Franck Ramus writes > For the moment, i would say that the reasonable choice is rather between > established journals that allow public archiving and those that don't.
... > Of course all this information is available to all authors upon request from > each journal, but it could be part of a project like Cogprints to centralize > it, order it, update it regularly, and make it available to all authors, > inciting them to choose journals that serve best their interest. I wanted to do just that just a couple of years ago for the RePEc dataset, under a project heading "Journal Watch". But members in my community voiced opposition against the project. One academic, associated with the journal Econometrica, wrote 1> Econometrica, at least from some, has no direct policy on papers on 1> the net - absence of a policy can be easily taken to permit posting. 1> Getting a society to make a statement places them at some risk and 1> most societies are risk averters. Would be nice if they all signed 1> off on a statement, but that requires a good deal of lobbying, 1> convincing folks that there is no harm, etc. and another added 2> I've often heard the saying, "It is easier to ask for forgiveness than 2> to ask for permission." and I think it really applies well here. Asking 2> for policy might yield something you don't like, but going along with 2> a somewhat ill-defined situation will often give results you like. a senior librarian noted 3> I would be reluctant to do such a study at this moment. The fact is 3> that only a few publishers really have defined a strategy for their 3> (electronic) future. Most publishers, the small and medium-sized 3> ones, are currently in a stressy and uncertain situation. Most of 3> them don't know what to do. I gave up my plan. That was two years ago, have things changed? Thomas Krichel http://gretel.econ.surrey.ac.uk RePEc:per:1965-06-05:thomas_krichel offline 1999-09-21 to 1999-09-26