Heather Morrison wrote:
> Challenge: My research blog and data verses are both fully open with
> no CC license at all. They are All Rights Reserved, and yet posted
> on the web, in the case of the dataverse deliberately so that people
> can go ahead and download and manipulate the data. I challen
On 2015-06-01, at 4:17 PM, Peter Murray-Rust
wrote:
>
> Please accept that posting on the web, with whatever good intentions but
> without explicit licence, gives no rights to any potential user.
Good grief, no, I accept no such thing. You sound like a copyright maximalist
here, PMR.
We ne
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Dana Roth
wrote:
> Taking Bernard's 'public road' analogy a little further ... one wonders
> his insistence on a 'perfect' solution isn't unfairly denigrating a
> reasonable (at least in the short term) alternative.
>
> The current situation, where the 'public NIH
Yes, Delayed Access is better than no access. (Toll access is better than
no access too.)
Yes, publisher embargoes have cowed (some) authors into providing Delayed
Access instead of Open Access.
But that does not make Delayed Access Open Access.
And the objective is to provide Open Access, immed
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Heather Morrison <
heather.morri...@uottawa.ca> wrote:
> Question and challenge
>
> Question: Didn't the UK recently change its legislation explicitly to
> allow for data and text mining?
>
Yes,
The Statutory Instrument came into force in June2014 following
rec
Nobody is insisting on perfect *solutions* - none of the current solutions
are even close to perfect - but what Heather was proposing was a change in
*goals*. There is nothing to be gained - and a lot to lose - by redefining
what we mean by open access (and thereby what we are trying to achieve) in
Taking Bernard's 'public road' analogy a little further ... one wonders his
insistence on a 'perfect' solution isn't unfairly denigrating a reasonable (at
least in the short term) alternative.
The current situation, where the 'public NIH road' is closed temporarily (12
months) and one has to us
*** Sorry for reposting, but a reminder that the deadline for this call is this
Friday!***
OpenAIRE Open Peer Review Tender Call
Peer review is evolving - help shape its future!
OpenAIRE invites tenders for two prototypes (technologies or workflows) in the
area of open peer review. Tenders sho
Dear all,
I agree with Heather that we should take a more inclusive approach to
Open Access. For most ordinary academics and non-academics all that
counts is getting access to particular articles they want to read that
more often than not are identified via references.
The landscape is not bla
On 2015-06-01, at 2:02 PM,
wrote:
When I want to drive on a public road, whether it is closed or temporarily
closed makes no difference to me. It is not open. I can't use it.
Embargo is antinomic to open.
Comment: would you agree then that all of the journals that make back issues
freely avai
Question and challenge
Question: Didn't the UK recently change its legislation explicitly to allow for
data and text mining?
Challenge: My research blog and data verses are both fully open with no CC
license at all. They are All Rights Reserved, and yet posted on the web, in the
case of the da
As of today, 3.5 million articles are archived in PubMedCentral. 1,685 journals
are providing all of their content to PMC. This number is growing on a regular
basis (it's one of the things I track in my Dramatic Growth of OA series).
It is true that this is less than 100% full, immediate open a
When I want to drive on a public road, whether it is closed or temporarily
closed makes no difference to me. It is not open. I can't use it.
Embargo is antinomic to open.
Bernard Rentier
> Le 1 juin 2015 à 18:26, Stevan Harnad a écrit :
>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Michael Eisen wrot
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Michael Eisen wrote:
> There's a difference between trying to be inclusive, and redefining goals
> and definitions to the point of being meaningless. I can not tell you how
> many times I hear that the NIH provides open access because they make
> articles freely a
We are now at the point where anything less than full BOAI-compliance is
seriously holding science and medicine back. We must have immediate
"free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read,
download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of
these articl
An idea to take or leave as you like: one way to look at the recent Elsevier
self-archiving policy change is that this could actually work against the
company in terms of attracting authors. If scholars are concerned about the
embargoes, whether due to policy or missing out on the benefits of op
There's a difference between trying to be inclusive, and redefining goals
and definitions to the point of being meaningless. I can not tell you how
many times I hear that the NIH provides open access because they make
articles freely available after a year. This is not just semantics. The
belief th
hi David,
Redefining open access and understanding that a great many people are moving
towards open access in slightly different ways are two different things. My
post will focus on the benefits of a more inclusive and welcoming approach to
open access.
For example, I have been conducting int
Early results of a pilot study on impact factor and APCs are now available.
Highlights:
- 10% of the journals listed in Journal Citation Reports (journals with impact
factor) are DOAJ journals
- over 10 % of the journals listed in DOAJ have impact factors and are listed
in JCR
- that's 1,146
Ever since ‘Open Access’ was first defined there have been people who have
wanted to redefine it. Heather is the latest of these. The trouble is, by
broadening the definition of ‘Open Access’ it is in danger of becoming
meaningless.
So, Heather wants to include journals who make their conten
20 matches
Mail list logo
