On 2012-02-16, at 11:28 PM, LIBLICENSE wrote: > From: Sally Morris on Liblicence > Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:28:18 +0000 > > Unless you also provide the date when you read it, people may not know > whether a correction/retraction/whatever had been appended to the VoR at > that time?
Date/Version read is helpful, feasible, advisable -- but a straightforward matter of scholarly practice (which will not be decided on the liblicense Forum!). My comments are only about the bearing of the versions question on OA and OA mandates. In particular: "Is accessing, quoting and citing the author's refereed, revised, accepted final draft good enough for scholars and scientists when they are denied access to the publisher's version-of-record, because they or their institution cannot afford subscription/license/pay-per-view access?" The answer is a resounding, unambiguous, unequivocal "YES". All the rest is irrelevant, and just equivocation or question-begging. Stevan Harnad _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
