Fénix 16, 212-242

PROBLE1'vIAS DE ORGANIZACION y ADMINISTRAClON DE BIBLIOTECAS 227 books in library B 01' for only a scgment of the books in library B, most likely P particular subject grouping such as the cconomio conditions of southern Chile. Probably the easiest method for library A to obtain this type of information is to receive an author card 01' a set of cards for each title within certain specified catcgorics from the library where the information is located. Two questions occur here. How many cards per title should be requested? and How should the cards be requested '1 Minimal1y, the information that any library needs is contained on the author cardo There is, however, justification also for a title cardo Why not then add the subject cards and complete the set? I believe that library A could very well manage if it only received an extra author card from library B. If, once it received the author card, library A needed the other cards of the set, librarian A could have the other cards reproduced in some fashion since the information would be complete on the author cardo Note that the numher of cards per title that is requested is dependent upon the manner in which thc eards are received. For example, the cards that library A receives from library B can come as a donation from Iihrary B 01' can be purchased from library B. If only Iihrary A needs this type of information from Iibrary B, library B not desiring su eh information from library A in return, then I suggest that library A purchase on author carrl per title from Iibrary TI in thc categories that library A believes to be necessary for its clientele. As J huye said, these cards can represent a11 of the books that are being processed in library B 01' it can represenr only a select subjeet grouping. In the present example it is just that library A purchase these cards from library B because library A is the institution that bcnefits from this transaction, not library B. Although there may not be much extra work per book for library D. the local time and the amount of supplies in one year could be cnormous for Iihrary B. Hence library B should be repaid for its effort: for the cost of typing or reproducing the extra cards and for the costs of transmitting them to library A. lf library D, however, also desires to have thc information that is contained in the catalogs of library A, then each library can send to the other onc extra author card for each title that it processes. It does not matter if one library sends the other more cards tran it receives, for the benefits oí having the ad– ditional information should more than outweigh thc disadvantages of the inequality of cards. This previous statement, however, is not preciscly true because there are situations where the inequality might be important enough to notice, For example, if the difference betwccn the number of cards sent and received is enormous, then an accounting would probably be thc best solution, for the library that was scnding much more than it receivcd might become conscious of thc discrcpancy in number of cards and begin, perhaps, to wonder whether the cost of the difference might not be too grcat to continue with the project. At this point, thereforc, each library would probably charge the other Fénix: Revista de la Biblioteca Nacional del Perú. N.16, 1966