3 ms·
Apparently, people don't check it out that much, but is that really a good reason for getting rid of it? For most libraries, I think so. By which I am referrin
by tjr 5y ago
Apparently, people don't check it out that much, but is that really a good reason for getting rid of it?
For most libraries, I think so. By which I am referring to general purpose community libraries. They have limited space, and keeping books on hand that nobody looks at is not a good use of that space. I wouldn't expect any of the public libraries in my area to keep obscure titles that are rarely touched.
Some other libraries purpose to be more of an archive, a repository of knowledge; I would expect such libraries to be slower to discard things.
Really, though, this seems like a great opportunity for scanning and digital preservation... copyright woes aside...
- Ekaros 5y agoI think it is reasonable for group of libraries to have some central storage where they move 1-2 copies of old books and then get rid of rest. I think that is not excessive requirement. Ofc, that does mean need to have larger group of them working together.
- fknorangesite 5y ago> Really, though, this seems like a great opportunity for scanning and digital preservation... Now you've traded your problems of having one collection with having two. Not to mention the choice (and constant migration!) of hardware media, data formats, etc. Are you going to be able to even read these digital files fifty years from now? Who's going to maintain this? Are you going to add a whole IT dept to your local library to keeping this system running? None of this is impossible, of course. But it's not free and it's not trivial.
- Apocryphon 5y agoDonate it to the Internet Archive. Their Open Library initiative can take care of those details.
- mtlynch 5y agoI think they're overloaded. I donated some books 18 months ago, and they still don't show up on Open Library. And many were popular books published in the last few decades, not obscure old books.
- tjr 5y agoWell, no, it's not a great opportunity for every local library to do this. As you suggested, they really don't have anything remotely like the staff and infrastructure. But it shouldn't be a job for every local library. All that is needed is one copy of the book; not every copy of the book. And for more recent books, there shouldn't even be a need to scan it; there should already be a digital version (whether if it was made publicly available or not). Granted, long-term storage and viewing of digital files seems like an open-ended problem in itself, regardless of who is handling it. But so is long-term storage and viewing of physical books. The books take up space, must be handled with care, and will deteriorate eventually (though hopefully slowly as preservation methods have advanced).