On 5-Oct-04, at 7:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Good luck will arrive when all archives are full of all articles on LH, FSH, etc.and it could be today. Do you think that this researcher can wait that we have resolved all promised problems for to-morrow ? Remember those who have nothing and please consider filling archives first.
To me, there is no inherent conflict between the need to address access and the need to address preservation. For example, I am completely in favor of moving immediately to open access - both OA publishing and developing and filling institutional repositories as quickly as possible - while other issues, such as preservation, are figured out, at the same time. Discussing other issues of importance in relation to scholarly communications does not mean that one is proposing any delay in moving to OA. For example, as universities develop their institutional repositories, most will likely develop policies for the IR at the same time. These policies may well be revised later, but the major policy development work is likely to occur at the outset. There are other questions to consider besides access, and preservation is one of these. The difference between discussing these in public and not discussing these in public is that the former course makes it easy for those doing this work to discover a range of potential views and approaches, while the latter forces each to proceed independently. For this reason, I would suggest that discussing other needs of scholarly communication, such as access, expedites the process of developing institutional repositories. cheers, Heather G. Morrison Project Coordinator BC Electronic Library Network ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Phone: 604-268-7001 Fax: 604-291-3023 Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.eln.bc.ca
