News from the open access movementJump to navigation
I just mailed the May issue of the SPARC Open Access Newsletter. This issue takes a close look at open access tracking project (OATP), a collaborative tagging effort to capture new OA developments comprehensively and in real time. The round-up section briefly notes 151 OA developments from April.
The Open Access Directory (OAD) has opened a set of lists on the Open access tracking project (OATP) for community editing. OATP is the collaborative tagging project I launched in beta about two weeks ago. The new OAD page will function as the project home page.
The May issue of SOAN, to mail later today, will include a longer introduction to the project.
Three journals have joined Revues.org recently; each is OA:
María del Rosario Tissera, Repositorios institucionales en bibliotecas académicas, apparently a pre-print, self-archived April 30, 2009. English abstract:
Starting from the concept and current functioning of academic libraries, there is a planning to adherence to the open access international movement to digital files, installed as repositories via Internet to allow free access to intellectual production of a discipline or an institution or several consortia libraries in order to increase the visibility and accessibility to information produced at universities. There are some examples of institutional repositories offered by consortia libraries of Spain and North America, as well as Latin America and Argentina. Considering some barriers faced by institutions, publishers and authors to the creation of digital repositories offers some basic guidelines for their training.
Christian Zimmermann, RePEc Author Service now 20,000 strong, The RePEc Blog, April 30, 2009.
David Weinberger, Pros and cons of the Google book deal, KM World, May 1, 2009. Excerpt:
Bill Hooker, Open Access, copyright transfer and NC licensing: caveat emptor! Open Reading Frame, May 1, 2009. Excerpt:
The Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science (EPTCS) is a new OA repository of refereed conference proceedings in CS. See yesterday's announcement. (Thanks to Michael Greenburg.) From the site:
Harnessing open innovation, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, May 2009. Accessible only to subscribers. (Thanks to Garrett Eastman.) Excerpt:
See also our past posts on AWS:
See also our past posts on the Oriental Institute.
Open Database License (ODbL) v1.0 Release Candidate Available, Open Data Commons, April 29, 2009. Excerpt:
Heather Morrison, Donald Taylor, Andrew Waller, and Devon Greyson, Open Access in Canada - Overview and Update, four slide presentation at the BC Library Conference 2009 (Burnaby, April 16-18, 2009). (Thanks to ResourceShelf.)
Yassine Gargouri and Stevan Harnad are measuring how OA mandates affect the OA citation advantage. They've posted two docs with preliminary versions of their findings (1, 2). Here's Stevan's summary, by email:
India's National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR) has converted four more of its 17 journals to OA and plans to convert the rest this summer. Details from Subbiah Arunachalam:
Philip Davis, Paying for Open Access Publication Charges, Scholarly Kitchen, April 30, 2009. Excerpt:
Comment. Davis is right that universities launching these funds should be designing procedures to deal with appeals and conflicts. If the demand on the funds is low today, it may grow steadily over time, just as the number of funds continues to grow. He has raised these issues before (1, 2), and I responded to an earlier version this way:
Harvard computer scientist Michael Mitzenmacher reports that the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) does not accept Harvard's author addendum and asks Harvard authors to seek a waiver from the school's OA mandate. In a clarification sent to Mizenmacher's colleague, Salil Vadhan, the ACM explained that it does allow OA archiving in the Harvard repository but does not allow all the reuse rights required by the Harvard addendum. The ACM and Harvard's Office of Scholarly Communication are discussing the matter. See Mitzenmacher's post, The ACM Does NOT Support Open Access, My Biased Coin, April 29, 2009.
Stevan Harnad underscores the ACM clarification: that the ACM journals are green and allow author-initiated preprint and postprint archiving. See his post, APA Kerfuffle Redux: No, ACM is NOT Anti-OA, Open Access Archivangelism, April 30, 2009.
Comment. I suspect that many publishers are like the ACM, either in permitting gratis but not libre OA archiving, or in permitting only a more limited form of libre archiving than Harvard would like. Hence, the result of the Harvard-ACM discussions should have wider application.
Update (5/1/09). See the second installment of Stevan Harnad's comments. Excerpt:
Ola Rosling, Adding search power to public data, Official Google Blog, April 28, 2009.
See also Google's Information for public data publishers:
Update. See also coverage by Nextgov:
Robert Kiley, American Psychological Association develops Wellcome-compliant OA option, UK PubMed Central Blog, April 28, 2009.
James Boyle, What the information superhighways aren’t built of..., Financial Times, April 17, 2009. (Thanks to Lawrence Lessig.)
Charles Bailey, Seven ARL Libraries Face Major Planned or Potential Budget Cuts, DigitalKoans, April 28, 2009. Excerpt:
PS: I've argued that the recession will have mixed results for OA, but will strengthen the case for it.
Comment. At first glance Alpha looks like any other free search engine. But it returns direct answers, sometimes with graphs of relevant data, not just links to pages which might contain answers. I'm looking forward to its launch next month. This kind of service --from humans or machines-- is what I meant (in an article last summer) by solving the last-mile problem for knowledge.
Brian Blank, Copyright Battle Looms for Docs Who 'Grew Up Google', ABC News, April 22, 2009. Excerpt:
Mike Rossner, A challenge to Goliath, Journal of Experimental Medicine, April 27, 2009. An editorial. Rossner is the Executive Director of Rockefeller University Press, and this editorial appeared in the latest issues of all three RUP journals --Journal of Cell Biology, Journal of Experimental Medicine, and the Journal of General Physiology. Excerpt:
Peter Murray-Rust, Open Chemistry Data at NIST, A Scientist and the Web, April 24, 2009.
The US Senate has confirmed Kathleen Sebelius as the new US Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Comment. Here's a bit of what I said when President Obama nominated her in February:
Peter Murray-Rust, BioIT in Boston: What is Open?, A Scientist and the Web, April 27, 2009.
Update. See also Where do we get Semantic Open Data?.
Daniel Cull, Exclusive: Interview with E-Conservation, Dan Cull Weblog, April 27, 2009. Interview with Rui Bordalo of e-conservation magazine.
A Medical Journal for the World's Health Priorities, PLoS Medicine Editors, editorial, April 28, 2009. See also the press release:
In discussing the vote at the University of Maryland, Philip Davis makes this claim:
PS: SCOAP3 produced an FAQ for US libraries back in 2007. The new FAQ is an update of the old one, and CERN's links now point to the new edition.
The Globethics.net Library and the Open Access Movement, Globethics.net Newsletter, April 2009. An editorial. Excerpt:
Tíscar Lara, El papel de la Universidad en la construcción de su identidad digital, Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento, 6, 1 (2009). In Spanish but with this English-language abstract:
Lisa J. Rogers, Simon Hodson, and Roddy MacLeod, Transforming Current Awareness through RSS: How two projects (ticTOCs and Gold Dust) are using RSS to improve the information landscape for the 21st century researcher, a presentation at the European Library Automation Group Conference (ELAG 09), University Library in Bratislava, April 22-24, 2009.
We've blogged the fact that President Obama named OA supporters Harold Varmus and Eric Lander to co-chair the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), with John Holdren.
PS: I haven't had time to check the OA records of the 17 new names. If anyone else has the time and makes a notable discovery, please drop me a line.
The Biosciences Federation has released a statement (April 14, 2009) in support of last month's report from Universities UK and the Research Information Network on Paying for open access publication charges. In particular, it supports the recommendations that universities launch funds to pay publication fees and that funding agencies clarify when they will pay publication fees.
Bioalma Announces Full-Text Search Capabilities From Open Access Journals Through novo|seek, press release, April 27, 2009.
See also our past post on novo|seek.
Abhishek Tiwari, Citation Trend Line For PLoS Journals, Fisheye Perspective, April 25, 2009.
Thanks to Don Troop in the Chronicle of Higher Education, who offers this background:
Comment. This isn't the human genome project. What's blogworthy here is not the value of the content for research (though historians and anthropologists should take a look), but Bailey's realization that he had no reason to keep his offline database to himself and that others might enjoy it. Sometimes you need to hear a strong argument. But sometimes it's enough just to ask, "why not OA?"
BTW, not a single institution in the database uses the word "sharing" in its tagline.
Barbara Kirsop, Reassuring Open Access-waverers, EPT, April 27, 2009. Excerpt:
Here's an editorial from the UMaryland student paper in response: Free at last, free at last, Diamondback Online, April 27, 2009. Excerpt:
Comment. The editorial is right to criticize the Senate vote and point out that OA articles are cited more often than non-OA articles. (Antelman's study was not the first to show this effect, which has been confirmed by many other studies.) But the editorial makes one of the same mistakes as the Senate it criticizes: overlooking green OA (through repositories) in order to focus on gold OA (through journals). The Senate resolution would have encouraged both, but the editorial only mentions the gold OA provision. Most faculty opposition, likewise, seems to have focused on the gold OA provision. (See my comments on the vote.) In summarizing the Harvard policy, the editorial leaves the false impression that it too focuses more on gold OA than green OA ("The transition to publishing academic research in free online journals may not yet be a done deal, but the shift has begun....") But the reverse is true. The Harvard policy focuses on green OA more than gold OA. It's about depositing peer-reviewed journal articles in OA repositories even when they were not published in OA journals. I suspect there would have been less contention at the Maryland Senate meeting, and fewer negative votes, if the proposal had been closer to Harvard's green OA policy and if faculty had understood that it is entirely compatible with the freedom to submit work to the journals of one's choice.