It might be possible to take this distinction into account in our data analysis - thanks for the suggestion
Sally NOTE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS - PLEASE UPDATE YOUR RECORDS. THANKS! Sally Morris, Chief Executive Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK Phone: +44 (0)1903 871686 Fax: +44 (0)1903 871457 E-mail: [email protected] ALPSP Website http://www.alpsp.org Our journal, Learned Publishing, is included in the ALPSP Learned Journals Collection, www.alpsp-collection.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leslie Chan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 12:01 AM Subject: Re: Open Access Does Not require Republishing and Reprinting Rights > If we agree that the goal of open access is to maximize research impact, > then are you suggesting that the two definitions of open access will have > differential results on research impact? Clearly we need some empirical data > and it is simply too early to tell. For now, I prefer to see the BMC and > PLOS definition as the deluxe model, while the one clearly enunciated by > Stevan as the economy model. Both will get us from point A to point B, but > not everyone could travel in first class. For low impact journals, > particularly those originating from developing countries, the economy mode > will do fine.
