Re: Publisher's requirements for links from published articles

From: Jean KEMPF <jkempf_at_mail.univ-lyon2.fr>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:01:16 +0200

Just a little side comment on the exhange between Stephen and Jean-Claude.

I think that when taking the broad view they really disagree. Stephen's "method" and rationale for quotes makes great sense (physical work vs location of work, title/paragraph quote).
HOWEVER, there are two points that need addressing:

1) Political (or strategic if you prefer). In order to convince scholars to come to OA, we must pay great attention to the differences between the cultures of the various disciplines. Those are not static, granted, but they are well entrenched and sometimes for good reasons (not all scholars are conservative fools). If they are not respected or at least addressed proactively, no chance of winning some departments over to OA. And page number citation is not simply a "residual Gutenberg compulsion" as Stephen puts it.

2) Epistemological. Many documents do (and will) exist in two physical forms (because of a growing tendency in HSS to publish electronically AND PoD). In this case the UR version (the quoted one) must remain the printed one and thus one (still) needs to refer to the folio (page number).

Jean Kempf
Universite de Lyon, France
Received on Fri Apr 25 2008 - 16:56:37 BST