Budapest Open Access Initiative      

Budapest Open Access Initiative: BOAI Forum Archive

[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [prev] [next] [options] [help]

boaiforum messages

[BOAI] Re: Harnad Comments on Proposed HEFCE/REF Green Open Access Mandate

From: "Andras Holl" <holl AT konkoly.hu>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:05:33 +0100


Threading: [BOAI] Harnad Comments on Proposed HEFCE/REF Green Open Access Mandate from amsciforum AT gmail.com
      • This Message


Nick,

Small, independent, innovative OA journals do not get the credit they would 
deserve -
I am partial, because I have my "own" journal - and often left out of 
considerations.
They are not green, but not "professional" gold either. They might 
not get IFs,
in spite of their (measurable) quality, success and impact. They are not 
represented
properly (that's what I feel) by OASPA either.

Andras Holl

On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 17:47:27 +1100, Nick Thieberger wrote
> Steven,
> 
> Our example is of a small OA journal, now in its seventh year. We have 
pioneered publishing primary language material to accompany linguistic articles 
and locate all our collection in a DSpace repository with handles. Our funding 
is scraped together and covers student GAships for copy-editing and page layout 
of articles. Our reach is excellent and can always be improved, but we use 
download statistics to emulate an impact factor. In your model, author download 
statistics will be split between the OA journal's site and the home 
institution's repository. My University repository allows us to have a full 
citation that points to the OA article in the originating journal's repository 
and that would seem to be a good outcome for both your mandating institution 
and the struggling OA journal that needs to justify itself to its funders. I'm 
sorry that you think that an OA journal that is doing its best to keep 
producing free OA output is acting as a publisher with a 'publishers' imp
 ortunate nonsense'.
> 
> 
> Nick Thieberger
> 
> On 15 March 2013 08:00, Stevan Harnad <harnad AT ecs.soton.ac.uk> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2013-03-14, at 1:13 AM, Nick Thieberger <thien AT unimelb.edu.au> 
wrote:
> 
> But what if the article is in an OA journal that would like to have the 
hit count for
> downloads from its site? Is there scope for the mandate to cover only 
non-OA
> journal articles perhaps?
> 
> That would be an exceedingly bad solution, for authors, for their 
institutions
> for their research and for OA.
> 
> And institutions would lose a simple, natural, powerful and uniform way to 
monitor
> mandate compliance by their authors.
> 
> And what's more important: hit/download counts for authors, for their own 
articles,
> and for their institutions, or hit/download counts for publishers' 
sites?
> 
> But in any case there's a simple (though silly) compromise:
> 
> All articles (whether subscription or Gold, emargoed or not) must be 
immediately
> deposited in the author's institutional repository.
> 
> Where the author either wishes to comply with a non-OA publisher's embargo
> on Green OA, or with a Gold-OA publisher's desire to have hit/download 
counts
> for its site, access to the deposit need not be made OA (until the embargo
> elapses or until the author tires of accommodating publishers' importunate
> nonsense).
> 
> Stevan Harnad
> 
> 
> 
> Nick Thieberger
> Editor
> Language Documentation & Conservation Journal
> http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/ldc/
> 
> On 14 March 2013 11:16, Stevan Harnad <amsciforum AT gmail.com> 
wrote:
> Full Text: http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/994-.html
> 
> Executive Summary: The proposed HEFCE/REF Open Access [OA] mandate -- 
that in order to be eligible for REF, the peer-reviewed final draft of all 
journal articles must be deposited in the author’s institutional repository 
immediately upon publication, with embargoes applicable only to the date at 
which the article must be made OA – is excellent, and provides exactly the 
sort of complement required by the RCUK OA mandate. It ensures that authors 
deposit immediately and institutionally and it recruits their institutions to 
monitor and ensure compliance.
>       For journal articles, no individual or disciplinary exceptions 
or exemptions to the immediate-deposit are needed, but embargo length can be 
adapted to the discipline or even to exceptional individual cases.
>       Embargo length is even more important for open data, and 
should be carefully and flexibly adapted to the needs not only of disciplines 
and individuals, but of each individual research project.
>       Requiring monograph OA if the author does not wish to provide 
it is not reasonable, but perhaps many or most monograph authors would not mind 
depositing their texts as Closed Access.
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
> http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f
> 
> 
> 
> --      
> To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
> http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
> http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f
> 
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Andras Holl / Holl Andras                e-mail: holl AT konkoly.hu 
Konkoly Observatory / MTA CsFK CsI       Tel.: +36 1 3919368 Fax: +36 1 
2754668 
IT manager / Szamitastechn. rendszervez. Mail: H1525 POBox 67, Budapest, 
Hungary 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

ATTACHMENT: message.html!

-- To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page: http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f

[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [prev] [next] [options] [help]

 E-mail:  openaccess@soros.org .