From: Sally Morris <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:02:16 +0000

A lot of work was done at the British Library on what could not
realistically be preserved, when they were working up their strategy on
e-preservation

I believe (but am not sure) they also have a policy on what print materials
are not preserved - perhaps there's a BL person on this list who can fill us
in?

Sally Morris
South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing
West Sussex, UK  BN13 3UU
Email:  [log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:56:37 -0500

Are there guidelines emerging on what should NOT be preserved?
Sandy's reference in this thread concerning self-published books gives me
pause.  Where do you draw the line?  Todd Carpenter of NISO posted on the
Scholarly Kitchen a few months ago about the impracticality of preserving
certain huge, dynamic databases--that would seem to be one area to be carved
out.  Preserving self-published consumer titles seems to me to be a
questionable allocation of resources, but I'm sure many people would
disagree with me.  And Gold OA scholarly articles placed with services of
uncertain merit?  Of course, at some point you have to ask, Who is to judge?
But I think someone has to.

Joe Esposito