On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Sally Morris (Morris Associates) <[email protected]> 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
