[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Fwd: The future of PubScience??]

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]