Let me make a clear distinction between
~U Subject-based repositories, and
~U Multi-disciplinary repositories.
The rhetoric about institutional repositories arises because (a) they are
multi-disciplinary, and (b) because the owning institutions are empowered to
mandate deposit. No
On 6 Feb 2009, at 00:02, Thomas Krichel wrote:
Arthur Sale writes
I totally disagree that researchers should be free to deposit where
they will.
This one of the basic tennants of academic fredom.
Academic freedom relates to a professor's freedom to choose to profess
(ie teach and
Klaus
1. Almost all research intensive universities in the world now have
repositories. I am sorry if yours doesn't. The remaining non-research
oriented universities will follow suit if it suits them, and there
are at most 10,000 of them.
2. I accept there are a few thousand scholars with
What a load of rubbish. If we follow that line, academics would be
free not to publish their research, not to participate in
evaluations, not to set and mark examination papers, not to deliver
lectures, etc.
This is a total misconstruction of academic freedom. What 'academic
freedom' means is
On 6-Feb-09, at 6:59 AM, Gerry Lawson (RCUK,Secretariat) wrote (in
JISC-REPOSITORIES):
Stevan, a very useful series of postings - thanks.
UK Research Councils have a variety of OA mandates -
including two which mandate deposition in CRs (MRC- UK
PubMed and ESRC - Society
Research repositories, whether they are a physical library, an electronic
journal archive, an institutional repository or a subject repository, are
collections of interconnected components. Understood in this way, as systems,
they have emergent properties. That is, properties of the
I believe we are getting carried away here.
My point was much simpler...
1. Universities may legitimately own a repository of all the publications by
their employees, no matter what their statutes can be, they may also impose
a mandate and simply enforce it by making it conditional for futher
Yet Another Case of Green/Gold Deuteranopia
Andrew Brown, wrote in the Guardian (5 Feb):
[O]pen access is unsatisfactory [because] open-access
journals [are] not yet widespread enough... The only
answer I can think of is to bring electronic
subscriptions into the
