- LIS-Forum - ncsi.iisc.ernet.in

Fwd: Methodology for estimating cost per article at an institution
by Mailing List Manager 09 Mar '04

09 Mar '04

Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 05:24:39 +0000 (GMT) From: "[iso-8859-1] MALLIKARJUNA, C" <hbmallikarjuna(a)yahoo.co.in> Phil Davis <pmd8(a)cornell.edu> wrote:From: Phil Davis To: liblicense-l(a)lists.yale.edu Subject: Methodology for estimating cost per article at an institution Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:24:13 EST Scott Plutchak, Ann Okerson and others have started some constructive dialog by comparing subscription vs. producer (author) payments at their own institutions. So librarians can begin to calculate these figures for their own institution, I have provided a methodology for estimating these figures below. The two most challenging tasks are 1) estimating the total article output of an institution in the absence of a single comprehensive index, and 2) correcting for articles that have authors from multiple institutions. Below is an example methodology. While I can imagine before even posting this, receiving a number of responses trying to pick holes in the weakness of the methodology, I ask those individuals in response to propose a correction or simpler model (Occam's Razor). ESTIMATING THE ARTICLE COVERAGE OF ISI Number of titles indexed by ISI (SCI, SSCI, AHCI) = 8,769 Estimate of the number of scholarly journals = 20,000 This means that ISI is only indexing 44% of journals; however, not all journals publish the same number of articles per year and ISI attempts to index the most prolific core journals. If we assume a logarithmic (skewed) distribution, these 44% of indexed journals represent nearly 92% of the number of articles published (i.e. log 8,769 / log 20,000). CORRECTING FOR MULTIPLE-AUTHOR ARTICLES Number of Cornell author "hits" in ISI for 2003 = 5,465 However, many of these articles have multiple authors from multiple institutions. If we assume that the first author would pay all publishing charges (this is the BMC model, and it seems more reasonable than splitting $525 among 100 authors of a high-energy physics article), then how many of the above "hits" represents first author-articles? ISI displays only the first 500 records and makes it difficult to get an absolute count. We need to resort to sampling. I took a distributed sample of 100 articles (the first and last article on each page of results), and found that 61 (of the 100) included a Cornellian as a first author. Therefore the % first author hits = 61% (do this calculation for your own institution). The estimate of article output by first authors at Cornell = 5,465 x 0.61 = 3,636 ESTIMATING THE COST PER ARTICLE IF AN INSTITUTION MOVED TO AN OPEN ACCESS MODEL Scenario 1. The entire industry swaps from a subscription model to an open-access model overnight, and all authors publish in open-access journals. The breakeven cost/article = total article output of an institution / total amount spent on purchasing journals. For Cornell, this number is about $1,100/article Scenario 2. The entire industry except Elsevier moves from a subscription to OA model. The library still purchases Elsevier journals and authors still publish in them. Calculate the number of articles published in Elsevier journals in 2003 by searching for your institution in Science Direct advanced journal search for affiliation. Correct for multiple authors. Remove money spent on Elsevier journals and number of articles published in Elsevier journals and recalculate the cost/article. For Cornell, this number is under $800/article. In other words, OA has to cost less than $800/article for the model to start saving money. Scenario 3. Same is 2 but assume all large publishers will not participate (Kluwer, Wiley, Springer). For Cornell, the cost/article is less than $400/article. The reason that the cost per article would need to be much lower in Scenario 1 and 2 is because the large commercial publishers take up a disproportionate amount of a libraries funds compared to the number of articles published in these journals. For example, the Elsevier ratio is 43% / 16%. Philip Davis, Life Sciences Bibliographer Mann Library, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 (607) 255-7192 ; (607) 255-0318 fax pmd8(a)cornell.edu http://people.cornell.edu/pages/pmd8/ C.MALLIKARJUNA, ISEC LIBRARY, INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE NAGARABHAVI BANGALORE-560 079. hbmallikarjuna(a)yahoo.co.in Office:080+3215468 EXT-301 Mobile:080+36757228 Yahoo! India Insurance Special: Be informed on the best policies, services, tools and more. --0-1197097960-1078809879=:60659 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <DIV><BR><BR><B><I>Phil Davis <pmd8(a)cornell.edu></I></B> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">From: Phil Davis <PMD8(a)CORNELL.EDU><BR>To: liblicense-l(a)lists.yale.edu<BR>Subject: Methodology for estimating cost per article at an institution<BR>Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:24:13 EST<BR><BR>Scott Plutchak, Ann Okerson and others have started some constructive<BR>dialog by comparing subscription vs. producer (author) payments at their<BR>own institutions. So librarians can begin to calculate these figures for<BR>their own institution, I have provided a methodology for estimating these<BR>figures below. The two most challenging tasks are 1) estimating the total<BR>article output of an institution in the absence of a single comprehensive<BR>index, and 2) correcting for articles that have authors from multiple<BR>institutions. Below is an example methodology. While I can imagine<BR>before even posting this, receiving a number of responses trying to pick<BR>holes in the weakness o! f the methodology, I ask those individuals in<BR>response to propose a correction or simpler model (Occam's Razor).<BR><BR><BR>ESTIMATING THE ARTICLE COVERAGE OF ISI<BR><BR>Number of titles indexed by ISI (SCI, SSCI, AHCI) = 8,769<BR>Estimate of the number of scholarly journals = 20,000<BR><BR>This means that ISI is only indexing 44% of journals; however, not all<BR>journals publish the same number of articles per year and ISI attempts to<BR>index the most prolific core journals. If we assume a logarithmic<BR>(skewed) distribution, these 44% of indexed journals represent nearly 92%<BR>of the number of articles published (i.e. log 8,769 / log 20,000).<BR><BR><BR>CORRECTING FOR MULTIPLE-AUTHOR ARTICLES<BR><BR>Number of Cornell author "hits" in ISI for 2003 = 5,465<BR><BR>However, many of these articles have multiple authors from multiple<BR>institutions. If we assume that the first author would pay all publishing<BR>charges (this is the BMC model, and it seems more reasonable than<BR>splitting $525 among 100 authors of a high-energy physics article), then<BR>how many of the above "hits" represents first author-articles?<BR><BR>ISI displays only the first 500 records and makes it difficult to get an<BR>absolute count. We need to resort to sampling. I took a distributed<BR>sample of 100 articles (the first and last article on each page of<BR>results), and found that 61 (of the 100) included a Cornellian as a first<BR>author. Therefore the % first author hits = 61% (do this calculation for<BR>your own institution).<BR><BR>The estimate of article output by first authors at Cornell = 5,465 x 0.61<BR>= 3,636<BR><BR><BR>ESTIMATING THE COST PER ARTICLE IF AN INSTITUTION MOVED TO AN OPEN ACCESS<BR>MODEL<BR><BR>Scenario 1. The entire industry swaps from a subscription model to an<BR>open-access model overnight, and all authors publish in open-access<BR>journals. The breakeven cost/article = total article output of an<BR>institution / total amount spent on purchasing journals. For Cornell,<BR>this number is about $1,100/article<BR><BR>Scenario 2. The entire industry except Elsevier moves from a subscription<BR>to OA model. The library still purchases Elsevier journals and authors<BR>still publish in them. Calculate the number of articles published in<BR>Elsevier journals in 2003 by searching for your institution in Science<BR>Direct advanced journal search for affiliation. Correct for multiple<BR>authors. Remove money spent on Elsevier journals and number of articles<BR>published in Elsevier journals and recalculate the cost/article. For<BR>Cornell, this number is under $800/article. In other words, OA has to<BR>cost less than $800/article for the model to start saving money.<BR><BR>Scenario 3. Same is 2 but assume all large publishers will not<BR>participate (Kluwer, Wiley, Springer). For Cornell, the cost/article is<BR>less than $400/article. The reason that the cost per article would need<BR>to be much lower in Scenario 1 ! and 2 is because the large commercial<BR>publishers take up a disproportionate amount of a libraries funds compared<BR>to the number of articles published in these journals. For example, the<BR>Elsevier ratio is 43% / 16%.<BR><BR>Philip Davis, Life Sciences Bibliographer<BR>Mann Library, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853<BR>(607) 255-7192 ; (607) 255-0318 fax<BR>pmd8(a)cornell.edu<BR>http://people.cornell.edu/pages/pmd8/<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR><DIV> <DIV> <DIV> <DIV> <DIV> <DIV> <DIV> <DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>C.MALLIKARJUNA,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>ISEC LIBRARY,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>NAGARABHAVI</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>BANGALORE-560 079.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff><A href="mailto:hbmallikarjuna@yahoo.co.in">hbmallikarjuna(a)yahoo.co.in</A></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>Office:080+3215468 EXT-301 </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>Mobile:080+36757228</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV><p><font face=arial size=-1> <a href="http://in.rd.yahoo.com/specials/mailtag/*http://in.insurance.yahoo.com/lics…" target="_blank"><b>Yahoo! India Insurance Special</a>:</b> Be informed on the best policies, services, tools and more.</font> --0-1197097960-1078809879=:60659--

1 0

Classification numbers in WWW
by Mailing List Manager 09 Mar '04

09 Mar '04

Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:15:54 +0530 From: Samdarshi Pali <Samdarshi.Pali(a)relianceinfo.com> Dear Satish Many libraries published their catalogues on Internet. These OPAC contains complete metadata including class numbers (most according to DDC or LOC) for their collections in MARC format. Try to collect information /class numbers from these sites. regards, Samdarshi Pali Kendriya Vihar Sector 11, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410210 Original Message ---------------- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 12:18:52 -0800 From: Satish Munnolli <smunnolli(a)actrec.res.in> Dear members, Classification of books is one of the basic activity of any library. Does anyone has the information of a site where in you give the title of a book and get the tentative or nearest class number(s) of standard classification systems in tabular format or series. The input is not necessarily the exact book title... even PMEST of the title. (Dr. Ranganathan's scheme). If it is available it will be of immense use for all classifiers. Because it's not possible for smaller to medium sized libraries to procure every updated edition of Classification schedules what they are following which are very expensive and above all it ease the work load of library staff. If not such site is available does anyone has the information on any project that is going on in this direction. Satish S. Munnolli LIbrarian Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer Sector 22, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410208 Email : smunnolli(a)actrec.res.in Ph: 2740 5026 (Direct) 2741 2919 Extn : 5026 Fax: 27412894

1 0

RE: [LIS-Forum] Definitions of information management and knowledgemanagement
by Mailing List Manager 09 Mar '04

09 Mar '04

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 22:00:28 +0530 From: Satish Hulyalkar <satish(a)vsnl.com> Hello, I have analyzed it a step ahead. What we call knowledge is mostly VARI (Value Added Rich Information) Knowledge is process and is person (human) oriented only. KM is allowing a human being to enrich the process by refining the VARI gathered till last occurrence. I have published a paper on this in Competia.com Those interested may contact me for a copy. Satish Hulyalkar Consultant Telecom & Knowledge Management Pune/India Ph: +91 (20) 2567 4343 E-mail: satish(a)SatishHulyalkar.com http://www.SatishHulyalkar.com Original Message ---------------- Subject: [LIS-Forum] Definitions of information management and knowledgemanagement Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 12:51:12 +0530 From: Subbiah Arunachalam <arun(a)mssrf.res.in> Friends: This is what Paul Whiffen, a KM consultant, says on the distinction between knowledge and information: "This (the distinction between knowledge and information) used to trouble me until I came up with this: a) Knowledge is what is inside peoples' heads; b) Information is what you get when you write it down (or make a report, tape, file or whatever - ie, Information is the physical media representation of knowledge). At first I thought that surely it can't be that simple - but this distinction has served me very well now for years. Outcomes of using this distinction lead to the following deductions: KM is about putting in place the environment to enable and facilitate knowledge moving from human head to human head whether they are separated by time or geography or both (all aspects of the environment including cultural, technology and process aspects); IM is about managing your documents (or whatever your media is) in support of KM; I.T. (which, after all, stands for Information Technology) is therefore about the technology being in place to enable / support IM (which in turn enables KM). As I say, this is simple. To me it was worryingly simple at first but so far it has always served me well. Hope this helps, Paul. Paul R.Whiffen Knoco Ltd www.knoco.co.uk Phone: Mobile + 44 (0) 7808 162 302 Office + 44 (0) 1420 560 147 (Alton, Hants, UK) Email: paul.whiffen(a)knoco.co.uk or paul.whiffen(a)global123.freeserve.co.uk

1 0

Open access in India
by Mailing List Manager 09 Mar '04

09 Mar '04

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 19:34:04 +0530 From: Subbiah Arunachalam <arun(a)mssrf.res.in> > > 5 March 2004 > Source: SciDev.Net > > > Subbiah Arunachalam argues that the best way to make scientific research > more available worldwide is to encourage scientists to self-archive their > research. The author is a distinguished fellow at the M S Swaminathan > Research Foundation, Chennai, India. <<...OLE_Obj...>> > In December 2003, the Indian National Science Academy (INSA) held a > one-day conference on access to scientific data and information as part of > its annual meeting in Pune. The conference was held to address two key > problems faced by Indian scientists - poor access to international > journals and the low visibility of papers published by Indian scientists - > and the possible solutions offered by electronic publishing and open > archives. > Inaugurating the conference, Raghunath A. Mashelkar, director-general of > India's Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, spoke of how > international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO) > and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) were helping developing > countries improve electronic access to expensive journals through the > HINARI and AGORA programmes, respectively. > Unfortunately, however, India has not benefited from either of these > programmes. Although journal publishers are willing to provide toll-free > electronic access to researchers in countries where relatively few > scientists read their journals, they are not prepared to do so in larger > developing countries such as India, where they already have a considerable > number of subscribers. Yet India's average gross domestic product (GDP) > is, per capita, less than half the threshold agreed upon by the WHO and > FAO when they set up the HINARI and AGORA programmes. > A radical response > So scientists in such countries need to find a more radical response by > harnessing the new opportunities provided by information and communication > technologies (ICTs). We need to break away from the existing model of > publishing and communicating scientific knowledge. One way of doing this > is to embrace the 'open-access' approach being promoted by the Budapest > Open Access Initiative with its two complementary strategies of setting up > interoperable open archives and promoting open-access journals. > Several Indian publishers have already adopted the open-access philosophy > for the electronic versions of their journals. Unlike some open-access > journals in other countries, in which authors pay to publish their papers, > Indian open-access journals use government grants and subscriptions to > their print version to cover publishing costs. > All 10 journals of the Indian Academy of Sciences, for example, as well as > the four journals of INSA are open-access journals. In fact, INSA has > already produced free-access electronic versions of back volumes for all > its journals, and the Indian Academy of Sciences is also attempting a > similar 'retro-digitisation'. > The Journal of the Indian Institute of Science is also available in this > form back to its very first issue, published in 1914. The Indian Medlars > Centre of the National Informatics Centre, New Delhi, is bringing out > electronic versions of 22 biomedical journals, all of them accessible > without subscription. The Medlars Centre also has an online bibliographic > database, www.indmed.nic.in <http://www.indmed.nic.in/>, providing titles > and abstracts of articles from 77 Indian biomedical journals. > Medknow Publications, a small company based in Mumbai, has helped 10 > medical journals - including the Journal of Post Graduate Medicine and > Neurology India - make the transition from print to electronic open access > and all of them are doing much better now than before. > In addition, some Indian open-access journals are using international > agencies such as Bioline, a not-for-profit electronic publishing service > for developing countries, and JournalServer.org, an online library of > academic journals, to gain greater visibility. > However, open-access publishing needs to be complemented by setting up > interoperable institutional archives, which allow researchers to make > versions of their articles publicly available online both before and after > publication. > An additional attraction of such archives is that they would raise the > profile of Indian research. At present, research originating in an Indian > laboratory and published in expensive journals all too often goes > unnoticed, even by other researchers in India. Creating institutional > archives of such work would help to integrate it into the global knowledge > base, to reduce the isolation of our scientists and to improve > opportunities for funding and international collaboration. > The clear advantages offered by institutional archiving over the present > publishing system, in which many research papers are held in the back > issues of journals controlled by commercial (and some society) publishers > in other countries, suggests that the government should have an interest > in ensuring its success. India's University Grants Commission, for > example, should insist that major universities with a large output of > science and technology papers set up institutional archives. > Other funding agencies - such as the Department of Science & Technology, > Department of Scientific & Industrial Research, Department of > Biotechnology, Department of Atomic Energy, Department of Space, Indian > Council of Agricultural Research and Indian Council of Medical Research - > should also insist that research papers resulting from work supported by > their funds be made available through open-access archives and toll-free > journals. > India is not the only country being drawn towards open access. In China - > for example, among officials of the National Natural Science Foundation > and the Institute of Scientific and Technical Information in China, as > well as researchers with the Chinese Academy of Sciences - there is > already significant interest in its benefits to the country's scientists. > Reflecting this interest, in mid-June 2004 China will hold a major > national conference on open access in cooperation with the US National > Academy of Sciences. And in the last week of June, the Eighth > International Conference on Electronic Publishing will take place in > Brasilia. > The first phase of the World Summit on the Information Society, held last > December, has given a considerable boost to these efforts: the WSIS > Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action include strong statements in > favour of open access to scientific literature. UN secretary-general Kofi > Annan has also offered his support. > Nurturing the network > International action is one thing, but genuine free access is another. It > will need a champion (or champions) in every institution to promote the > creation of institutional archives, and persuade scientists to place their > papers in them. > Free access also requires adequate hardware and connectivity. Many > universities and research institutions in the developing world lack both > computers and high bandwidth Internet connectivity, so part of the > strategy of open-access proponents must include campaigning for improved > ICT facilities. Luckily, costs of both hardware and Internet bandwidth are > coming down all over the world. > Another important hurdle to overcome is the fact that many scientists > labour under the impression that journal editors may not accept archived > papers, claiming that this represents an unacceptable form of > 'pre-publication'. > These scientists worry that it will be difficult to assess the impact of > their research if it isn't published in conventional journals. After all, > they argue, promotions and awards are often determined by the impact > factor of the journals in which one's work is published. Many are also > unaware of the advantages of gaining greater visibility and are reluctant > to make the effort to post their articles on archives. > Just over a year ago, for example, the National Centre for Science > Information (NCSI) at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), the > country's best-known higher education institution in science and > technology, set up an institutional archive. The institute publishes about > 1,800 papers a year, of which about 900 are indexed in the Web of Science, > which gives access to the world's most prestigious, high impact research > journals. > Yet so far, the archive has attracted less than 70 papers. This experience > emphasises an important point: it is not enough just to create an > open-access archive. Filling it is far more important (and difficult). > After all, an empty archive is worse than having no archive at all. > But attitudes of the journals are changing, making institutional archiving > a more attractive proposition. It is important for champions of open > access to let scientists know that many journals, including high-impact > titles such as Nature and the British Medical Journal, already permit > authors to archive both preprints and postprints. The emphasis should > therefore be on setting up open archives rather than on persuading journal > publishers to make their journals open access. > If scientists and scientific establishments in China, India and Brazil can > be persuaded to adopt open access quickly, then it is likely that the rest > of the developing world will follow. > > Related links: Indian National Science Academy > <http://www.insa.ac.in/html/home.asp> Indian Academy of Sciences > <http://www.ias.ac.in> Indian Medlars Centre <http://www.medind.nic.in> > HINARI <http://www.healthinternetwork.org/> AGORA > <http://www.aginternetwork.org/en/> Budapest Open Access Initiative > <http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml> Bioline International > <http://www.bioline.org.br/> JournalServer.org <http://journalserver.org/> > M S Swaminathan Research Foundation <http://www.mssrf.org/>

1 0

SciDev.Net's Special Section on Open access and Scientific Publis hing
by Mailing List Manager 09 Mar '04

09 Mar '04

Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:29:14 +0530 From: Subbiah Arunachalam <arun(a)mssrf.res.in> [Forwarding from SciDev.Net. --Peter.] The Science and Development Network (SciDev.Net) is pleased to announce its new quick guide on science publishing (www.scidev.net/scipub) Concentrating on the issue of how developing-country scientists can access the latest scientific research, the quick guide offers an insight into the discussions on this controversial topic and gives an overview of new initiatives to make science literature more accessible. Packed with news, features and opinions as well as updated background resources including key documents, links, definitions and events, the quick guide on science publishing aims to keep you up-to-date on the latest developments. Highlights include the following specially commissioned articles for SciDev.Net: 1) David Dickson, director of SciDev.Net, gives an overview of the different approaches being taken to increase access to the latest scientific literature for developing-country researchers. http://www.scidev.net/quickguides/index.cfm?fuseaction=dossierfulltext&qguid eid=4 2) Subbiah Arunachalam, a distinguished fellow at the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation, Chennai, India, argues that the best way to make scientific research more available worldwide is to encourage scientists to self-archive their research. http://www.scidev.net/quickguides/index.cfm?fuseaction=qguideReadItem&type=3 &itemid=243&language=1&qguideid=4 3) Helen J. Doyle of the Public Library of Science, calls on scientists, research funders and others to support the open-access movement and help increase access to scientific information across the globe. http://www.scidev.net/quickguides/index.cfm?fuseaction=qguideReadItem&type=3 &itemid=244&language=1&qguideid=4 The quick guide also contains a spotlight on WSIS, drawing together news and resources from the event, including SciDev.Net's reports from the first stage in Geneva in December 2003. The quick guide is aimed at those interested in the current challenges and discussions surrounding science publishing, and will be of particular interest to developing-country scientists who have difficulty accessing the latest research findings. Please pass this message to friends and colleagues. Many thanks, The SciDev.Net team.

1 0

Classification numbers in WWW
by Mailing List Manager 08 Mar '04

08 Mar '04

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 12:18:52 -0800 From: Satish Munnolli <smunnolli(a)actrec.res.in> Dear members, Classification of books is one of the basic activity of any library. Does anyone has the information of a site where in you give the title of a book and get the tentative or nearest class number(s) of standard classification systems in tabular format or series. The input is not necessarily the exact book title... even PMEST of the title. (Dr. Ranganathan's scheme). If it is available it will be of immense use for all classifiers. Because it's not possible for smaller to medium sized libraries to procure every updated edition of Classification schedules what they are following which are very expensive and above all it ease the work load of library staff. If not such site is available does anyone has the information on any project that is going on in this direction. Satish S. Munnolli LIbrarian Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer Sector 22, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410208 Email : smunnolli(a)actrec.res.in Ph: 2740 5026 (Direct) 2741 2919 Extn : 5026 Fax: 27412894

1 0

Web site for NewGenLib
by Mailing List Manager 08 Mar '04

08 Mar '04

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 15:43:24 +0530 From: Jai Haravu <haravu(a)newgenlib.com> Dear List members I am happy to let members of the list know that the first generation web site for NewGenLib (a library automation and networking solution developed as an initiative of the Kesavan Institute of Information and Knowledge Management, http://www.kiikm.org/ in partnership with Verus Solutions Pvt., Ltd.) is now ready and can be seen at http://www.newgenlib.com/. I am also happy to let you know that Goa Univ has invited us to install it on their Server. They propose to build a network of Goa university library and some of the better equipped college libraries in Goa. Preliminary work on this has just been done and soon hopefully, their catalogue database should be accessible on a public domain server of the Univ. I welcome feedback from members. Best regards. L J Haravu 69 Krishnapuri Colony West Marredpally Secunderabad 500026 Tel: (91)-40-27803947

1 0

ebook site
by Mailing List Manager 08 Mar '04

08 Mar '04

Date: 7 Mar 2004 08:31:44 -0000 From: ravi inder <elibrarian(a)rediffmail.com> Respected professionals , Here is an important link from where you can access to thousands of free ebooks of all subjects. http://www.digitalbookindex.com P.Ravinder ADIS(First year student) Documentation Research and Training Centre Indian Statistical Institute, Bangalore 560059 Ph:+91(80)8483975 e-mail:elibrarian@rediffmail.com

1 0

Guide to Institutional Repository Software
by Mailing List Manager 08 Mar '04

08 Mar '04

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:32:49 +0530 From: Subbiah Arunachalam <arun(a)mssrf.res.in> OSI is pleased to announce the release of the second edition of the Guide to Institutional Repository Software. The guide has been updated to include two additional systems: ARNO and Fedora. In addition, the new guide reflects comments and suggestions received following the release of the first edition. OSI intends to update the guide on a regular basis. Once again, OSI is grateful to the author of the guide, Raym Crow of the Chain Bridge Group, as well as the developers of the software systems for working with us to produce the guide. To view the guide, please see: <http://www.soros.org/openaccess/software/> Melissa Hagemann, Program Manager Open Access Project Open Society Institute

1 0

Open Access - Institutional Repositories
by Mailing List Manager 08 Mar '04

08 Mar '04

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 10:43:13 +0530 From: Subbiah Arunachalam <arun(a)mssrf.res.in> Friends: Here is a brief summary of the Breakout session 7: "If you build it will they come - filling an institutional repository", part of the CERN Workshop OAI3 (in the series Innovations in Scholarly Communication), held last month (12-14 February 2004) at Geneva. Arun [Subbiah Arunachalam] -------- If you build it will they come - filling an institutional repository Concerns raised by academic staff: * Not willing to take on additional work. * Copyright * Fear of plagiarism. * Benefits not immediately obvious - why deposit in an institutional archive when their papers can be found on Google? * Worries re prior publication - Ingelfinger rule (a paper won't be commercially published if deemed to have been already published elsewhere). * Concerns re potential for harm to learned societies. * Quality control (or perceived lack of). Possible solutions: * Need for dedicated support for the institutional repository - establish a post to support advocacy, help authors with depositing papers, handle metadata, convert file formats etc. Implications - ongoing role for the Library. * Work with your liaison librarians. They often have good links into academic departments. If they are on board they can help spread the message. * Raise awareness of copyright issues - what authors can and can't do with their works. Use the RoMeo database to identify where pre and post prints can be deposited. Encourage authors to hang on to their copyright. * Explode the myth about prior publication. Ingelfinger is very much in decline apart from in certain subject areas (mainly Medicine). Make academics more aware of their rights. * Use of plagiarism software to make it easier to detect plagiarism. * Sell the benefits of proper indexing, and the benefit of papers appearing in a quality listing rather than in Google. * Sell the benefits of archive as a preservation tool. * Encourage academics to discuss the issues with their learned societies. * Consider that you may need departmental-level agreements on content (what is deposited) rather than broad institutional agreements. Different needs and requirements from discipline to discipline. * Consider format issues - need to meet accessibility legislation requirements as well as being suitable for long term preservation. * Use of national initiatives - such as the UK Research Assessment Exercise - to force change.

1 0