on 9/22 Paul M. Gherman, INTERNET:gher...@library.vanderbilt.edu wrote
As a library director, I second Steve Harnad's
observation that libraries will not quickly cancel
journal subscriptions because of lanl or other
self-archiving ventures.
The problem is not the library but the financial
Mark Doyle said:
There are two big hurdles: 1) reducing the cost of handling electronic
manuscripts and 2) author/institution/funding agency acceptance of
paying submission fees up front.
Regarding 2), I have heard some concerns that this would unfairly
penalize the most productive
From: Lee Miller l...@cornell.edu
Date: 1999-09-22 22:51:09 -0400
In your comments you noted that Phy. Rev. journals vary in the percentage
of their articles that appear in the LANL archive. Why is that so?
This is due to the fact that even within physics, there is a wide variation
in the
Why is Paul Gherman complicating a simple issue? The dissemination of
research results is part of the research process. If an institution is
successful, then part of its responsibility should be to make the results
known. Surely, the cost of disseminating the research of its faculty and
staff
Peter,
I began thinking exactly as you suggest. Institutions
paying the charges for their own faculty from library
journals budgets. But then I ran the numbers. Vanderbilt
spends 1.8 million a year on journal subscription, not
all serials. We have 1500 faculty. At a minor charge of
$1,000 per
on 23 Sep 1999 Katherine Porter por...@library.vanderbilt.edu wrote:
The fact that APS
hasn't noticed many cancellations attributable to
LANL suggests only that universities are willing to sacrifice small
fry physics as bait for a big kill in the life and social sciences.
Albert
