Re: Proposed update of BOAI definition of OA: Immediate and Permanent

From: Lee Giles <giles_at_IST.PSU.EDU>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:16:00 -0500

I strongly agree with these sentiments. If you don't include us, we will
go elsewhere and create our own open access policies and movement.
What a waste.


Lee Giles
Computer and Information Scientist and Scholar

Laurent Romary wrote:

>Iwas not planning to answer this thread, but any statement that does not reflect
>the practices in communities such as computer science is not likely to be
>endorsed by multidisciplinary bodies such as CNRS.
>Laurent Romary
>Selon "J.F.B.Rowland" <J.F.Rowland_at_LBORO.AC.UK>:
>>Having spent all morning at a meeting discussing various academics'
>>"outputs" and whether they are "acceptable" to the University's management
>>for Research Assessment Exercise purposes, I heard this very argument from a
>>computer scientist. The Pro Vice Chancellor for Research (an engineer, by
>>the way) would have none of it. Journal articles only, please!
>>Fytton Rowland, Loughborough University
>>>As a Computer Scientist, I automatically read "peer reviewed journal"
>>>as "peer reviewed (journal/conference/workshop/symposium)", because
>>>that's the convention of my discipline, where a
>>>conference/workshop/symposium is a "peer review service provider".
Received on Thu Mar 17 2005 - 17:16:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:47:50 GMT