Re: OA mandate from the US National Center for Atmospheric Research

From: Klaus Graf <klausgraf_at_GOOGLEMAIL.COM>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 22:26:58 +0200

Professor Harnad is defining the reality according his wishes once more.

2009/10/17 Stevan Harnad <amsciforum_at_gmail.com>:
>> is "institutional repository" in this press release a
>> complete misnomer? OpenSky will be a multi-institution, *disciplinary*
>> repository, not so? Unless they are planning selective OAI-PMH
>> harvesting from IRs, which isn't how I read the release.
>
> The relevant distinction is institutional vs central repository,

The authoritative list of OA disciplinary repositories is

http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Disciplinary_repositories

There is absolutely no need to have one "central repository" for each
discipline (like arxiv).

Professor Harnad is ignoring the fact that

* most universities have no repository

* most researchers are not affiliated to an institution with an repository.

"An estimated 185,000 people were employed as active researchers in
the UK during 2006-07, of which
around 94,000 were in the business sector, 82,000 in higher education
and 9,500 in
government" (Houghton et al., p. 139)
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/rpteconomicoapublishing.pdf

This means that one cannot exclude non-university-affiliated
researchers from OA deliberations.

Klaus Graf
Received on Sat Oct 17 2009 - 22:29:28 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:49:58 GMT