Sometimes people ask me what do I have against Green OA (repositories) as opposed to Gold OA (journals) and I have a couple of stock answers to that, usually including a caveat that I do not really have anything against Green OA per se, but the way it is implemented is not good, yet makes people complacent, which in turn slows the down the progress towards complete OA. Not well implemented? Well, yes, I have seen all of these sins over the past couple of years. Once there is a standard that all builders of repositories adher to, Green OA will be OK (though there are other arguments against its current implementation still standing, i.e., the usual 6-12 month wait which is not inherent to Green OA but just a current bad practice).
- Log in to post comments
More like this
It's been a while since I came back from Boston, but the big dinosaur story kept me busy all last week so I never managed to find time and energy to write my own recap of the Harvard Conference.
Anna Kushnir, Corie Lok, Evie Brown, Kaitlin Thaney (Part 2 and Part 3) and
Alex Palazzo have written…
Via Lance Fortnow's Twitter post, it's interesting to see Communications of the ACM editor Moshe Y. Vardi on Open Access:
First, a point of precision. Open-access experts distinguish between "Gold OA," described earlier, and "Green OA," which allows for open access self-archiving of material (…
John Dupuis has been writing Confessions of a Science Librarian since the time blogging software was really physically soft, being made of clay and shaped like a tablet. We finally got to meet face-to-face at the Science Blogging Conference last month - a meeting long overdue until then.
Welcome…
Peter Suber reports the announcement of a new initiative by SAGE and Hindawi, starting a number of new Open Access journals. The platform will be unveiled in early December. They have decided not to switch their older, more established journals to OA yet.
This is really good news as SAGE is one…