[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>, <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component
- From: "David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 20:16:28 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
I can only add to DS's summary: we should be concerned not only with institutions too small to run their own IR, but with those lacking the stability of staff, interest, and funding to guarantee their permanent operation and updating. Implementing an IR does not mean starting one with the present tools, and maintaining it at that level, adding documents as they arrive. It means, at the very least, committing to the perpetual upgrades as the state of the art advances --and, inevitably, becomes more complicated. (Just as with libraries. It's not enough to buy books, or even enough to endow funds to continue buying books. It's necessary to commit to the future conversions, upgrades, and changes in role. ) Dr. David Goodman Associate Professor Palmer School of Library and Information Science Long Island University dgoodman@liu.edu -----Original Message----- From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu on behalf of David Stern Sent: Wed 5/4/2005 11:02 PM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: Re: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component While Stevan's push for 100% coverage of academic materials within OA repositories is on target, I still believe that we need a more reliable and universal infrastructure for decentralized repositories ... one that includes long-term support, which means funding for all authors and organized R&D for enhanced navigation. The present loose federation of existing D-Space (and other) and possible FEDORA-based institutional repository (IR) platforms does not yet offer the scalable design that we require in order to develop integrated tools with universal storage. Perhaps we need to devlop a blend of IRs and discipline-based repositories (a la arXiv) in order to provide platforms and navigation for all users -- not just those in organizations able to run their own IRs? We have the technology, now we need to focus our support on a plan that provides universal storage and access ... with or without the peer review overlay for the present time. David David Stern Director of Science Libraries and Information Services Kline Science Library New Haven, CT 06520-8111 email: david.e.stern@yale.edu
- Prev by Date: Re: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component
- Next by Date: Re: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component
- Previous by thread: Re: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component
- Next by thread: Re: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component
- Index(es):