[GOAL] Call for Papers (Deadline extension) - Special Track on Metadata Semantics for Open Repositories, Research Information Systems and Data Infrastructures
=== Apologies for cross-posting === CALL FOR PAPERS - DEADLINE EXTENDED (5th June) MTSR 2015 - Special Track on Metadata Semantics for Open Repositories, Research Information Systems and Data Infrastructures Part of the the 9th Metadata and Semantics Research Conference (MTSR 2015) http://www.mtsr-conf.org Aim and Scope -------------------- The sharing and re-use of research information is becoming an increasingly important aspect of scientific activity. Text publications are traditionally the main way of publishing research output and challenges still exist for their optimal recording and dissemination. Scientific communities increasingly recognise the immense significance of storing, discovering, processing, preserving and re-using data sets as well as other types of research objects like workflows and software. Furthermore, Public Sector Information, potentially valuable for research purposes, is provided openly by governments although not always in forms that enable re-use. Metadata is a critical factor in this area, actually providing the means to promote black-box digital files to discoverable and re-usable objects. Rich metadata about research output needs to be recorded and disseminated, including contextual and provenance information (for example, relationships of publications and data sets with people, organisations, funding information, facilities and equipment). For certain use cases, metadata needs to be uniformly accessed across research domains, to foster collaboration and re-use of data sets among different disciplines and vertical communities. However, the recording and utilisation of domain-specific information is also significant in many circumstances. A range of open research and technical issues have to be addressed towards these goals, while it is also recognised that international harmonisation on standards and technologies is of critical importance. The aim of this Special Track is to serve as a forum for experts to present recent results and experiences, establish liaisons with other groups and reflect on the state-of-the-art of metadata and semantic aspects of open repositories, research information systems and data infrastructures. Topics --------- Topics include but are not limited to contributions dealing with the following issues: - Metadata, knowledge representation and relevant standards in open access repositories, research information systems and research infrastructures - Semantic interoperability and information integration in open access repositories, research information systems and research infrastructures - Application of semantic web technologies in open access repositories, research information systems and research infrastructures - Data infrastructures (e.g. scientific data, public sector information) - Contextual and provenance metadata in open access repositories, research information systems and research infrastructures - Metadata interoperability for data infrastructures across disciplines - Metadata quality in open access repositories, research information systems and research infrastructures - Mechanisms, tools and infrastructures for shared services in open access repositories, research information systems and research infrastructures - Digital preservation workflows and mechanisms and impact on metadata - Value-added services based on open access repositories, research information systems and research infrastructures Important dates ----------------------- June 5th 2015: Paper submission deadline (EXTENDED) June 16th 2015: Acceptance/rejection notification June 30th 2015: Camera-ready papers due September 9th-11th 2015: Conference at Manchester Metropolitan University Submissions ---------------- Interested authors can submit to EasyChair (https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=mtsr2015 ) The following types of presentation are invited: - full papers (12 pages) reporting complete research - short papers (6 pages) presenting ongoing or preliminary research Papers should be original and not previously submitted to other Conferences or Journals. All submissions will be reviewed on the basis of relevance, originality, importance and clarity following a double-blind peer review process. Submitted papers have to follow the LNCS proceedings formatting style and guidelines. Authors of accepted papers will be asked to register to the Conference and present their work in the form of either oral presentation or poster presentation. The Conference welcomes Workshops and Tutorial on any issues concerning the main themes of MTSR such as metadata, ontologies, semantic Web, knowledge management, software engineering and digital libraries. Publication / Proceedings
[GOAL] OASPA Members Show Continued Growth in OA articles published with a CC BY license
The latest post on the OASPA blog shows the growth of CC BY articles in open access-only journals using data supplied by OASPA members up to the end of 2014. All of the figures are available for download which includes information on other licenses and on open access articles published by OASPA members in hybrid journals. This year we are also pleased to be able to include data showing growth of the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB). See http://oaspa.org/growth-of-oa-only-journals-using-a-cc-by-license/. -- Claire Redhead Membership Communications Manager Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, OASPA http://oaspa.org/ ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: OASPA Members Show Continued Growth in OA articles published with a CC BY license
Thank you for the numbers Claire and kudos to OASPA and its members - it is refreshing to see a strong open access publishing community. Critique It is important for OA advocacy to understand that OASPA is an organization composed of publisher members who have their own business interests. The emphasis on open-access only journals and journal-wide CC licenses illustrates the problem. There are still journals publishing in print and/or print and online. The majority of the world's peer-reviewed journals have a history that predates Creative Commons licensing; for these journals, journal-wide CC licenses would be difficult or impossible to achieve. In some ways, OASPA acts as a lobby organization for born-digital, born-open-access journals. That's fine. Everyone has a right to represent their own interests. However, it is important for everyone, especially OASPA members, to understand that this is what OASPA is doing, at least some of the time. My perspective is that the larger the corpus of CC-BY licensed works and the easier it is to identify them (e.g. if a robot can crawl the journals listed on DOAJ, search the metadata and retrieve all CC-BY items), the stronger the temptation is for the downstream commercial use actively invited by CC-BY licenses. CC, unlike OA, is not limited to works that are free-of-charge. Downstream services can be toll-access. For example, there is nothing in CC licenses that says that downstream users have to make their works reasonable available to those who made the original works possible. A downstream point-of-care health tool that draws from the CC-BY licensed works of medical researchers and funders in the developing world can be priced out of reach of the people in the developing world. A bit more on IJPE: http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.ca/2015/05/growth-in-cc-by-numbers-and-critique.html best, Heather Morrison On 2015-05-20, at 6:14 AM, Claire Redhead wrote: The latest post on the OASPA blog shows the growth of CC BY articles in open access-only journals using data supplied by OASPA members up to the end of 2014. All of the figures are available for download which includes information on other licenses and on open access articles published by OASPA members in hybrid journals. This year we are also pleased to be able to include data showing growth of the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB). See http://oaspa.org/growth-of-oa-only-journals-using-a-cc-by-license/. -- Claire Redhead Membership Communications Manager Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, OASPA http://oaspa.org/ ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Global coalition of organizations denounce Elsevier's new sharing policy
Please excuse the cross posting. For Immediate Release Wednesday, May 20, 2015 Contact: Ranit Schmelzer (SPARC) 202-538-1065 sparcme...@arl.org mailto:sparcme...@arl.org Katharina Müller (COAR) 49 551 39-22215 off...@coar-repositories.org mailto:off...@coar-repositories.org - NEW POLICY FROM ELSEVIER IMPEDES OPEN ACCESS AND SHARING Global coalition of organizations denounce the policy and urge Elsevier to revise it Washington, DC and Göttingen, Germany – Elsevier’s new sharing and hosting policy http://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-updates-its-policies-perspectives-and-services-on-article-sharing represents a significant obstacle to the dissemination and use of research knowledge, and creates unnecessary barriers for Elsevier published authors in complying with funders’ open access policies, according to an analysis by the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) and the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR). “Elsevier’s policy is in direct conflict with the global trend towards open access and serves only to dilute the benefits of openly sharing research results,” said Heather Joseph, Executive Director of SPARC and Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director of COAR, in a joint statement. “Elsevier claims that the policy advances sharing but in fact, it does the opposite. We strongly urge Elsevier to revise it.” The new stance marks a significant departure from Elsevier’s initial policy, established in 2004, which allowed authors to self-archive their final accepted manuscripts of peer-reviewed articles in institutional repositories without delay. While the stated purpose of the new revision is, in part, to roll back an ill-conceived 2012 amendment prohibiting authors at institutions that have adopted campus-wide Open Access policies from immediate self archiving, the net result of the new policy is that Elsevier has placed greater restrictions on sharing articles. Twenty-three groups today released the following statement in opposition to the policy: “On April 30, 2015, Elsevier announced a new sharing and hosting policy for Elsevier journal articles. This policy represents a significant obstacle to the dissemination and use of research knowledge, and creates unnecessary barriers for Elsevier published authors in complying with funders’ open access policies. In addition, the policy has been adopted without any evidence that immediate sharing of articles has a negative impact on publishers’ subscriptions. “Despite the claim by Elsevier that the policy advances sharing, it actually does the opposite. The policy imposes unacceptably long embargo periods of up to 48 months for some journals. It also requires authors to apply a non-commercial and no derivative works license for each article deposited into a repository, greatly inhibiting the re-use value of these articles. Any delay in the open availability of research articles curtails scientific progress and places unnecessary constraints on delivering the benefits of research back to the public. “Furthermore, the policy applies to all articles previously published and those published in the future making it even more punitive for both authors and institutions. This may also lead to articles that are currently available being suddenly embargoed and inaccessible to readers. “As organizations committed to the principle that access to information advances discovery, accelerates innovation and improves education, we support the adoption of policies and practices that enable the immediate, barrier free access to and reuse of scholarly articles. This policy is in direct conflict with the global trend towards open access and serves only to dilute the benefits of openly sharing research results. “We strongly urge Elsevier to reconsider this policy and we encourage other organizations and individuals to express their opinions.” The statement is available here https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/petition-against-elseviers-sharing-policy/ and we welcome others to show their support by also endorsing it. The statement has been signed by the following groups: COAR: Confederation of Open Access Repositories SPARC: Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition ACRL: Association of College and Research Libraries ALA: American Library Association ARL: Association of Research Libraries Association of Southeastern Research Libraries Australian Open Access Support Group IBICT: Brazilian Institute of Information in Science and Technology CARL: Canadian Association of Research Libraries CLACSO: Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales COAPI: Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions Creative Commons Creative Commons (USA) EIFL Electronic Frontier Foundation Greater Western Library Alliance LIBER: European Research Library Association National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences OpenAIRE Open
[GOAL] In the E.U.? your USD OA APC costs 21% more today than a year ago
Jihane Salhab and I have prepared a post intended to explain the impact of currency fluctuations on APCs. In brief, if you are in the E.U., a USD APC that has not changed in amount in the past year will cost you 21% more today, due solely to the rising strength of the US dollar. A strong currency benefits the buyer (purchaser of APCs) but works against the seller (less competitive). This is a disadvantage of international publishing for both APCs and subscriptions. Currency fluctuations make budgeting difficult. This is important in scholarly publishing, because buyers - libraries, universities, funders - tend to work in environments with very constrained budgets. It is very unlikely that an E.U. library or university will receive a 21% increase in funding to offset the higher cost of US-based APCs. Details and examples from a few other currencies: http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/2015/05/20/in-the-e-u-your-usd-apcs-cost-21-more-than-a-year-ago/ Congratulations to the US - a strong currency tends to reflect a healthy economy. best, -- Dr. Heather Morrison Assistant Professor École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies University of Ottawa Desmarais 111-02 613-562-5800 ext. 7634 Sustaining the Knowledge Commons: Open Access Scholarship http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/ http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html heather.morri...@uottawa.camailto:heather.morri...@uottawa.ca ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: Global coalition of organizations denounce Elsevier's new sharing policy
Exchange with Alicia Wise, Elsevier: http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1150-.html ALICIA WISE, ELSEVIER: Hi Stevan – We continue to permit immediate self-archiving in an author’s institutional repository. This is now true for all institutional repositories, not only those with which we have agreements or those that do not have mandates. You are correct that under our old policy, authors could post anywhere without an embargo if their institution didn’t have a mandate. Our new policy is designed to be consistent and fair for everybody, and we believe it now reflects how the institutional repository landscape has evolved in the last 10+ years. We require embargo periods because for subscription articles, an appropriate amount of time is needed for journals to deliver value to subscribing customers before the manuscript becomes available for free. Libraries understandably will not subscribe if the content is immediately available for free. Our sharing policy now reflects that reality. With kind wishes, Alicia Dr Alicia Wise Director of Access Policy Elsevier a.w...@elsevier.com @wisealic — STEVAN HARNAD Dear Alicia, Unless I am misunderstanding something, your response seems to be a play on words (double-talk). You say Elsevier permits “immediate self-archiving in… all institutional repositories, not only those with which we have agreements or those that do not have mandates.” But “self-archiving” means (and always has meant) Open Access self-archiving. Otherwise it would merely mean “depositing,” for which no one needs (or has ever needed) Elsevier’s permission. Embargoed depositing is not OA self-archiving (and never was). So what is new is not the (unneeded) permission from Elsevier to deposit, but the very new and regressive embargo on making the deposit immediately OA — in other words, an embargo on the immediate self-archiving that Elsevier had been officially permitting since 2004. It is shameful to try to justify this flagrant back-pedalling as being done “to be consistent and fair for everybody”. It was clearly done solely to sustain subscriptions at all costs (to research access, usage and progress). And Elsever should at least admit that, openly (sic). Sincerely, Stevan Harnad On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Kathleen Shearer m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com wrote: Please excuse the cross posting. For Immediate Release Wednesday, May 20, 2015 Contact: Ranit Schmelzer (SPARC) 202-538-1065 sparcme...@arl.org Katharina Müller (COAR) 49 551 39-22215 off...@coar-repositories.org - *NEW POLICY FROM ELSEVIER IMPEDES OPEN ACCESS AND SHARING* *Global coalition of organizations denounce the policy and urge Elsevier to revise it* *Washington, DC and Göttingen, Germany* – Elsevier’s new sharing and hosting policy http://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-updates-its-policies-perspectives-and-services-on-article-sharing represents a significant obstacle to the dissemination and use of research knowledge, and creates unnecessary barriers for Elsevier published authors in complying with funders’ open access policies, according to an analysis by the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) and the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR). “Elsevier’s policy is in direct conflict with the global trend towards open access and serves only to dilute the benefits of openly sharing research results,” said Heather Joseph, Executive Director of SPARC and Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director of COAR, in a joint statement. “Elsevier claims that the policy advances sharing but in fact, it does the opposite. We strongly urge Elsevier to revise it.” The new stance marks a significant departure from Elsevier’s initial policy, established in 2004, which allowed authors to self-archive their final accepted manuscripts of peer-reviewed articles in institutional repositories without delay. While the stated purpose of the new revision is, in part, to roll back an ill-conceived 2012 amendment prohibiting authors at institutions that have adopted campus-wide Open Access policies from immediate self archiving, the net result of the new policy is that Elsevier has placed greater restrictions on sharing articles. Twenty-three groups today released the following statement in opposition to the policy: “On April 30, 2015, Elsevier announced a new sharing and hosting policy for Elsevier journal articles. This policy represents a significant obstacle to the dissemination and use of research knowledge, and creates unnecessary barriers for Elsevier published authors in complying with funders’ open access policies. In addition, the policy has been adopted without any evidence that immediate sharing of articles has a negative impact on publishers’ subscriptions. “Despite the claim by Elsevier that the policy advances sharing, it actually does the opposite. The policy imposes unacceptably long
