function. Their
goals in running the system may be significantly at variance with those of the
library - particularly regarding scholarly support and open access.
Prof Leslie Carr
Web Science institute
#⃣ webscience #⃣ openaccess
On 18 May 2016, at 14:44, David Prosser
<david.pros...@rluk.ac
The software may change, but you can't sell off a distributed network of
independent repositories.
Prof Leslie Carr
Web Science institute
#⃣ webscience #⃣ openaccess
On 17 May 2016, at 21:35, Joachim SCHOPFEL
<joachim.schop...@univ-lille3.fr<mailto:joachim.schop...@univ-lille3.fr>>
The gap between a Masters level dissertation/thesis and a journal article
should be quite considerable from the perspective of educational outcomes, let
alone the more superficial editorial considerations of restructuring and
rewriting. This should guarantee that the two documents are too
...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of
Leslie Carr
Sent: 30. april 2015 10:08
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Master theses as preprints
The gap between a Masters level dissertation/thesis and a journal article
should be quite
Like Fred I found the whole event rather mystifying. The attitude to green OA
by the publishers and societies is completely incompatible with their stated
desire for time to adapt to the new OA realities.
If they really are looking for time to adapt (as opposed to a perpetual
prevarication),
I assume that your problems with harvesting repositories are the publisher
objections on the principle that the *author* is allowed to decide to deposit
in the appropriate place, but that a third party does not have the right to
make a deposit independently of the author's wishes. (For the
Publishers are capitalists - I don't think they'd argue the point.
The hostage metaphor really works for me and for many of my colleagues, as it
involves elements of ENFORCED TAKING and subsequent DEPRIVATION tied to
conditions of RANSOM.
Eric's piece makes the really interesting and helpful
Is platinum effectively the same as green?
Sent from my iPad
On 26 Jul 2012, at 14:12, Beall, Jeffrey jeffrey.be...@ucdenver.edu wrote:
I make the distinction between gold open-access and platinum open-access.
Author fees + free to reader = gold open access
No author fees + free to
ROAR, the Registry of Open Access Repositories, is launching an Overview of
Open Access (pictured below) that showcases open access material from
repositories around the world. Picking one recent deposit at a time, the
animated map cycles around the world's repositories showing a description of
871286
Email: Â sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk
-Original Message-
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
[mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org]
On
Behalf Of Leslie Carr
On 19 Sep 2010, at 16:09, bj...@hanken.fi wrote:
Firstly I have recently uploaded my central 30 articles to our (D-Hanken)
repository,
In what I would consider best practice fashion. You can check the results at
http://www.hanken.fi/staff/bjork/. This took me about one weekâs workload
On 18 Sep 2010, at 21:59, Velterop wrote:
o Make a repository easy to find (a Google search for University
of X repository more often seems to produce a link to an
article or press release about the repository than a link to the
repository itself, at least on
On 12 Jul 2010, at 06:25, Leslie Chan wrote:
This is rather circular. The view that academic papers should be fixed in
form and format is rather out of sync with the emergence of new forms of
scholarly expression enabled by the web.
I don't wish to argue that academic writing SHOULD BE fixed
On 9 Jul 2010, at 08:12, Isidro F. Aguillo wrote:
However perhaps you will like this page we prepared for the University
rankings related to UK universities commitment to OA:
http://www.webometrics.info/openac.html
Thanks for preparing the page - it is very informative and helpful in
On 8 Jul 2010, at 09:43, Isidro F. Aguillo wrote:
Regarding the other comments we are going to correct those with mistakes but
it is very difficult for us to realize that Virginia Tech University is
faking its institutional repository with contents authored by external
scholars.
This (and
On 21 Feb 2010, at 13:55, Kiley ,Robert wrote:
To give a very practical example there are some publishers (e.g. Elsevier)
who allow authors to self-archive papers in an IR, but do NOT allow
self-archiving in a central repository like PMC or UKPMC. To be clear,
if such papers were harvested
On 21 Feb 2010, at 20:56, Uhlir, Paul wrote:
In response to your last question, yes, if the article is made
available under an Attribution Only (ATT 3.0) Creative Commons
license. This is the recommended license for open access journals
and is already broadly in use. The
On 19 Feb 2010, at 05:00, Dana Roth wrote:
The January 25 issue of Chemistry Industry (issue 2, 2010) has a short
article on research fraud which includes a sidebar on the situation in China
(see below). This suggests that, contrary to Heather Morrison's suggestion,
scholar led open
On 17 Feb 2010, at 10:56, Jan Szczepanski wrote:
Publishers are indispensible even today.
Without researchers, academic journal publishers would have nothing to publish.
Without publishers, researchers would still be very busy indeed doing research.
They would probably also have worked out a
On 17 Feb 2010, at 17:06, Dana Roth wrote:
Isn't it more likely that researchers would be extra 'busy' trying to sort
out what is relevant from everything else on the web?
No. Are you suggesting that researchers are incapable of distinguishing
research from everything else on the web?
On 30 Nov 2009, at 21:15, Armbruster, Chris wrote:
Any Internet 101 course will include plenty of examples
where deposit, content and service are assembled within a
single site (by one provider, company etc.) - the list is
really very long, from ArXiv to Amazon, SSRN to
On 23 Nov 2009, at 17:22, Armbruster, Chris wrote:
Four types of publication repository may be
distinguished, namely the subject-based repository,
research repository, national repository system and
institutional repository.
I'm not sure these distinctions are going to
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Noel, Robert E. rn...@indiana.edu
wrote:
Anyway, others have devoted much more time and energy to this topic
than I have, but I'm skeptical of recommendations that bluntly
reject other strategies from the outset. ... It's tantamount to
engineers and scientists
On 31 Oct 2009, at 13:09, Sally Morris (Morris Associates) wrote:
Since when was solar and wind energy free (any more than quality-
controlled
and value-added research literature!)?
On the contrary, sun and wind energy IS FREE. However, building the
infrastructure to collect and distribute
On 19 Sep 2009, at 12:25, Stevan Harnad quoted:
the Compact for Open Access Publishing Equity (COPE)
is a key initiative in the transition to open access.
http://www.oacompact.org/
In these straitened times I wonder if it would be better for the HE
sector to launch CORE, the
On 21 Sep 2009, at 22:29, Charlotte Hess wrote:
What I worry about is that these databases will use this as an excuse
for not indexing OA journals along with the others.
Has anyone researched this?
They can't get reference lists from OAI-PMH, although the JISC
Repository Infrastructure
.
Submissions and enquiries should be made by email to the editor of
this special issue: Leslie Carr, University of Southampton, UK
(l...@ecs.soton.ac.uk
)
The official version of this Call for Papers is online at
http://repositoryman.blogspot.com/2009/06/special-issue-of-new-review-on.htm
l
[ The following text is in the WINDOWS-1252 character set. ]
[ Your display is set for the iso-8859-1 character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
This comment was reported in the independent daily student
newspaper - so its record of the debate will probably
the following in response to
it. The subtext of my message is
(a) IRPlus isn't doing aything new.
(b) IRPlus is a bit limited - but what do you expect if you take the
advice of 25 postgrads?
(c) Did you make IRPlus because DSpace is crap?
--
les
Begin forwarded message:
From: Leslie Carr l
[This message was posted on JISC-REPOSITORIES and is reproduced here
on the request of the AMSCI moderator.]
On 15 Feb 2009, at 19:56, Charles Oppenheim wrote on the JISC-
REPOSITORIES mailing list:
I agree that the publisher cannot demand destruction of copies made
PRIOR to the assignment,
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
On 2 Jan 2009, at 20:18, Klaus Graf wrote:
I have given a legal analysis of ORBi in German at:
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5420548/
The practice and legal framework is nonsense.
And yet the practice embodies sufficient sense to be effective. I have
no doubt that a more refined policy
On 8 Dec 2008, at 22:14, Stevan Harnad wrote:
This is a configurational detail. EPrints can be configured to tally
full-texts if desired.
One of the basic EPrints health check scripts (cgi/counter) provides
a very broad brush overview of the number of records and the number of
full texts. The
On 8 Dec 2008, at 22:50, Klaus Graf wrote:
Here are the numbers for journal articles in the ZORA December 5
sample:
30 journal articles (of 50 entries), free fulltext 7
A good way to do large samples of the repository is via a search.
Search for (e.g.) all refereed items, and you will get
On 2 Dec 2008, at 15:47, Michael Eisen wrote:
OF COURSE Elsevier can have objections to
libraries assisting individuals in self-archiving their
work, because
Elsevier does not want self archiving to succeed!
No-one wants to split unnecessary hairs, but there does seem
On 26 Nov 2008, at 21:08, Michael Eisen was goaded to write:
I will proudly claim the mantle of an OA extremist
No, I'm Spartacus!
It seems to me that institutions have attempted Green Open Access
through various means:
(a) self-archiving - the individual author does all the work
(b) proxy
On 18 Nov 2008, at 12:32, Dominic Tate wrote:
Aimed at librarians and repository staff using the open-source EPrints
software, the morning sessions will cover the installation and visual
customisation of EPrints, metadata schema design and the batch importing
of legacy records.
I'd just like
On 23 Oct 2008, at 12:09, Sally Morris (Morris Associates) wrote:
Here's a set of 'rules' for another email discussion forum, one
which I
personally think is moderated in an exemplary fashion
I expect there are hundreds of other discussion forums whose charters
and processes are indeed
On 21 Oct 2008, at 18:23, J.F.Rowland wrote:
There is a real and valid point in Heather's message, and simply
saying 'use
other metrics' is vague, to say the least. Please specify what
metrics
might be used to provide a valid quality measure to the work of
researchers
who study minority
On 21 Oct 2008, at 18:23, J.F.Rowland wrote:
Stevan - You misunderstood Heather's point. She didn't say the
researcher -
the author of the current research article in question - was little-
known.
She said the literary author that (s)he was studying was little-known.
Therefore, not many
On 22 Oct 2008, at 16:46, c.oppenh...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
DSpace@Cambridge 192,000 items! presumably there is a
story behind that amazing figure??
About 178,000 are chemical records (in CML format I believe) imported
(and processed) from the US National Cancer Institute. They have been
On 22 Oct 2008, at 18:59, Klaus Graf wrote:
One of the largest German university repository Freidok
http://freidok.uni-freiburg.de
with 5166 records in OAIster has zero records in this statistics. This
is'nt the only irritating thing.
Apologies. Freidok didn't have its OAI-PMH interface
On 17 Oct 2008, at 09:27, Sally Morris (Morris Associates) wrote:
Puzzled by Les's posting - Google Scholar already identifies 'green'
sources
of documents, doesn't it?
What I mean is that
(a) Google Scholar is a service that few people are using (just look
at the stats for repository usage)
they call
universal search.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/pressrel/universalsearch_20070516.html
Regards,
Frank
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 6:36 AM, Stevan Harnad
amscifo...@gmail.com wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Leslie Carr lac -- ecs.soton.ac.uk
Date: Thu, 16
On 12 Oct 2008, at 13:54, Andrew A. Adams wrote:
The main driver for this seems to be the REF and the need to
potentially track all the
output of our researchers. At this stage our PVC(Research) is still
somewhat
unsure of the nature of the non-technical elements of an IR, i.e.
about the
On 3 Oct 2008, at 08:27, Muriel Foulonneau wrote:
The HAL archive in France which hosts a number of
institutional repositories has a similar system for
several years with arXiv (researchers can tick a box and
the paper is submitted to arXiv as well). Connections
On 29 Jul 2008, at 12:47, Talat Chaudhri [tac] wrote:
When you say reduces, doesn't SWORD quite simply eliminate such
competition if implemented widely enough? That is, one could
theoretically deposit simultaneously in multiple repositories,
whether IR or CR or both. With an appropriate
On 25 Jul 2008, at 17:58, FrederickFriend wrote:
Oh dear! I have avoided contributing to this discussion because it has
saddened me to see so much disagreement about the various ways to
achieve OA
when we are all working so hard to achieve OA by any means possible
Most stakeholders in the
On 25 Jul 2008, at 19:22, Michael Eisen wrote:
And why is everyone assuming that the existence of an institutional
archive requires double deposits for authors who are also under a
funder mandate to submit to a central repository? Why can't authors
just simply submit to their institutional
On 20 Mar 2008, at 02:18, Thomas Krichel wrote:
Stevan Harnad writes
(7) University-external, subject-based self-archiving does not
scale up
to cover all of OA output space: it is divergent, divisive,
arbitrary,
incoherent and unnecessary.
So, do you reccommend arXiv, RePEc,
On 10 Mar 2008, at 09:11, Andy Powell wrote:
Well, I hope that you are right... I certainly don't have the will or
ability to fight a political and technical agenda that has become so
entrenched worldwide and that says there is only one 'right' way of
achieving OA.
Those who are involved in
[ The following text is in the WINDOWS-1252 character set. ]
[ Your display is set for the iso-8859-1 character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
Repository developers are invited to participate in a new Repository
Challenge prize activity to produce
On 27 Jan 2008, at 14:40, Stevan Harnad wrote:
I would simply underscore that the number
of authors who currently *do* want OA for their articles is low
enough
that Harnad and others recommend they be coerced to achieve the goal.
(1) Coerced is a rather shrill term! (Is every rule that
OPEN REPOSITORIES 2008: CALL FOR POSTERS
http://www.openrepositories.org/2008
We invite developers, researchers and practitioners to submit 2-page poster
proposals describing novel experiences or developments in the construction
and use of repositories.
Repositories are being deployed in a
On 19 Jan 2008, at 10:05, Stevan Harnad wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Sandy Thatcher wrote:
One would think, then, that the language of the ERC statement could
have been
more precise: peer-reviewed publications is a general term that
normally
would be thought, in an academic context,
On 11 Jan 2008, at 14:01, N. Miradon wrote:
Could someone who understands these things explain to me what is the
difference between the European Research Council, the European
Council
and the European Commission ?
From the front page of the ERC website (erc.europa.eu)
Status: O
The
On 8 Dec 2007, at 07:08, Hélène.Bosc wrote:
I am sure that more details on this cost will be given by ECS Southampton.
I can only speak about what we have at the moment, a simple OA repository
that works for a single school. Not a whole institution, just our school.
Setup costs for our
On 28 Nov 2007, at 14:55, Talat Chaudhri [tac] wrote:
My aim here is not to rely on voluntarism, but to build from it by
trying to develop de facto mandates through conversations with
departmental organisers and university management until proper
mandates
are in place.
I rather like Talat's
OPEN REPOSITORIES 2008: Deadline 9th Dec 2007 for Papers Panels
(Calls for Posters and User Group Participation to follow later)
http://www.openrepositories.org/2008
We invite developers, researchers and practitioners to submit papers
describing novel experiences or developments in the
On Wed, 7 Nov 2007, Christian Zimmermann wrote:
Re: whether download statistics should be put in CVs. I would not
necessarily
go that far (I do not put citation counts in my CV either),
I ought to highlight the fact that you do (we all do) put citation
counts on our CVs and publication lists
[This call is available at the EPrints website:
http://www.eprints.org/software/cfp.php . Please excuse multiple
postings. On the other hand, please feel free to distribute this call
through your normal channels.]
CALL FOR PLUGINS FOR EPRINTS REPOSITORIES
Developers are warmly invited to create
I feel sure that I must have missed something crucial that is being
argued over, but I can't see what it is.
We all seem to be agreed that Budapest/Bethesda/Berlin Open Access
entails the broadest permission to reuse research articles. The
problem seems to be that some publishers are using the
OPEN REPOSITORIES 2008: CALL FOR PAPERS PANELS
http://www.openrepositories.org/2008
Repositories are being deployed in a variety of settings (research,
scholarship, learning, science, cultural heritage) and across a range
of scales (subject, national, regional, institutional, project, lab,
I think that Southampton** is quietly confident that if you can talk
up Open Access while actually achieving the metadata deposits as an
embedded institutional process, then the final stage of document
deposit will be relatively painless to achieve. If you ask them
whether they would have planned
It occurred to me that it is rather bizarre behaviour to go to the
trouble of exporting ISI bibliographic metadata about my publications
solely to measure the effectiveness or shortcomings of my
repository. Much better by far to import that list into my repository
to top up my missing articles
On 2 Oct 2007, at 06:56, N. Miradon wrote:
I thank Professor Harnad for his long and detailed reply.
Meanwhile, I have received some results from a random spidering of
staff
publication lists at
http://www.civil.soton.ac.uk/staff/allstaff/staffpubs.asp?NameID=
Here are the first
On 30 Jun 2005, at 22:43, Tim Gray, Libray Assistant, Homerton
College, Cambridge wrote:
Incidentally, what percentage of all UK peer-reviewed research is
funded by
RCUK? Would this percentage then be the percentage of *all* peer-
reviwed UK
research available via OA funded post 1st October
Usually it's New Scientist that picks these stories up (they have
grown-up physicists working for them), and indeed the BBC ran a story
based on an arxiv preprint (hep-th/0501068) in March 2005(http://
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4357613.stm) . So it's not the first,
but I can't find any other
On 21 May 2005, at 03:28, David Goodman wrote:
I'm just commenting on one key part of the exchange,
where I disagree with both parties:
I think I disagree that we disagree!
The life sciences have already moved beyond the need to read a word
document on a local website
I definitely agree
there is no technical barrier
against Wellcome's policy working with Institutions.
Finally, I hope that Robert will accept an invitation to visit the
EBank project and to discuss the nature of scientific communication
and the advantage that our respective repositories can offer scientists.
---
Dr Leslie Carr
Are you forgetting Scotland? All of the Universities have signed up
to OA there. The only issue is whether Scotland is a country, a state
or a nation. I used to know once :-)
--
Les
PS I think a country is geographically defined, so Scotland may well
count.
On 14 May 2005, at 23:09, Stevan
On 23 Apr 2005, at 20:48, Stevan Harnad wrote:
Richard Poynder has written an -- as always -- thoughtful and
informative
article:
Richard Poynder, The role of digital rights management in Open
Access,
Indicare, April 22, 2005.
On 29 Mar 2005, at 06:09, Leif Laaksonen wrote:
Working for an IT organisation (CSC) that is supporting (computational)
research work and the Finnish university library computer system, it
always makes me smile when when someone makes the claim that an IT
service does not need more than a
To be fair to Ann Okerson, she did not state that institutional
archives (or repositories) are likely to be expensive, only that
respondents to her survey were concerned that was the case. Very little
of her article address Institutional Repositories, and the paragraphs
that did only suggested
On 26 Mar 2005, at 15:14, Franck Laloe wrote:
We now have a goood experience of this question at CCSD, since we have
run an archive for the CNRS (a French research institution) for a few
years. Actually, the cost of running an archive is not much; one
salary is needed to pay someone to check
The Berlin3 conference videos have now been edited and converted into
streaming MP4 format, suitable for the latest version of RealPlayer.
All media from the conference are available from
http://www.eprints.org/berlin3/program.html
As well as the reports from CNRS, DFG, CERN, INSERM, JISC and
On 15 Mar 2005, at 12:11, Michael Fraser wrote:
Just in case it's of interest, the Guardian has a short but effective
piece on the Scottish Declaration on Open Access
(http://scurl.ac.uk/WG/OATS/declaration.htm) -- 16 universties
committed
to institutional repositories (or a jointly-developed
On 13 Mar 2005, at 21:10, Stevan Harnad wrote:
Open Access is provided *by* researchers *for* researchers (and for
research progress and benefits).
Open Access, by this criterion, applies to Research Outputs (or
Researcher Outputs).
As a Computer Scientist, I automatically read peer
On 14 Mar 2005, at 04:16, David Goodman wrote:
What remains is the literally academic distinction you mention:
it cannot be listed on one's academic CV as published.
This is now as archaic as the structure of the academic world itself.
But it is that world (and no other) in which we are
, and the JISC
TARDis project, which has been investigating the technical, cultural and
academic issues which surround institutional repositories.
---
Leslie Carr
On Behalf of GNU EPrints and JISC TARDis project teams
On 13 Nov 2004, at 06:54, Rick Anderson wrote:
Look, obviously we're proceeding from a different set of definitions
here.
indubitably
My point is simply that the word publish has a real-world definition
that is far different from the artificially narrow one created by the
OA establishment.
On 7 Oct 2004, at 12:38, Brian Simboli wrote:
But: why not cut to the chase? Why stumble over some pocket change en
route to picking up the one thousand dollar bill that lies ahead on the
sidewalk? Why not directly engage in infrastructural initiatives that
will concurrently resolve access,
It was very interesting to see some publishers' reactions to OA 1 2
at a meeting I attended recently. The discussion I was present for came
down clearly on the side of Open Archives as a preferable (and stable)
way forward, even describing it as a safety valve on an overheated
system. My
On 18 Nov 2003, at 13:28, Stevan Harnad wrote:
What is the actual percentage of withdrawals in the 12-years span of
250,000 papers self-archived in http://www.arxiv.org
And what actually was the reason behind there withdrawals?
Below is a manual analysis of the 399 which depends on my
On 17 Nov 2003, at 20:42, Stevan Harnad wrote:
I have to admit that this is the first I've ever heard of any papers
being removed from Arxiv for copyright reasons.
Me too. There are 11 entries across the whole *physics* archive which
have any comments about copyright: 9 are mentions of
[This message contains some long quotes. Please bear with me!]
At 10:20 16/02/2003 -0500, Dempsey,Lorcan commented on Les Carr's comment:
The Open in OAIS comes from the fact that the standard is open (the
archives may be closed), whereas OAI and BOAI assume open distribution
of metadata
The latest paper (with many of the prior citations) appears to be
Use of citation analysis to predict the outcome of the 2001 Research
Assessment Exercise for Unit of Assessment (UoA) 61: Library and
Information Management available at
http://informationr.net/ir/6-2/paper103.html
Les Carr
---
At 15:57 26/07/2002 +0100, Tim Chown wrote:
...what's the best way to get the institutions engaged?
You may be interested in the TARDIS project we are just starting up at
Southampton. Funded by JISC in the UK, its objective is to examine ways of
achieving cultural and institutional change in
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Declan Butler wrote:
As metadata are expensive to create - it is estimated that tagging
papers with even minimal metadata can add as much as 40% to costs
For what purpose is the metadata? Minimal retrieval metadata (title, author,
date) is different from minimal
89 matches
Mail list logo
