My reply to Arthur Smith's last posting will be found on a new thread:
"Online Self-Archiving: Distincguishing the Optimal from the Optional."
Stevan Harnad
This is a reply to Arthur Smith of APS, but first an introduction
ONLINE SELF-ARCHIVING: DISTINGUISHING THE OPTIMAL FROM THE OPTIONAL,
THE PROVISIONAL, THE CONDITIONAL AND THE EVENTUAL
The 2/3-year long American Scientist September-Forum Discussion so far
has helped to crystallize a n
== Following are my comments, in two parts, ==
== exactly as submitted to NIH ==
FROM: Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH
QUARTERLY <70244.1...@compuserve.com>
We share a vision of effective science using the rapid
communication features of informat
Apologies to Ginsparg and Harnad if I've taken their names in vain
in my classification system. But I think there really is a
sharp distinction between the systems II and III
which Harnad dismisses: under system II (Harnadian)
the literature is clearly always free to readers, because the
journal fu
On Tue, 11 May 1999, Arthur Smith wrote:
> The distinction is really one of responsibility. Under system III
> the author is responsible for the freely distributed version.
> Under system II, the journal or other authoritative source takes
> responsibility. Who do you trust more to get accurate in
