On 13 Mar 2005, at 21:10, Stevan Harnad wrote:
> Open Access is provided *by* researchers *for* researchers (and for
> research progress and benefits).
Open Access, by this criterion, applies to Research Outputs (or
Researcher Outputs).
As a Computer Scientist, I automatically read "peer reviewed journal"
as "peer reviewed (journal/conference/workshop/symposium)", because
that's the convention of my discipline, where a
conference/workshop/symposium is a "peer review service provider".
I believe that Stevan does not mean to bar this reading, as he himself
used it in public at the Berlin-3 conference.
>> On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, Jean-Claude Guedon wrote:
>> And, by the way, what does "publishing" really mean?
> We can philosophize or even legalize about that if we like.
Oh good. Let's take this back to researchers again. Since we know that
they must "publish or perish" we might be able to say that
"publishing" is an activityt that will make "a researcher" somewhat
less likely to perish. In some disciplines putting a working paper on
the Web will suffice, in others getting a full page peer-reviewed
spread in Nature is needed to stay the executioner's hand.
---
Les Carr
Received on Sun Mar 13 2005 - 22:26:17 GMT