On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, [iso-8859-1] David Cahill wrote:
> Chris,
> sounds like an excellent idea. Some things you might want to deal with,
> based on my own experience establishing an archive here at NUI
> Maynooth:
>
> * A summary of the techncial issues in "manager-speak". One thing I've
> noticed is that management don't realy seem aware of what's invloved
> (technically) in setting up an archive, how it works, or how long it
> takes. It might be worth giving some kind of summary of these issues,
> at least so managers will have some idea of who to hire, how to
> schedule the project, etc.
Good idea.
> * Copyright. This is one of the most common issues I've been asked
> about. I know Prof Harnad has written some comebacks for this one, but
> some more information/reassurance might be useful:) This definetely
> strikes me as one of the trickier issues involved.
We will put some relevant, reassuring information about copyright in
there, and point to other sources.
> * Getting people to use the damn thing:) As you say, this is the main
> obstacle to setting up an archive. One thing that has struck me is the
> lack of concrete backup for all the vague assurances I've been handing
> out about increased exposure, readership, etc. The OAI is a great idea,
> but in practical terms, what good is it currently doing? I know that
> might seem a bit cynical, but other than the experimental ARC service,
> I haven't really seen any examples of the 'value-added' aspect of the
> OAI. I'm well aware the system is in an embryonic stage, but that's not
> going to be much use when persuading hard-pressed academics to submit
> their papers. Fortunately no one has actually raised this question yet,
> but when they do, I'm not sure what I'll be able to say.
> It might be worth devoting some space in the handbook to this topic, as
> the OAI would appear to be one of the main selling points of the
> archive system as a whole.
There are several articles published on how open access enhance
visibility and impact:
Lawrence, S. (2001a) Online or Invisible? Nature 411 (6837): 521.
http://www.neci.nec.com/~lawrence/papers/online-nature01/
Lawrence, S. (2001b) Free online availability substantially increases a
paper's impact. Nature Web Debates.
http://www.nature.com/nature/debates/e-access/Articles/lawrence.html
Odlyzko, A.M. (2002) The rapid evolution of scholarly communication."
Learned Publishing 15: 7-19
http://rosina.catchword.com/vl=11319436/cl=24/fm=docpdf/nw=1/rpsv/catchword/alpsp/09531513/v15n1/s2/p7
http://www.si.umich.edu/PEAK-2000/odlyzko.pdf
The handbook will describe and cite these and others, but don't imagine
that mere descriptions of quantitative benefits will be enough to fill
the university archives. An active university policy will need to be
implemented:
"How can an institution facilitate the filling of its Eprint Archives?"
http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/#institution-facilitate-filling
> * Maintenance + support. I know this is verging on a technical issue,
> but another question that pops up pretty often is the issue of support
> - how much work is it going to take to keep the thing going? -
> including both technical and editorial work, etc. Some kind of general
> discussion of the issues involved could be useful.
This will be provided. CogPrints is an example, as it has been up for
several years now. Chris can say how much sysad-time it needs to keep up,
and I can say how much input vetting it needs (very little).
Stevan Harnad
> That's all I can think of offhand.
> Cheers,
>
> David Cahill
> NUI Maynooth Library.
>
>
>
> --- ePrints Support <eprints-support_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Hi, We've been given some funding for a colleague of mine to write
> > some more (better?!) documentation for eprints.
> >
> > The provisional plan is to aim this at the project manager and leave
> > me doing the technical documentation still.
> >
> > I think there is a real need for a guide to setting up an
> > institutional
> > archive as there are so many recurring (non technical) issues and
> > problems
> > which we've encountered - policy, metadata decisions, getting people
> > to fill
> > the damn data etc.
> >
> > I think it would be most useful if it has an eprints bias, but deals
> > with
> > the general process of setting up an archive (eprints or otherwise).
> >
> > So what I'm asking is for suggestions and comments really. This would
> > in effect be the "eprints-underground" manual, rather than the
> > current
> > one which could be considered the "eprints-tech" documentation.
> >
> > -chris
> >
> > --
> >
> > Christopher Gutteridge
> > eprints-support_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk
> > ePrints2 Coder, Support and Stuff +44 23 8059 4833
> >
Received on Tue Jun 18 2002 - 15:37:42 BST