Re: Priorities: OA Content Provision vs. OA Content Preservation

From: Heather Morrison <heatherm_at_ELN.BC.CA>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 08:31:55 -0700

On 5-Oct-04, at 7:00 AM, hbosc_at_TOURS.INRA.FR 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.


Heather G. Morrison
Project Coordinator
BC Electronic Library Network
Phone: 604-268-7001
Fax: 604-291-3023
Received on Tue Oct 05 2004 - 16:31:55 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:47:37 GMT