Re: [GOAL] Shining a light on Discoverability of Open Access content

[Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen)]

Dear John,

this is interesting and good work. However, Ï'm a bit puzzled as the GRID is 
still empty. Is it your intention to crowdsource the "answers" to fill the grid 
with? Of course there are often no simple answers. They'll need to be generic 
yet nuanced.

BTW As a discovery pathway I would add OA article aggregators such as Papaerity 
or ScienceOpen or CORE. Or is this captured by "journal aggregations"?

Kind regards,
Jeroen Bosman


From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [goal-boun...@eprints.org] on behalf of John G. 
Dove [johngd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 9:12 PM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Cc: John Dove
Subject: [GOAL] Shining a light on Discoverability of Open Access content

I thought this GRID might be useful or interesting to some people on this list.

As I started looking (see link below my signature) at ways in which to use 
pre-publication reference lists to identify and mobilize authors to share their 
submitted manuscripts (green OA) I came to recognize that not each of the 
various "discovery pathways" by which readers can find articles of interest are 
equally able to discover such content.

I began developing a GRID to lay out each discovery pathway and each location 
of "open" content.  Then I started asking questions from those much more 
knowledgeable than me about how such content would be found.  I soon realized 
that this is not just a problem for green OA, but even for gold OA as well as 
OA monographs and OER.  If a new OA publisher is unaware of some advantages to 
providing the discovery tool knowledge bases with the right meta-data, for 
example, then their open articles won't be included in the discovery tool.  
Subscription publishers tend to know about these things because they have 
on-going revenue to protect which is at risk if there's no usage attributed to 
their journal.  More seriously is the case of hybrid open articles which have 
been paid for by authors or funding agencies to be open but are apparently 
unable to be discovered by mechanisms that are architected at the journal level 
rather than the article level.  So I ask, would funding agencies pay for 
articles to be open in a hybrid journal if they knew that such articles would 
not be discoverable via a link-resolver or a library's discovery service?

I've now shared with GRID with the NISO "Discovery to Delivery Topic Committee" 
which I joined last year.  There is interest on that committee to draft a "new 
item request" which then, should it gain support, can be voted on by NISO 
membership to establish a NISO "Working Group".

I'm not necessarily sure that all of this lends itself to a NISO "recommended 
practice" or standard.  It could well be that other organizations might adopt 
best practices or policies that would be informed by the light this grid (or 
some version of it) might shine on the problem. The fact that there is content 
which the author or perhaps the publisher or perhaps a funding agency is fully 
intending to be open to the world but is, in fact, hidden or blocked from some 
of the common discovery mechanisms is something I think needs attention.

It's offered here without any rights reserved.  Feel free to use it, modify it, 
with or without attribution.

-John Dove

An Open Content Discovery Grid for full-text discovery of content intended to 
be open.
  Location





Discovery
_  Pathway

Gold OA Journal Articles hosted by publisher

Articles in hybrid journals which have been paid to be “open”

Versions of articles which have been submitted to institutional or subject 
repositories

Versions of articles which the author has posted in Academia .edu

Versions of articles which the author has posted in Research Gate

Versions of articles which the author has posted in personal or departmental 
websites



Open Access Monographs



Open Educational Resources

General Web Search Engine






















Academic Web Search Engine






















Library Webscale Discovery Services





















Link Resolvers (targets, sources?)





















Publisher-provided links in reference lists





















Specialized Bibliographic Databases





















Journal Aggregations






















Library Catalogs

























_
John G. Dove, personal e-mail
johngd...@gmail.com

Check out my latest post on LinkedIn:  SPARC M.O.R.E Poster Presentation on 
messaging to cited scholars re 
OA
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Shining a light on Discoverability of Open Access content

[John G. Dove]

Jean Claude,
 Yes, http://dissem.in is a good example of available open source
technology which seeks to score an author's output to identify articles
that Sherpa/Romeo indicates could be shared but haven't been.  This can
help educate authors about the best places to adequately share their
submitted manuscripts.

 More relevant to the purposes of this grid, however, is the work which
the dissem.in team has done with http://doai.io which takes a DOI and
attempts to find a legal and freely accessible version of the article
you're seeking, but failing that takes you to the article of record.

 If you took either of these as "discovery pathways" and scored it for
each of the journal columns (ways in which authors attempt to make their
articles accessible to the world), you'd find that professors like my
nephew, Patrick Dove, who share their articles on www.academia.edu or my
brother, William F. Dove, who shares almost all of his pre-NIH-mandate
(before 2007) articles on the McCardle Labs website, would have shared
their articles in places where http://dissem.in and http://diao.io do not
find them.  So the intentions of the author to share and the discovery
pathway to discover DO NOT ALIGN.
 This GRID does not advocate a particular solution to this
non-alignment.  This GRID just points out the lack of alignment.  Solutions
could be to either educate authors that sharing on www.academia.edu or
departmental websites is not enough, or having discovery pathways like
dissem.in and diao.io find such articles.  If one decides that the
"correct" fix is to educate authors about where to share then initiatives
like I've been promoting about using pre-publication reference lists to
ping authors urging them to share and cc'ing their scholarly publishing
offices,
SPARC M.O.R.E Poster Presentation on messaging to cited scholars re OA
 will
be a way to systematically educate authors one-at-a-time.

-john dove

_
John G. Dove, personal e-mail
johngd...@gmail.com

Check out my latest post on LinkedIn:  SPARC M.O.R.E Poster Presentation on
messaging to cited scholars re OA


On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Jean-Claude Guédon <
jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca> wrote:

> I am not sure of being quite on target, but I will risk it anyway. This
> perspective seems to me to complete the dissemin tool in useful ways.
>
> To inspect what Dissemin is about, just check http://dissem.in .
>
> And if I am totally off base, please tell me. I stand to be corrected, if
> needed.
>
> --
> Jean-Claude Guédon
>
> Professeur titulaire
> Littérature comparée
> Université de Montréal
>
>
>
> Le jeudi 30 juin 2016 à 15:12 -0400, John G. Dove a écrit :
>
> I thought this GRID might be useful or interesting to some people on this
> list.
>
>
> As I started looking (see link below my signature) at ways in which to use
> pre-publication reference lists to identify and mobilize authors to share
> their submitted manuscripts (green OA) I came to recognize that not each of
> the various "discovery pathways" by which readers can find articles of
> interest are equally able to discover such content.
>
> I began developing a GRID to lay out each discovery pathway and each
> location of "open" content.  Then I started asking questions from those
> much more knowledgeable than me about how such content would be found.  I
> soon realized that this is not just a problem for green OA, but even for
> gold OA as well as OA monographs and OER.  If a new OA publisher is unaware
> of some advantages to providing the discovery tool knowledge bases with the
> right meta-data, for example, then their open articles won't be included in
> the discovery tool.  Subscription publishers tend to know about these
> things because they have on-going revenue to protect which is at risk if
> there's no usage attributed to their journal.  More seriously is the case
> of hybrid open articles which have been paid for by authors or funding
> agencies to be open but are apparently unable to be discovered by
> mechanisms that are architected at the journal level rather than the
> article level.  So I ask, would funding agencies pay for articles to be
> open in a hybrid journal if they knew that such articles would not be
> discoverable via a link-resolver or a library's discovery service?
>
>
> I've now shared with GRID with the NISO "Discovery to Delivery Topic
> Committee" which I joined last year.  There is interest on that committee
> to draft a "new item request" which then, should it gain support, can be
> voted on by NISO membership to establish a NISO "Working Group".
>
>
> I'm not necessarily sure that all of this lends itself to a NISO
> "recommended practice" or standard.  It could well be that other
> organizations might adopt best practices or policies that would be informed
> by the light this grid (or 

Re: [GOAL] Shining a light on Discoverability of Open Access content

[John G. Dove]

Heather,
You raise some excellent points.  The purpose of this GRID is not to
advocate for any particular "fix" to the problems of Discovery but simply
to make clear where there are disconnects between the intention of authors,
or publishers (such as Gold OA publishers), or funding agencies (those with
an Open Access mandate) and various ways ("discovery pathways") that
various users attempt to find articles of interest.
 For example, in the column for allegedly "open" articles in hybrid
journals, there are some discovery pathways which are currently architected
or effectively 'primed' only at the journal level rather than the article
level.  These discovery pathways will then only discover such "open"
articles if and only if the library subscribes to that journal.This,
some would argue, makes the promise of such articles to be "open" a false
promise.
 Filling in this GRID accurately should reveal this discrepancy.
Various people will have different reactions to what to do about this
disconnect.  Personally I would argue that the funding agencies with open
access mandates should not accept the current hybrid "open" fee as
compliant with their open access mission.  Others, I imagine, would
advocate working hard to fix the disconnect.

 I don't happen to agree with your opposition to value-added services
which enhance discovery.  If we fix all of the free open access discovery
problems I think it's perfectly alright, in fact desirable, that innovation
in the ways in which publishers, scholarly societies, etc. can add value to
the lives of researchers and the organizations which employ them will be a
net benefit to the world.   I think BOAI draws a very clear line:  the
least resourced scholar in the world other than a good connection to the
internet should have unfettered access to making full use of the scholarly
literature in their field.   The publishing systems needs to deliver on
this objective.  But if they can add value in other ways to the lives of
researchers and the institutions which employ them--all the better.

-John Dove

_
John G. Dove, personal e-mail
johngd...@gmail.com

Check out my latest post on LinkedIn:  SPARC M.O.R.E Poster Presentation on
messaging to cited scholars re OA


On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Heather Morrison <
heather.morri...@uottawa.ca> wrote:

> Interesting question and direction. This raises at least two different
> questions for me:
>
> 1.  Is access via for-pay discovery tools and knowledge bases a goal
> for open access? I am concerned that the most liberal open licenses,
> allowing downstream re-use by anyone for commercial purposes, will simply
> create a new set of for-pay services. Authors and institutions that have
> contributed to open access but cannot afford these tools may find
> themselves moving one step forward (benefits of open access) but two steps
> behind (unable to afford the next generation of research tools). This is
> not my goal, and this is one of the reasons why I do not support the most
> open approaches to licensing. I want reciprocity built into the system -
> downstream users should have obligations to share back (not the same as CC
> share alike) as well as rights.
>
> 2.  Does it make sense to invest heavily in incremental improvements
> in traditional systems based on traditional materials? We have these cool
> new tools - computers and internet - let’s invest in really making use of
> them rather than tweaking a print-based system. Cancel your subscription to
> the discovery service and talk to your faculty about redirecting the money
> to hire local faculty, students, and grads, to work on open access journals
> or better yet develop innovative approaches like peer-review overlay.
>
> thoughts?
>
> Heather Morrison
>
> > On Jun 30, 2016, at 3:12 PM, John G. Dove  wrote:
> >
> > I thought this GRID might be useful or interesting to some people on
> this list.
> >
> > As I started looking (see link below my signature) at ways in which to
> use pre-publication reference lists to identify and mobilize authors to
> share their submitted manuscripts (green OA) I came to recognize that not
> each of the various "discovery pathways" by which readers can find articles
> of interest are equally able to discover such content.
> >
> > I began developing a GRID to lay out each discovery pathway and each
> location of "open" content.  Then I started asking questions from those
> much more knowledgeable than me about how such content would be found.  I
> soon realized that this is not just a problem for green OA, but even for
> gold OA as well as OA monographs and OER.  If a new OA publisher is unaware
> of some advantages to providing the discovery tool knowledge bases with the
> right meta-data, for example, then their open articles won't be included in
> the discovery tool.  Subscription publishers tend to know 

Re: [GOAL] Shining a light on Discoverability of Open Access content

[Heather Morrison]

Interesting question and direction. This raises at least two different 
questions for me:

1.  Is access via for-pay discovery tools and knowledge bases a goal for 
open access? I am concerned that the most liberal open licenses, allowing 
downstream re-use by anyone for commercial purposes, will simply create a new 
set of for-pay services. Authors and institutions that have contributed to open 
access but cannot afford these tools may find themselves moving one step 
forward (benefits of open access) but two steps behind (unable to afford the 
next generation of research tools). This is not my goal, and this is one of the 
reasons why I do not support the most open approaches to licensing. I want 
reciprocity built into the system - downstream users should have obligations to 
share back (not the same as CC share alike) as well as rights.

2.  Does it make sense to invest heavily in incremental improvements in 
traditional systems based on traditional materials? We have these cool new 
tools - computers and internet - let’s invest in really making use of them 
rather than tweaking a print-based system. Cancel your subscription to the 
discovery service and talk to your faculty about redirecting the money to hire 
local faculty, students, and grads, to work on open access journals or better 
yet develop innovative approaches like peer-review overlay. 

thoughts?

Heather Morrison

> On Jun 30, 2016, at 3:12 PM, John G. Dove  wrote:
> 
> I thought this GRID might be useful or interesting to some people on this 
> list.
> 
> As I started looking (see link below my signature) at ways in which to use 
> pre-publication reference lists to identify and mobilize authors to share 
> their submitted manuscripts (green OA) I came to recognize that not each of 
> the various "discovery pathways" by which readers can find articles of 
> interest are equally able to discover such content.  
> 
> I began developing a GRID to lay out each discovery pathway and each location 
> of "open" content.  Then I started asking questions from those much more 
> knowledgeable than me about how such content would be found.  I soon realized 
> that this is not just a problem for green OA, but even for gold OA as well as 
> OA monographs and OER.  If a new OA publisher is unaware of some advantages 
> to providing the discovery tool knowledge bases with the right meta-data, for 
> example, then their open articles won't be included in the discovery tool.  
> Subscription publishers tend to know about these things because they have 
> on-going revenue to protect which is at risk if there's no usage attributed 
> to their journal.  More seriously is the case of hybrid open articles which 
> have been paid for by authors or funding agencies to be open but are 
> apparently unable to be discovered by mechanisms that are architected at the 
> journal level rather than the article level.  So I ask, would funding 
> agencies pay for articles to be open in a hybrid journal if they knew that 
> such articles would not be discoverable via a link-resolver or a library's 
> discovery service?
> 
> I've now shared with GRID with the NISO "Discovery to Delivery Topic 
> Committee" which I joined last year.  There is interest on that committee to 
> draft a "new item request" which then, should it gain support, can be voted 
> on by NISO membership to establish a NISO "Working Group". 
> 
> I'm not necessarily sure that all of this lends itself to a NISO "recommended 
> practice" or standard.  It could well be that other organizations might adopt 
> best practices or policies that would be informed by the light this grid (or 
> some version of it) might shine on the problem. The fact that there is 
> content which the author or perhaps the publisher or perhaps a funding agency 
> is fully intending to be open to the world but is, in fact, hidden or blocked 
> from some of the common discovery mechanisms is something I think needs 
> attention.
> 
> It's offered here without any rights reserved.  Feel free to use it, modify 
> it, with or without attribution.
> 
> -John Dove
> 
> An Open Content Discovery Grid for full-text discovery of content intended to 
> be open.
> 
>   Location
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> Discovery
> _  Pathway
> Gold OA Journal Articles hosted by publisher
> Articles in hybrid journals which have been paid to be “open”
> Versions of articles which have been submitted to institutional or subject 
> repositories
> Versions of articles which the author has posted in Academia .edu
> Versions of articles which the author has posted in Research Gate
> Versions of articles which the author has posted in personal or departmental 
> websites
>  
> Open Access Monographs
>  
> Open Educational Resources
> General Web Search Engine
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> Academic Web Search Engine
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> Library Webscale Discovery Services
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 

Re: [GOAL] Shining a light on Discoverability of Open Access content

[Jean-Claude Guédon]

I am not sure of being quite on target, but I will risk it anyway. This
perspective seems to me to complete the dissemin tool in useful ways.

To inspect what Dissemin is about, just check http://dissem.in .

And if I am totally off base, please tell me. I stand to be corrected,
if needed.

-- 
Jean-Claude Guédon 

Professeur titulaire
Littérature comparée
Université de Montréal




Le jeudi 30 juin 2016 à 15:12 -0400, John G. Dove a écrit :
> I thought this GRID might be useful or interesting to some people on
> this list.
> 
> 
> 
> As I started looking (see link below my signature) at ways in which to
> use pre-publication reference lists to identify and mobilize authors
> to share their submitted manuscripts (green OA) I came to recognize
> that not each of the various "discovery pathways" by which readers can
> find articles of interest are equally able to discover such content.  
> 
> I began developing a GRID to lay out each discovery pathway and each
> location of "open" content.  Then I started asking questions from
> those much more knowledgeable than me about how such content would be
> found.  I soon realized that this is not just a problem for green OA,
> but even for gold OA as well as OA monographs and OER.  If a new OA
> publisher is unaware of some advantages to providing the discovery
> tool knowledge bases with the right meta-data, for example, then their
> open articles won't be included in the discovery tool.  Subscription
> publishers tend to know about these things because they have on-going
> revenue to protect which is at risk if there's no usage attributed to
> their journal.  More seriously is the case of hybrid open articles
> which have been paid for by authors or funding agencies to be open but
> are apparently unable to be discovered by mechanisms that are
> architected at the journal level rather than the article level.  So I
> ask, would funding agencies pay for articles to be open in a hybrid
> journal if they knew that such articles would not be discoverable via
> a link-resolver or a library's discovery service?
> 
> 
> 
> I've now shared with GRID with the NISO "Discovery to Delivery Topic
> Committee" which I joined last year.  There is interest on that
> committee to draft a "new item request" which then, should it gain
> support, can be voted on by NISO membership to establish a NISO
> "Working Group". 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not necessarily sure that all of this lends itself to a NISO
> "recommended practice" or standard.  It could well be that other
> organizations might adopt best practices or policies that would be
> informed by the light this grid (or some version of it) might shine on
> the problem. The fact that there is content which the author or
> perhaps the publisher or perhaps a funding agency is fully intending
> to be open to the world but is, in fact, hidden or blocked from some
> of the common discovery mechanisms is something I think needs
> attention.
> 
> 
> 
> It's offered here without any rights reserved.  Feel free to use it,
> modify it, with or without attribution.
> 
> 
> 
> -John Dove
> 
> 
> An Open Content Discovery Grid for full-text discovery of content
> intended to be open.
> 
> 
>Location
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Discovery 
> 
> _
> Pathway
> 
> 
> Gold
> OA
> Journal Articles hosted by publisher
> 
> 
> Articles in hybrid journals which have been paid to be “open”
> 
> 
> Versions of articles which have been submitted to institutional or subject 
> repositories
> 
> 
> Versions of articles which the author has posted in Academia .edu
> 
> 
> Versions of articles which the author has posted in Research Gate
> 
> 
> Versions of articles which the author has posted in personal or departmental 
> websites
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Open
> Access
> Monographs
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Open
> Educational Resources
> 
> 
> General Web Search Engine
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Academic Web Search Engine
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Library Webscale Discovery Services
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Link
> Resolvers (targets, sources?)
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Publisher-provided links in reference lists
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Specialized Bibliographic Databases
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Journal Aggregations
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Library Catalogs
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
>