[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
[Fwd: The future of PubScience??]
- To: Multiple recipients of list <epc-l@iucr.org>
- Subject: [Fwd: The future of PubScience??]
- From: Howard Flack <Howard.Flack@cryst.unige.ch>
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 10:25:09 +0100 (BST)
Il s'agit d'un message multivolet au format MIME. --Boundary_(ID_Jxf2spNu32CnKq+qr3DGhA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT -- Howard Flack http://www.unige.ch/crystal/ahdf/Howard.Flack.html --Boundary_(ID_Jxf2spNu32CnKq+qr3DGhA) Content-type: message/rfc822 Return-path: <owner-icsti-l@DTIC.MIL> Received: from kilo.unige.ch (kilo.unige.ch [129.194.8.26]) by mbx.unige.ch (PMDF V6.1-1 #38753) with ESMTP id <0H1I0019G405D7@mbx.unige.ch> for flack@mail.cryst.unige.ch (ORCPT howard.flack@CRYST.UNIGE.CH); Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:00:05 +0200 (MEST) Received: from DIRECTORY-DAEMON.kilo.unige.ch by kilo.unige.ch (PMDF V6.1-1 #38753) id <0H1I00B01404IK@kilo.unige.ch> for flack@mail.cryst.unige.ch (ORCPT howard.flack@CRYST.UNIGE.CH); Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:00:04 +0200 (MEST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.kilo.unige.ch by kilo.unige.ch (PMDF V6.1-1 #38753) id <0H1I00B01403HZ@kilo.unige.ch> for howard.flack@CRYST.UNIGE.CH; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:00:04 +0200 (MEST) Received: from list.dtic.mil (list.dtic.mil [131.84.105.11]) by kilo.unige.ch (PMDF V6.1-1 #38753) with ESMTP id <0H1I0095Y402L0@kilo.unige.ch> for howard.flack@CRYST.UNIGE.CH; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:00:03 +0200 (MEST) Received: from list (list.dtic.mil [172.16.105.11]) by list.dtic.mil (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RBxSQ13248; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:59:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DTIC.MIL by DTIC.MIL (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 18541 for ICSTI-L@DTIC.MIL; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:59:28 -0400 Received: from dtics22.dtic.mil (dtics22.dtic.mil [131.84.1.29]) by list.dtic.mil (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with SMTP id g7RBonQ12219 for <icsti-l@dtics22.dtic.mil>; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:50:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mails.dtic.mil ([131.84.1.19]) by dtics22.dtic.mil (NAVGW 2.5.1.15) with SMTP id M2002082707504727330 for <icsti-l@dtics22.dtic.mil>; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:50:47 -0400 Received: from mail05.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (mail05.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net [159.134.118.21]) by mails.dtic.mil (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2/990419cac) with SMTP id g7RBong05551 for <icsti-l@dtic.mil>; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 07:50:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 14216 messnum 302515 invoked from network[159.134.209.35/p35.as1.bantry1.eircom.net]); Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:50:47 +0000 Received: from p35.as1.bantry1.eircom.net (HELO your-z3mdcejeuo) (159.134.209.35) by mail05.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 14216) with SMTP; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:50:47 +0000 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:55:00 +0100 From: Barry Mahon <mahons1@EIRCOM.NET> Subject: Re: The future of PubScience?? In-reply-to: <DAA8A5679EFBFF4FBD4E6E0B5C16F3EE7AEE1B@exmail.CSA.COM> Sender: ICSTI-L list <ICSTI-L@DTIC.MIL> Approved-by: crandall@DTIC.MIL To: ICSTI-L@DTIC.MIL Reply-to: mahons1@EIRCOM.NET Message-id: <IGCAGE4ZO5ZCAC009QP98RQHGUT7EC.3d6b3e64@your-z3mdcejeuo> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Opera 6.04 build 1135 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Comments: To: "McGinty, Jim" <jmcginty@CSA.com> X-Comment: This message was scanned against viruses by kilo.unige.ch. 16/08/2002 21:46:22, "McGinty, Jim" <jmcginty@CSA.com> wrote: PubScience also duplicated much of CSA .I would like to see the small journal publisher in PubScience that is not covered in in CSA , Ovid , ISI , Science Direct , Wilson , the list goes on . The day it came to being almost three years it was in direct competition many A@I services. Barry. Give me a call and I can brief you on why more 18 for profit and not for profit companies were so against the pubscience initiative . > Apropos, an input from Stevan Harnad on this subject. Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 17:30:19 +0100 From: Stevan Harnad <harnad@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Momentum for Eprint Archiving On Sun, 25 Aug 2002, Richard Stallman wrote: I saw your note about supporting PubSCIENCE; if the situation is what I think it is, I wonder if supporting PubSCIENCE is really going far enough. > >From what I can see, PubSCIENCE is just an index--it does not contain the papers themselves. To read them, you must subscribe to some journal's site. (Please correct me if I am wrong. > Contrast that with the arXiv site, which contains (for the fields it covers) the actual text of papers, openly accessible to all. That is what scholars really should have. > In fields covered by the arXiv, I don't see how PubSCIENCE does any good. Why not use the arXiv instead? In other fields, while PubSCIENCE is better than nothing, what people really need is something like the arXiv. > What do you think of this point? Is there some important factor I am missing? Far from missing the point, Richard Stallman has put his finger right on the heart of the matter: (1) Another gateway pointing to paid access to full-text research is not really what is urgently needed at this time. What is needed is open access to those full texts (20,000 peer-reviewed journals-worth, across all disciplines, 2 million new articles per year). (2) The Physics Eprint Archive, (http://arxiv.org) -- in which any physicist worldwide can self-archive his preprints and postprints -- already provides open access to a growing portion of this full-text literature in many branches of physics. (3) What is needed is more Eprint Archives so that researchers in all disciplines can self-archive their research -- all annual 2 million papers. (4) The Physics Eprint Archive is growing, but not fast enough. At the unchanging linear rate at which it has been growing for 10 years, it will be another 10 years before all annual physics research is being self-archived therein. http://arXiv.org/show_monthly_submissions (5) My own hunch as to why centralized, discipline-based self-archiving is not growing faster is that the discipline as a whole is the wrong entity for motivating and sustaining self-archiving and open access across disciplines and around the world. (6) The entity sharing the same interests in open access as the researcher visibility, accessibility, uptake, citations, research impact, and the further funding, prestige and rewards that they bring) is the researcher's institution, not the researcher's discipline. http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/#institution-facilitate-filling (7) What is needed is distributed, institution-based Eprints Archives integrated and made interoperable by compliance with the Open Archives Initiative OAI Meta-data harvesting protocol http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/guidelines.htm along the lines described in SPARC's recent position paper http://www.arl.org/sparc/IR/ir.html (8) That is why Southampton University has created the eprints.org software for generating immediate OAI-compliant institutional Eprint Archives (available free to all institutions under Richard Stallman's GNU license) http://software.eprints.org/ (9) That is also why Tim Brody created citebase, the scientometric OAI search engine for citation-linking, navigating, ranking and analyzing the open access literature on the basis of classical and novel online measures of research impact: http://citebase.eprints.org/cgi-bin/search (10) And that is also the basis of the Budapest Open Access Initiative's Strategy 1 (self-archiving) http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml and the many concurrent efforts ongoing worldwide at this very moment in order to facilitate and promote universal self-archiving: http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2212.html Stevan Harnad --Boundary_(ID_Jxf2spNu32CnKq+qr3DGhA)--
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Prev by Date: [Fwd: SPARC Manual]
- Next by Date: [Fwd: FYI: Open Forum on Metadata Registries]
- Prev by thread: [Fwd: The future of PubScience??]
- Next by thread: [Fwd: ICSU-TWAS-WFEO event at Science Forum, WSSD.]
- Index(es):