis I need to select the software? Plz, suggest me. Thanks and Regards, Veena Bhat International Institute of Information Technology, Pune Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman1/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/ev… Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.

3 2

Accepting documents as gifts
by Chitra P Rao 04 Apr '06

04 Apr '06

To Mr Saji S Nair: I think accepting or giving as gifts needs same consideration from both the giver and reciever. If the gift is not appropriate it does not make sense accepting it. Instead as lirarians always do we must guide the person to that library which will accept the same and use it well. So some work on the part of the reciever is to guide to the correct doner. In all such cases however close or important the doner I have felt being clear and honest alwsys makes for better management. Chitra Rao Sr Librarian and Head LIS NITIE Mumbai 400 087 ph: 28573371 extn 337

1 0