> > Jennifer Vigil wrote:
> >
> > Our president would like to maintain a database of papers published by
> > authors at our Institute.
David Goodman wrote:
> Please note also that this is to be an internal network, and many
> publishers policies towards these are and have been considerably more
> liberal than their policies towards posting them on a site accessible to
> the public. I do not think the Romeo table makes that distinction,
> because at this point most people are concerned about general access; any
> publisher that permits this certainly also permits internal access. For
> the others, in my experience the best place to find the information is in
> the information for authors section of the publishers home page.
The Romeo list does indicate if a publisher only allows intranet
self-archiving, and such a publisher is (correctly) classified
as "gray" (i.e., as *not* yet having given the green light to
self-archiving). Giving the green light means giving the green light
to public self-archiving. That's what Open Access means: toll-free,
full-text access, webwide.
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/Romeo/romeo.html
An internal archive is an internal archive. It stretches credulity to
the breaking point to imagine that an institution would feel it needs to
ask for permission to make its own internal research output accessible
to its own internal users! It seems to me that nothing could be further
from the institutional library's classical preoccupation with securing
permissions for the use of the bought-in research output from *other*
institutions in such things as course-packs for an institution's own
students.
Stevan Harnad
Received on Sat Apr 17 2004 - 13:18:33 BST