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

NIH research to be open access - What about India?
by Mailing List Manager 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 18:18:17 +0530 From: Subbiah Arunachalam <arun(a)mssrf.res.in> > Friends: > > Here is an article (from The Scientist) on a hot topic. In the USA soon > all research funded by NIH will be available free on the Internet. When > will Indian funding agencies start insisting on such open access to > research funded by them? Best wishes. > > Arun > [Subbiah Arunachalam] > > > > July 29, 2004 > NIH research to be open access > > Publishers and editors meet Zerhouni plans for publicly available papers > with exasperation | By Paula Park <paulapark52(a)hotmail.com> > > > WASHINGTON, DC-National Institutes of Health (NIH) director Elias Zerhouni > indicated at a gathering of 43 scientific journal publishers and editors > Wednesday (July 28) that eventually all NIH-financed research will be > freely available to the public. > > Zerhouni stopped short of setting deadlines for depositing full-text > materials in the searchable PubMed database, as recommended in a House > Appropriations Committee report > <http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20040721/01> released earlier this > month. Instead, he asked the publishing executives to inform him how best > to manage material so that the public can freely use it. > > "The public needs to have access to what they've paid for," Zerhouni told > commercial and nonprofit publishing executives at a meeting he called on > the NIH campus. Congress, he said, also demanded evidence of the agency's > productivity. "I need to manage the portfolio," he said. "The status quo > just can't stand." > > The executive conference was the first of several planned meetings that > will lead to the creation of an approach public access, which NIH will > publish in the Federal Register for comment before it becomes official > policy, Zerhouni said. He would not say when the policy-making would > begin, but the Appropriations Committee report requested that NIH produce > some language by December 1. > > That report recommended that papers resulting from NIH-funded research be > deposited jn PubMed 6 months after their publication in a journal. Papers > for which NIH pays publishing costs would be deposited immediately upon > publication. Last year, a member of Congress introduced a bill > <http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20030716/04/> that would have banned > copyright on all publications based on federally funded research; that > bill has been in committee since last fall. > > Several meeting participants expressed exasperation with the House report, > which they termed a "government mandate." Paul W. Kincade, president of > the Federation of American Societies of Experimental Biology, told The > Scientist that he resented the "coercion." Others grumbled that the > government couldn't tell publishers what to do. > > "They were a little startled by the language," Pat Schroeder, president > and executive director of the Association of American Publishers, > explained diplomatically in the meeting. She likened the report's > recommendations to the "federal government putting down its thumb." > > But Zerhouni tried to assure participants that the government was not yet > creating a mandate and that their views would be taken into account before > the policy was finalized. He also distanced himself from the House report, > saying that NIH did not prepare it, even though the wording was "inspired" > by deliberations within the agency. > > Beyond the policy-making process, the executives fretted that if all > information is available in a government database, subscriptions will > fall. Many executives reported that they are trying some forms of open > access, making material available at no charge 6 months or a year after > publication. But setting a single date could be harmful to some and not > others, some said. > > Alan Leshner <http://www.aaas.org/press/leshner-bio.shtml>, chief > executive officer of the American Association for the Advancement of > Science, which publishes Science, told Zerhouni that releasing articles 6 > months after publication didn't worry him. "But if any part of the > publication has been paid out of NIH grants... [it] must be given > immediate open access... most of us in the room are much more concerned > about that." > > Brian D. Crawford, vice president and publishing director of Life and > Medical Sciences for Wiley, predicted that under the proposed policy, > journal numbers would dwindle, and more material would be published solely > on the PubMed site. "This would lead to a constricted ability to publish," > he added. "The unintended consequence for NIH could be less access, not > more." > > Judith Bond, president of the American Society for Biochemistry and > Molecular Biology, questioned PubMed's reliability and suggested NIH use > multiple repositories. "PubMed Central has had a lot of technical > problems," she added, questioning whether NIH would be technically > prepared to meet the suggested mandate. > > Zerhouni said that individual repositories tend to fade out. He also told > participants that NIH had no intention of becoming a journal publisher and > the public is aware of the value of journals' peer reviews. > > Not all participating publishers were anxious about the proposed policy. > PNAS editor-in-chief Nicholas R. Cozzarelli > <http://mcb.berkeley.edu/faculty/BMB/cozzarellin.html> told Zerhouni that > depositing material would be "no problem." "We would endorse it and see it > as an advancement of science, and education," he added. "We can do it, > other journals can do it. It will just take time." > > Links for this article > A. McCook, "Open access to US govt work urged," The Scientist, July 21, > 2004. > <http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20040721/01> > > C. Zandonella, "Sabo bill assessed," The Scientist, July 16, 2003. > <http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20030716/04/> > > Alan I. Leshner > <http://www.aaas.org/press/leshner-bio.shtml> > > Nicholas R. Cozzarelli > <http://mcb.berkeley.edu/faculty/BMB/cozzarellin.html> > > > >

1 0

Re: Norms of AICTE for selection as Librarian, Dep.Librarian And Asst.Libn
by Mailing List Manager 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 11:57:13 +0100 (BST) From: "[iso-8859-1] vijaykumar nayak" <vijay_vtulib(a)yahoo.co.in> Dear Colleagues, I need infn on Norms of AICTE for selection as a LIBN,DEPUTYLIBN,And ASSTLIBN.in UNiversitues and Engg.colleges. Reply soon Thanking u Vijay Nayak

1 0

Open Content and Access for Digital Scholarship
by Mailing List Manager 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 15:07:07 -0500 From: Gerry Mckiernan <gerrymck(a)iastate.edu> Colleagues/ I am pleased to announce the availability of the revised version of my PowerPoint presentation from the recently concluded WiLSWorld 2004 Conference [ http://www.wils.wisc.edu/events/wworld04/ ] _Open Content and Access for Digital Scholarship_ "The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) provides an application-independent interoperability framework based on metadata harvesting. There are two classes of participants in the OAI-PMH framework: Data Providers and Service Providers. Data Providers administer systems that support the OAI-PMH as a means of exposing metadata from digital collections or repositories; while Service Providers use metadata harvested via the OAI-PMH as a basis for building value-added services. In this presentation we will profile several major OAI-PMH Data and Service Providers, and describe and discuss their innovative content, features, and functionalities." The REVISED and CORRECTED presentation has been self-archived at: [ http://www.public.iastate.edu/~gerrymck/OpenContent.ppt ] BTW:This is a LARGE file [11MB] and Long Presentation [130+ Slides] For your Late-Friday-Afternoon, Late-July Reading-and -Viewing-Pleasure! Enjoy! /Gerry Gerry McKiernan OAI-Compliant Librarian Iowa State University Ames IA 50011 gerrymck(a)iastate.edu "The Revolution Will NOT be Blogged"

1 0

info on santhal tribes
by Mailing List Manager 30 Jul '04

30 Jul '04

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 10:54:36 +0530 From: sumita panse <sumita_panse(a)hotmail.com> Does any library have information on present status of SANTHAL tribes? It might be in the form of journal article or social case study. I would like to know at the earliest. sumita Content researcher Bhartiya vidya bhavan Mumbai

1 0

RE: [LIS-Forum] Autonomous Institutions : Position of Librarians
by Mailing List Manager 30 Jul '04

30 Jul '04

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 11:09:42 +0100 (BST) From: "[iso-8859-1] suresh kumar" <nsureshfcri(a)yahoo.co.in> Dear sir, In the best of my knowledge,in many autonomous organisations- situation is very pathetic.There are no formal rule of law and procedure/regulations for anything . The administrave ministry become a silent spectator to the activities of these organisations. Head of organisation will look forward to get guidelines form Ministry. Service Rules are mixure of Both FRSR and CSIR or similar organisations.In order to implement any Govt. of Inidia ofer,clearence from Governing council/Body required.The members of these Governing bodies are Top officers from Ministry and other Govt. organisations- least bothered about the autonomous bodies/its activities/employees.The failure is not marginal.But I agree that in the case of Hard work, the said advantage?/pressure is there in every autonomous organisation than Govt.since it functions like a private organisation.Similarly there are many autonomous organisations free from all these evils also. thanks Sureshkumar, Librarian,Fluid Control Research Institute(Govt. of India) Palakkad -kerala. nsureshfcri(a)yahoo.co.in --- Mailing List Manager <mailman(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in> wrote: > Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:05:57 +0530 > From: Vyasamoorthy(a)icicikp.com > > Dear Friends: > > There is a plea from some quarters for help / > protection/ standardization > of pay scales, stream-lining promotion policy etc in > Autonomous > Institutions, especially for Librarians. > > Those in Autonomous institutions are at an advantage > over regular > government departments. Only those who are contended > with doing the > routine, collecting salary + perks etc at the end of > the month would enter > govt service. Those who desire to show their > competency, work hard, > improve themselves and the organization they serve > will choose private > organizations. Autonomous institutions under govt > give you the advantage > of both worlds. In an autonomous unit you need to > convince only one or two > bosses at the most and your line is clear for moving > up. In govt set ups > all employees are same; there is not much scope for > merit, intelligence or > hard work. Promotion is ensured by sitting in the > same seat for some years > at a stretch. Whether one deserves or not he would > get increments, salary > revision along with others. > > If you are capable you can move faster than the rest > in an autonomous > unit. If you just want to be mediocre, nobody > prevents you from being so > nor or you sacked for that. Why then crib? I do not > understand. > > Vyasamoorthy, P > _______________________________________________

1 0

A case of sour grapes Re: RE: [LIS-Forum] Autonomous Institutions : Position of Librarians (fwd)
by Mailing List Manager 30 Jul '04

30 Jul '04

Date: 30 Jul 2004 08:22:48 -0000 From: Rajesh K Patil <rajeshbcd(a)rediffmail.com> Moderator's Note ---------------- Rajesh has a valid point. One shouldn't generalize things, especially when it comes to competency. We all have our own unique cracks and flaws. I request all the members to eschew such remarks in future. Let's not debate on it any further. Thanks for your cooperation, - Moderator -------Note ends here----------- � Hi, I don't think it is right to generalize that all Librarians in Government Service are incompetent. Even private sector has incompetent people. To be specific, my interaction with ICICI bank has been extremely disappointing. Hence, please avoid making such statements. Regards. Rajesh Thu, 29 Jul 2004 Mailing List Manager wrote : >Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:05:57 +0530 > From: Vyasamoorthy(a)icicikp.com > >Dear Friends: > >There is a plea from some quarters for help / protection/ standardization >of pay scales, stream-lining promotion policy etc in Autonomous >Institutions, especially for Librarians. > >Those in Autonomous institutions are at an advantage over regular >government departments. Only those who are contended with doing the >routine, collecting salary + perks etc at the end of the month would enter >govt service. Those who desire to show their competency, work hard, >improve themselves and the organization they serve will choose private >organizations. Autonomous institutions under govt give you the advantage >of both worlds. In an autonomous unit you need to convince only one or two >bosses at the most and your line is clear for moving up. In govt set ups >all employees are same; there is not much scope for merit, intelligence or >hard work. Promotion is ensured by sitting in the same seat for some years >at a stretch. Whether one deserves or not he would get increments, salary >revision along with others. > >If you are capable you can move faster than the rest in an autonomous >unit. If you just want to be mediocre, nobody prevents you from being so >nor or you sacked for that. Why then crib? I do not understand. > >Vyasamoorthy, P >_______________________________________________ >LIS-Forum mailing list >LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

1 0

Electronic Library
by Mailing List Manager 29 Jul '04

29 Jul '04

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 10:40:26 +0100 (BST) From: "[iso-8859-1] narayan ghosh" <narayanghosh(a)yahoo.co.uk> This is to write an article titled "Electronic Library: a bare necessity for professional institutions". To establish my logic I require some live example of Libraries digitized their documents or subscribing resources in electronic forms. Please help urgently. N.Ghosh National Institute of Management Calcutta Kolkata

1 0

RE: [LIS-Forum] Autonomous Institutions : Position of Librarians
by Mailing List Manager 29 Jul '04

29 Jul '04

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:05:57 +0530 From: Vyasamoorthy(a)icicikp.com Dear Friends: There is a plea from some quarters for help / protection/ standardization of pay scales, stream-lining promotion policy etc in Autonomous Institutions, especially for Librarians. Those in Autonomous institutions are at an advantage over regular government departments. Only those who are contended with doing the routine, collecting salary + perks etc at the end of the month would enter govt service. Those who desire to show their competency, work hard, improve themselves and the organization they serve will choose private organizations. Autonomous institutions under govt give you the advantage of both worlds. In an autonomous unit you need to convince only one or two bosses at the most and your line is clear for moving up. In govt set ups all employees are same; there is not much scope for merit, intelligence or hard work. Promotion is ensured by sitting in the same seat for some years at a stretch. Whether one deserves or not he would get increments, salary revision along with others. If you are capable you can move faster than the rest in an autonomous unit. If you just want to be mediocre, nobody prevents you from being so nor or you sacked for that. Why then crib? I do not understand. Vyasamoorthy, P

1 0

RE: RE: [LIS-Forum] RE: The Sabo Bill and Open Access
by Mailing List Manager 29 Jul '04

29 Jul '04

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 14:50:10 +0530 From: Manish Mankad <Manish.Mankad(a)unilever.com> I have some comments on Mr. Sathya;s and Mr. Bukhari's observations on OAI. Firstly, let us be clear on the issue of free access ( i.e OAI type) v/s value added access ( i.e paid like CA, WOS etc)..The current Contents is useful only when all the TOCs are cross linked for search purposes else as Mr. Bukhari suggests it has little more to offer. Going further, OAI holds a great future only if has a good search mechanism. Coming to scientist's recognition of his/her work, again that can be viewd into 2 parts: Firstly, as Mr. Bukhari suggests, OAI will improve the knowledge buildup by mutual sharing thereby avoid costly duplication.. this can percolate down to students' level where at present the concerned institutes might not have enough funds to go for those journals ( and that benefits none but publishers ONLY) Secondly, if the information is of IPR type, it will any not appear in the journals before it is registered with the patent authorities. hence fear of loosing a commercial value does not arise. -Manish Mankad Information Services Ext: 208/460 Tel: 022 28276208 Hindustan Lever research Centre B.D. Sawant Marg Andheri (E), Mumbai 400099 INDIA -----Original Message----- Date: 29 Jul 2004 06:36:58 -0000 From: afsar bukhari <bukhari_786(a)rediffmail.com> Dear Friends, I would like to share some of my views in connection with �Sabo Bill & Open Access� as pointed out by Mr. Sathya do chemists world over subscribe �..databases like CA will be superfluous. In present day environment, how many libraries are subscribing to Current Contents of ISI? CC gives alerts of recently published articles. When we have TOC email alerts of journals freely available, then, is it worth going for current contents? Both of them are almost achieving the same objective. It is also worth here to ask how many scientists are looking at CC Moreover, they are rigid in the sense that scientists should go to the library to refer them (because individuals cannot afford to subscribe to them at such prices). What I feel is, future of these services like CA, CC etc in Open Access Environment will depend on what unique features they are offering to the users compared to what is available freely. Regarding the copyright issue Again in the present model, authors of articles do not enjoy copyright. It is the publisher who retains it and makes profit at the cost of library�s displeasure. A primary fact, which should not be forgotten, is: Author publishes his/her work to increase its visibility that offers him recognition in the field. If the article has wider access, it will also stop re-inventing the wheel. And regarding the other apprehension raised by Mr. Sathya If a scientist desires to publish a book out of his research work, will any publisher be willing to pick it up. Yes I agree with this because Sabo bill clearly states Any Federal department or agency that enters into a funding agreement with any person for the performance of scientific research substantially funded by the Federal Government shall include in the agreement a provision that states that copyright protection under this title is not available for any work produced pursuant to such research under the agreement�. The implication of this would be, publisher would have to make the book freely available. In this connection my suggestion is, let the supporters of Open Access (Publishers or National Academies) come forward to accept such manuscripts and make it available in electronic format on net. If any body desires to have its printed version, let an on demand order� be placed with the publisher This is already into practice. At National Academic Press (www.nap.edu) most of the titles are freely available on the net in html or pdf format. And if you like, you can order a title in print at a reasonable price. Looking forward to others views which would enrich my further understanding Happy Reading & Warm regards S.A.A. Bukhari Librarian Shantha Biotechnics Pvt Ltd Medchal Hyderabad www.shanthabiotech.com library.factory(a)shanthabiotech.com On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 sathya wrote : >Question-1 > >Do Chemists world over subscribe to Arun's view that Databases like Chemical >Abstracts will become superfluous as OAI initiative matures covering a large >part of journal content? > >Question-2 > >Saboo bill is a threat to the academic freedom of the scientists which gives >them benefit of copyright for their published research works even though >money is spent by their respective institutes for doing research (be it >federal funding or others)? Are the scientist-authors willing to loose this >academic freedom? This issue which is at the heart of freedom of expression, >a very fundamental individual rights. If a scientist desires to publish a >book out of his research work, will any publisher be willing to pick it up >once the Saboo bill is passed as an act? > >Sathya >-------------------------------------------------- >N V Sathyanarayana >Chairman & Managing Director >Informatics (India) Ltd >Bangalore 560003, India >Phone : 91-80-23365940 >www.informindia.co.in >-------------------------------------------------- > >-----Original Message----- > From: Mailing List Manager [mailto:mailman@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in] >Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 6:31 PM >To: lis-forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >Subject: RE: [LIS-Forum] RE: The Sabo Bill and Open Access > >Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 07:26:27 +0100 (BST) > From: "[iso-8859-1] Subbiah Arunachalam" <subbiah_a(a)yahoo.com> > >Sathya asks how would champions of OA like to deal >with secondary services [sucha as Chemical Abstracts]? > >I have not yet read his editorial and I will wait till >the print version arrives, but in the meantime let me >do a bit of loud thinking. > >The main purpose of OA in general is to make primary >research findings available free to anyone who cares >to read them. Especially final versions of refereed >papers. This goal can be achieved two ways: OAP and >OAA. There are now more than a thousand OAP journals. >Many of them charge a fee upfront from the authors >(who in turn charge it to their funding agencies). >This model is the 'author pays' model of BMC and PLoS. >There are others [like Current Science and Pramana] >which do not charge any fee from the authors or >readers. They charge a subscription fee to print >subscribers and probably get grants from funding >agencies. > >In the OAA approach, authors deposit the full text of >their papers [preprints, final accepted versions of >papers, and postprints] in archives - either a central >archive such as arXiv or an institutional archive. As >the institutional archives are interoperable, to the >searcher it would appear as if all these papers are >located in one distant server; one does not have to >search several servers. What is important to note is >that OAA has adopted the key features of secondary >services such as the use of metadata tags to make a >search for relevant documents. > >If all researchers deposit their papers in >institutional archives [as recommended recently by the >UK House of Commons S&T Committee] anyone having a >decent Internet connection can access any of those >papers deposited anywhere in the world using metadata >[keywords, etc]. > >This is what the secondary services try to achieve >partially. Imagine that I access the print version of >Chemical Abstracts. Using keywords, I can locate >papers of my interest. If I use the electronic version >[SciFinder] I can not only find out papers of my >interest but often can navigate my way to the actual >documents themselves, as SciFinder has agreements with >many primary journals. > >In a perfect world, the secondary services will become >superfluous. My guess is if the archiving habit picks >up [as it has to a large extent in physics], many >scientists will find it less and less necessary to go >to secondary services. A clear example of what >advances in technology can do to the ways in which we >acquire knowledge. > >The Sabo Bill, as proposed by Congressman Martin Sabo, >has a few loopholes as pointed out in some discussion >lists. Peter Suber has suggested some improvements. >With those improvements, if accepted by the US >Congress, the Bill will do a lot of good. > >Of course OA will not cover secondary services. > >Arun > > >--- Mailing List Manager <mailman(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in> >wrote: > Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 19:32:45 +0530 > > From: sathya <sathya(a)informindia.co.in> > > > > Hi Arun > > > > Our Feb 2004 editorial in U&I focuses on Martin > > Saboo's bill and its > > implications - "OAI and the Copyright Battle" > > http://www.informindia.co.in/u&i/Feb2004/u&i.htm > > > > A QUESTION(that haunts me), to Forum members. > > > > What should be the OAI's approach to "Indexes and > > database Aggregations"? > > For example, "Chemical Abstracts" and "the Journal > > of American Chemical > > Society" are different species of knowledge-animal, > > of entirely different > > value. > > Please note, a new separate Act is enacted recently > > by US Government to > > copyright protect databases, while Saboo's bill > > seeks to take-out federally > > funded (substantially) research publications out of > > copyright. > > > > Sathya > > -------------------------------------------------- > > N V Sathyanarayana > > Informatics > > www.informindia.co.in > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > LIS-Forum mailing list > > LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in > > http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum > > > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! >Messenger - all new features - even more fun! >http://www.allnewmessenger.com >_______________________________________________ >LIS-Forum mailing list >LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum >_______________________________________________ >LIS-Forum mailing list >LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum _______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

1 0

Re: RE: [LIS-Forum] RE: The Sabo Bill and Open Access
by Mailing List Manager 29 Jul '04

29 Jul '04

Date: 29 Jul 2004 06:36:58 -0000 From: afsar bukhari <bukhari_786(a)rediffmail.com> Dear Friends, I would like to share some of my views in connection with �Sabo Bill & Open Access� as pointed out by Mr. Sathya do chemists world over subscribe �..databases like CA will be superfluous. In present day environment, how many libraries are subscribing to Current Contents of ISI? CC gives alerts of recently published articles. When we have TOC email alerts of journals freely available, then, is it worth going for current contents? Both of them are almost achieving the same objective. It is also worth here to ask how many scientists are looking at CC Moreover, they are rigid in the sense that scientists should go to the library to refer them (because individuals cannot afford to subscribe to them at such prices). What I feel is, future of these services like CA, CC etc in Open Access Environment will depend on what unique features they are offering to the users compared to what is available freely. Regarding the copyright issue Again in the present model, authors of articles do not enjoy copyright. It is the publisher who retains it and makes profit at the cost of library�s displeasure. A primary fact, which should not be forgotten, is: Author publishes his/her work to increase its visibility that offers him recognition in the field. If the article has wider access, it will also stop re-inventing the wheel. And regarding the other apprehension raised by Mr. Sathya If a scientist desires to publish a book out of his research work, will any publisher be willing to pick it up. Yes I agree with this because Sabo bill clearly states Any Federal department or agency that enters into a funding agreement with any person for the performance of scientific research substantially funded by the Federal Government shall include in the agreement a provision that states that copyright protection under this title is not available for any work produced pursuant to such research under the agreement�. The implication of this would be, publisher would have to make the book freely available. In this connection my suggestion is, let the supporters of Open Access (Publishers or National Academies) come forward to accept such manuscripts and make it available in electronic format on net. If any body desires to have its printed version, let an on demand order� be placed with the publisher This is already into practice. At National Academic Press (www.nap.edu) most of the titles are freely available on the net in html or pdf format. And if you like, you can order a title in print at a reasonable price. Looking forward to others views which would enrich my further understanding Happy Reading & Warm regards S.A.A. Bukhari Librarian Shantha Biotechnics Pvt Ltd Medchal Hyderabad www.shanthabiotech.com library.factory(a)shanthabiotech.com On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 sathya wrote : >Question-1 > >Do Chemists world over subscribe to Arun's view that Databases like Chemical >Abstracts will become superfluous as OAI initiative matures covering a large >part of journal content? > >Question-2 > >Saboo bill is a threat to the academic freedom of the scientists which gives >them benefit of copyright for their published research works even though >money is spent by their respective institutes for doing research (be it >federal funding or others)? Are the scientist-authors willing to loose this >academic freedom? This issue which is at the heart of freedom of expression, >a very fundamental individual rights. If a scientist desires to publish a >book out of his research work, will any publisher be willing to pick it up >once the Saboo bill is passed as an act? > >Sathya >-------------------------------------------------- >N V Sathyanarayana >Chairman & Managing Director >Informatics (India) Ltd >Bangalore 560003, India >Phone : 91-80-23365940 >www.informindia.co.in >-------------------------------------------------- > >-----Original Message----- > From: Mailing List Manager [mailto:mailman@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in] >Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 6:31 PM >To: lis-forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >Subject: RE: [LIS-Forum] RE: The Sabo Bill and Open Access > >Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 07:26:27 +0100 (BST) > From: "[iso-8859-1] Subbiah Arunachalam" <subbiah_a(a)yahoo.com> > >Sathya asks how would champions of OA like to deal >with secondary services [sucha as Chemical Abstracts]? > >I have not yet read his editorial and I will wait till >the print version arrives, but in the meantime let me >do a bit of loud thinking. > >The main purpose of OA in general is to make primary >research findings available free to anyone who cares >to read them. Especially final versions of refereed >papers. This goal can be achieved two ways: OAP and >OAA. There are now more than a thousand OAP journals. >Many of them charge a fee upfront from the authors >(who in turn charge it to their funding agencies). >This model is the 'author pays' model of BMC and PLoS. >There are others [like Current Science and Pramana] >which do not charge any fee from the authors or >readers. They charge a subscription fee to print >subscribers and probably get grants from funding >agencies. > >In the OAA approach, authors deposit the full text of >their papers [preprints, final accepted versions of >papers, and postprints] in archives - either a central >archive such as arXiv or an institutional archive. As >the institutional archives are interoperable, to the >searcher it would appear as if all these papers are >located in one distant server; one does not have to >search several servers. What is important to note is >that OAA has adopted the key features of secondary >services such as the use of metadata tags to make a >search for relevant documents. > >If all researchers deposit their papers in >institutional archives [as recommended recently by the >UK House of Commons S&T Committee] anyone having a >decent Internet connection can access any of those >papers deposited anywhere in the world using metadata >[keywords, etc]. > >This is what the secondary services try to achieve >partially. Imagine that I access the print version of >Chemical Abstracts. Using keywords, I can locate >papers of my interest. If I use the electronic version >[SciFinder] I can not only find out papers of my >interest but often can navigate my way to the actual >documents themselves, as SciFinder has agreements with >many primary journals. > >In a perfect world, the secondary services will become >superfluous. My guess is if the archiving habit picks >up [as it has to a large extent in physics], many >scientists will find it less and less necessary to go >to secondary services. A clear example of what >advances in technology can do to the ways in which we >acquire knowledge. > >The Sabo Bill, as proposed by Congressman Martin Sabo, >has a few loopholes as pointed out in some discussion >lists. Peter Suber has suggested some improvements. >With those improvements, if accepted by the US >Congress, the Bill will do a lot of good. > >Of course OA will not cover secondary services. > >Arun > > >--- Mailing List Manager <mailman(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in> >wrote: > Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 19:32:45 +0530 > > From: sathya <sathya(a)informindia.co.in> > > > > Hi Arun > > > > Our Feb 2004 editorial in U&I focuses on Martin > > Saboo's bill and its > > implications - "OAI and the Copyright Battle" > > http://www.informindia.co.in/u&i/Feb2004/u&i.htm > > > > A QUESTION(that haunts me), to Forum members. > > > > What should be the OAI's approach to "Indexes and > > database Aggregations"? > > For example, "Chemical Abstracts" and "the Journal > > of American Chemical > > Society" are different species of knowledge-animal, > > of entirely different > > value. > > Please note, a new separate Act is enacted recently > > by US Government to > > copyright protect databases, while Saboo's bill > > seeks to take-out federally > > funded (substantially) research publications out of > > copyright. > > > > Sathya > > -------------------------------------------------- > > N V Sathyanarayana > > Informatics > > www.informindia.co.in > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > LIS-Forum mailing list > > LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in > > http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum > > > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! >Messenger - all new features - even more fun! >http://www.allnewmessenger.com >_______________________________________________ >LIS-Forum mailing list >LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum >_______________________________________________ >LIS-Forum mailing list >LIS-Forum(a)ncsi.iisc.ernet.in >http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

1 0