Re: Embargoes on Deposit in Repositories

["Morgan, Cliff - Chichester" <cmorgan@wiley.com>]

Having mentioned the authors' unrefereed manuscript versus the 
authors' refereed manuscript distinction, you then seem to think 
that referring to "authors' manuscripts" is a model of clarity.

There is quite a difference between unrefereed and refereed 
manuscripts when it comes to third-party investment in the peer 
review process, its management, and journal branding.

Why not follow the NISO/ALPSP recommended terms "Author's 
Original" and "Accepted Manuscript"?

Cliff

----- Original Message -----
From: David Prosser [mailto:david.prosser@rluk.ac.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:57 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Subject: Re: Embargoes on Deposit in Repositories

I think that Sandy's attempts at clarity risk confusing matters.
'Green OA versions' can mean anything from authors' unrefereed
manuscripts, authors' refereed manuscripts, or even the final
'version of record' (there are some publishers, not many but
some, who allow the author to deposit the publishers' PDF - see
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/PDFandIR.html for details).

The OAIG statement I drew attention to is about authors'
manuscripts, exactly as I said.

David