From: Michael Zeoli <[log in to unmask]> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 22:28:02 +0000 Jim, Your post has helped pass some time while DC digs us out (to be honest, it's a race with warm temps melting us out). I hope you won't mind if I offer a very humble comment or two. I enjoyed the responses from Tony Sanfilippo, Carey Newman and Joe Esposito. We have all borne witness to and been participants in the significant developments in scholarly book publishing in terms of technology, library collecting, and economics... To state the obvious, the creation and supply of books to academic libraries is incredibly complex, and the complexities have grown exponentially over the past decade. The ebook aggregators, as well as publisher ebook platforms, represent but one of the new blossoms in the scholarly book ecosystem; their adoption in real scale is less than a decade old. Carey Newman made a sharp observation: "thinking about this problem reminds that discovery, delivery and use are three separate enterprises -- and should not be confused one with another." Librarians participate on publisher advisory boards, and aggregators work very hard with both publishers and libraries to make a better stew - or hash - and a variety of vendors and service providers are also part of the recipe. Imagining the future and building towards it has always been hard work. I'd plea for some leniency for all participants as we explore ways forward, letting a thousand flowers bloom (there's always be more than one). "Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts and the sciences and a flourishing socialist culture in our land." [not Bernie Sanders] Michael ******************** 3213 Sutton Place NW Washington, DC 20016 -----Original Message----- From: "Jim O'Donnell" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:11:23 -0700 My thanks to the various contributions here. Carey Newman was most provocative, essentially telling me in the very nicest possible way to get over it – stop wanting an e-book to please my book-wanting eye. Others performed more as enablers for my hankering, and I’m still inclined to accept their encouragement. I had forgotten, until one old friend here reminded me, that it was another old friend, Mike Jensen at National Academies Press, who first successfully implemented the cripple-your-book strategy for making material available on-line and sustaining print sales. Revolutionary twenty years ago, an albatross, I fear, now for many of us. BUT: the Jensen strategy put the crippled books up on the open web for worldwide free access. My complaint a few nights ago was about “e-books” that we “buy” at a price I could complain about and that are only accessible to our university community inside the paywall and come crippled. That’s a distinction with a difference, I think. In the new technical language of librarianship that I’ve begun to master, that’s nuts. AND: I learned one incidental thing in reading this thread and looking at the Open Syllabus thread started by the article the other day in the New York Times. Of their books-most-frequently-taught (where, as somebody pointed out, they follow in the footsteps of the BYTES project Ann O. led some years ago and which produced, on a smaller data set, quite similar conclusions), 33 of the top 50 are readily available in open access, howbeit often in translations that now ring a little quaintly to our ears. The aging of translations gives print publishers the opportunity to keep lots of versions of Augustine and Plato and Marx in print, selling briskly in exactly the place – the curriculum – where open access might be thought most welcome. ONE COMMENT: To my admittedly biased eye, the structure by which our vendors make content available for discovery, then charge us when we begin to use it (so many clicks into the content and the library has bought it, though the user does not know they have triggered a purchase) is potentially useful, but right now, the number of clicks is too small and the price is too high. I still wonder if publishers actually see what a hash the e-book vendors make of their products. SO: what is to be done? I’ll go back to Toby Green’s admirable post and ask him to say what it will take and when it might come about for there to be the premium e-book editions of which he speaks. I still seek (and tens of thousands of ASU students need) books that are fully functional when accessed on-line. Charts, diagrams, illustrations, footnotes, indices, hot-linked references and cross-references, ease of use – in short, digital objects with the ability to meet the demands of those who could be reading the same book in print and of those who want to take advantage of the new media to get new functionality: when and how can we get these? We can argue about price later, but that artifact does not now exist. The e-book hasn’t been invented yet. Who will do it and when? Jim O’Donnell