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