On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Sally Morris (Morris Associates)
<sally_at_morris-assocs.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Setting aside for the moment all arguments about who should do
> what with which versions, it would be an excellent idea if all players
> started using the standard terminology for different article versions,
> as advocated by NISO - see http://www.niso.org/publications/rp/.
>
> The term 'postprint' is particularly confusing, and should be
> abandoned forthwith, IMHO!
One wonders whose interests it would serve if we were to act in
accordance with Sally's HO: the worldwide research community's or the
worldwide publisher community's (including NISO's)?
"Preprint" means the unrefereed draft of a paper and "Postprint" means
the refereed draft (accepted for publication).
http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/self-faq/#What-is-Eprint
"Postprint" covers both the author's final, accepted draft and the
publisher's proprietary PDF. But, as I pointed out -- and that was the
whole point of my posting -- for purposes of research and researcher
usage, the critical watershed is peer review: The postprint is
anything past that watershed. Further distinctions among postprints
are irrelevant to Open Access as well as to questions about citation:
Cite the published work, and access whichever postprint you can access.
Dixit.
Stevan Harnad
Received on Tue Sep 30 2008 - 19:39:21 BST