2007
DOI: 10.1108/02641610710754042
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rapid and the new interlending: a cooperative document supply system in the USA

Abstract: Purpose -The purpose of this article is to describe the development of Rapid, a successful document supply system in the USA. Design/methodology/approach -The paper provides a descriptive analysis. Findings -Finds that Rapid reduces costs and speeds up the fulfillment of document supply requests by using a well integrated system that precisely identifies holdings statements of participating libraries. Originality/value -Gives a good insight into the workings of a cooperative document supply system in the USA w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These systems include stand-alone interlibrary loan management systems, local library systems, consortial borrowing software, interlending systems, document delivery systems and software for placing end user requests. Examples of products/projects mentioned in the literature include Agent Resource Sharing (Advanced Technology Libraries, 2006), the BLDSC Automated Request Processing System (Chivers, 2000), Clio (Whitlock and Edwards, 2003), Danbib/bibliotek.dk (Petersen and Lose, 2006), DOCLINE (LaCroix and Mehnert, 2002), DocUTrans (Dekker and Waaijers, 2001), ESTAR (Braid, 2003), ILLiad (Kriz et al, 1998) (Norton and Stover, 2003), IMPALA (Van Borm and Corthouts, 2003), INN-Reach (Chmelir, 2005), IntelliDoc (VanBuskirk, 2003), Kinetica (Missingham, 2006), NILDE (Cecconi et al, 2006), Odyssey (Connell and Janke, 2006), Prospero (Morgen and Hersey, 2003), QuickDoc (Munson and Hill, 2003), RAPID (Smith, 2006;Delaney, 2007), Relais (Cornish, 2000) (Guadagno, 2005), RLG's ILL Manager (Massie, 2000), URSA (Nitecki and Jones, 2004), VDX (Burrows et al, 2004) (Braun et al, 2006;Irwin andReid, 2006), WebZap (Library Technology Reports, 2000), WinCHILL (Glover et al, 2000), a number of open source alternatives (Wan, 2006), and the interlibrary loan modules of various local library systems (Prowse, 2006). For reviews, see Barry (2000), Jackson (2000), Lieberthal (2000), Prowse (2006) and White (2006).…”
Section: Discussion and Future Perspectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These systems include stand-alone interlibrary loan management systems, local library systems, consortial borrowing software, interlending systems, document delivery systems and software for placing end user requests. Examples of products/projects mentioned in the literature include Agent Resource Sharing (Advanced Technology Libraries, 2006), the BLDSC Automated Request Processing System (Chivers, 2000), Clio (Whitlock and Edwards, 2003), Danbib/bibliotek.dk (Petersen and Lose, 2006), DOCLINE (LaCroix and Mehnert, 2002), DocUTrans (Dekker and Waaijers, 2001), ESTAR (Braid, 2003), ILLiad (Kriz et al, 1998) (Norton and Stover, 2003), IMPALA (Van Borm and Corthouts, 2003), INN-Reach (Chmelir, 2005), IntelliDoc (VanBuskirk, 2003), Kinetica (Missingham, 2006), NILDE (Cecconi et al, 2006), Odyssey (Connell and Janke, 2006), Prospero (Morgen and Hersey, 2003), QuickDoc (Munson and Hill, 2003), RAPID (Smith, 2006;Delaney, 2007), Relais (Cornish, 2000) (Guadagno, 2005), RLG's ILL Manager (Massie, 2000), URSA (Nitecki and Jones, 2004), VDX (Burrows et al, 2004) (Braun et al, 2006;Irwin andReid, 2006), WebZap (Library Technology Reports, 2000), WinCHILL (Glover et al, 2000), a number of open source alternatives (Wan, 2006), and the interlibrary loan modules of various local library systems (Prowse, 2006). For reviews, see Barry (2000), Jackson (2000), Lieberthal (2000), Prowse (2006) and White (2006).…”
Section: Discussion and Future Perspectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some items are designed to be used in a way that reduces their strength. For example, a simple straight piece of rope when tied into a knot may lose up to 50% (Atiyah, 1990;Delaney, 2015) of its strength due to the constrictions on the strand of rope created in the knot. Furthermore, equipment deteriorates from wear and tear.…”
Section: Journal Of Search and Rescue Volume 4issuementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the Rapid system has been around for some time, the RapidX component has not been discussed in the literature up to this point. Rapid itself has been covered in recent years by Smith (2006) and Delaney (2007).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%