[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Monopolies in publishing
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: RE: Monopolies in publishing
- From: David Goodman <dgoodman@princeton.edu>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:29:45 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Jan, you might be over-simplifying a little when you say that the best "guarantee [of] optimal dissemination [is] via open access." Certainly the physical availability is one part of effective dissemination. But so is knowledge of the existence of the article, and knowledge that the article is likely to be worth reading. Most people do look through at least one or two key journals, and an article on their subject in such a journal will come to their effective notice. (Certainly there are other ways, but in practice that's the current awareness method most of us do use. And that it's worth reading is partly known through the certification of the journal's name. (Again, there are other methods. I am told that physicists sometimes simply look for familiar author names in the appropriate section of ArXiv, for example.) This doesn't only apply to journals: the best way to get me to read something is to post it on this list--not just any list. I could search Google every day or so for familiar names, too (but I don't--partly because I want to see the newcomers.) So besides open access, the other parts are widespread practical awareness, and quality. When projects such as yours achieve them, they will have succeeeded. You know that I hope it will be very soon. Dr. David Goodman Princeton University Library and Palmer School of Library & Information Science, Long Island University dgoodman@princeton.edu
- Prev by Date: RE: Monopolies in publishing
- Next by Date: xreferplus Adds Bridgeman Art Library Images
- Previous by thread: RE: Monopolies in publishing
- Next by thread: RE: Monopolies in publishing
- Index(es):