Stevan
I am glad we agree that both activities can and should proceed in parallel. All we disagree on is a judgment as to whether mandates for open data or open articles will be first. I continue to assert that achievement of 100% mandated open data is much nearer in time than 100% open articles. If I am right, then open data will help drive open articles, rather than the other way around. It's worth considering. The problems with open data are not what you write. The Harvard mandate solution of reversing the onus onto authors to justify why open access should not be provided is just as applicable, and is general Australian policy. The immediate deposit argument does not hold water, because even articles are not immediately deposited by depositing the Accepted Manuscript, but at a point in time when their content virtually freezes. Some research data never freezes and may indeed continue to grow with time, as for example from sensor networks. Others may need to be preserved until publication of the associated articles (but no later). Some journals I know insist on the research data and the software being made open before they will referee the article (in genetics and bioinformatics). In addition, in the hard sciences there is a strong tradition of sharing anyway within a clique, which is excellent. This is not as strong in the social sciences (survey) fields, and there are privacy matters to be taken into account also. Part of that difference is due to the strong group / collaborative / laboratory association of many of the hard sciences. You will have observed that much research data is already open, for example weather, tidal, climate, oceanic, polar, hydrological, much genetic and molecular biology information, economics, Internet traffic, and indeed the Internet content generally. I am not interested in assessing whether 20% of the world's data is open to compare with articles, since this is a pretty meaningless question. We would need to agree what the % was of. Projects? Bytes? Records? The Australian Code of Conduct in Research governs the storage of and access to research data, and for example insists on defined preservation times and procedures. All Ethics Committees demand to see research data plans before approving a project involving humans or animals. Many (all?) Australian universities mandate compliance with the Code of Conduct. Many researchers (not authors) see open data repositories as a simple way of complying with the requirements imposed on them thereby. The ones with huge datasets (and their own repositories) are generally even more amenable to open access to their data. Best wishes Arthur Sale Emeritus Professor of Computer Science, University of Tasmania From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: Friday, 22 November 2013 11:11 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: [Open-access] Re: Re: Fight Publishing Lobby's Latest "FIRST" Act to Delay OA - Nth Successor to PRISM, RWA etc. On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Arthur Sale <a...@ozemail.com.au> wrote: S.H.: Can we wait, please, until [mandates] at least cover (journal article) text, rather than demanding even more when we don't yet even have less? A.S.: There is no need to wait. Open access data is within our easy reach, because there are no publishers involved. Details need to [be] resolved and open access of research data is not fully implemented, but it is a long way ahead of scholarly published text.. Software is only different because [of] the potential profit ... Voluntary provision of OA to anything -- articles, data, books, software -- can of course proceed apace. But when it comes to mandates, there are obstacles. With articles, the obstacle is publishers. (Authors are willing but worried, and need their institutional and funder mandates to support and embolden them. But the mandates must contend with publisher embargoes of various lengths.) In contrast, with data and software the obstacle is authors. And with books the obstacle is both authors and publishers. Researchers are not data-gatherers. They gather data in order to analyze it and publish their findings, and they want (and deserve) first-expoitation rights. How long access to data should be reserved to the data-gatherer is the "detail to be resolved" with data. This will vary from discipline to discipline and study to study. Unlike with articles, instant OA is not a fair solution that fits all. But I of course agree that immediate-deposit (with the option of restricted access) does fit data just as well as articles. What I am cautioning, however, at a time when article OA mandates are still few, and mostly needlessly weak -- most of them not yet being the optimal Liege-model immediate-deposit mandates with optional immediate-OA -- is that it will not accelerate but retard progress to try to make OA mandates do double-duty as both article and data OA mandates. Rather, once strong OA mandates for articles have become widespread, the article access they generate will pave the way for (fair) data OA mandates and eventually(fair) book and even (fair) software mandates. That said, of course both voluntarism and fair closed-access immediate-deposit policies for data are certainly welcome too. (I would be rather surprised, however, if open access to data "is a long way ahead of scholarly published text," even in Australia.) Stevan Harnad From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: Friday, 22 November 2013 10:26 AM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Cc: scholc...@ala.org; open-acc...@lists.okfn.org Subject: [GOAL] Re: [Open-access] Re: Re: Fight Publishing Lobby's Latest "FIRST" Act to Delay OA - Nth Successor to PRISM, RWA etc. On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Bjoern Brembs <b.bre...@gmail.com> wrote: [Arthur] . I would expand green mandates to cover not only text, but also data and software. Can we wait, please, until they at least cover (journal article) text, rather than demanding even more when we don't yet even have less? [Arthur] . Stevan Harnad _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
