ver.sigmaxi.org]
On Behalf Of Sally Morris (Morris Associates)
Sent: Friday, 10 October 2008 12:45 AM
To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org
Subject: Re: [AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM] Brisbane
declaration on Open Access (fwd)
Perhaps it's worth just pointi
17
To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org
Subject: Re: Brisbane declaration on Open Access (fwd)
This declaration has got swallowed up amongst the c**P that has
polluted this forum in the last days. May I tease out a few strands
of the Brisbane Declaration for readers of the
This declaration has got swallowed up amongst the c**P that has
polluted this forum in the last days. May I tease out a few strands
of the Brisbane Declaration for readers of the list, as a person who
was at the OAR Conference in Brisbane.
1. The Declaration was adopted on the voices at the C
On 9-Oct-08, at 7:37 AM, Peter D. Mosses wrote:
> Could you clarify the following point:
>
>> 5. At the same time, it was widely recognized that publishers' pdfs
>> ("Versions of Record") were not the preferred version of an article to
>> hold in a repository, primarily because a pdf is a print-b
Cross-Posted
-- Forwarded message --
List-Post: goal@eprints.org
List-Post: goal@eprints.org
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 12:11:58 +1000
From: Tom Cochrane
To: "peters -- earlham.edu" ,
'Stevan Harnad' , Alma Swan
Subject: Brisbane declaration on Open Access
Dear Stevan,Peter,Alma
