[Open-access] Well, this is unexpected!
Björn Brembs
b.brembs at googlemail.com
Tue Feb 28 11:41:24 UTC 2012
Mike Taylor wrote:
> On 28 February 2012 08:09, cameronneylon.net
> <cn at cameronneylon.net> wrote:
>> I think IRs and DRs are just publishers, simply different types of publishers for instance - but in the short term keep your ear to the ground for whispers.
> I like the idea of describing IRs as publishers.
I think I don't need to emphasize that pushing the notion
that libraries which host IRs are publishers.
:-)
> That isn't necessarily a point we need to make -- we can just start talking that
> way as though it's always been assumed. "Like other publishers, IRs
> make works available under some specific licence; unlike many other
> publishers, that licence is often permissive." That kind of thing.
In fact, that's one of the things which beg the question:
what do we need 'real' publishers for?
Shouldn't this question be solved first? I still have never
gotten a satisfying answer.
Cheers,
Bjoern
--
Björn Brembs
---------------------------------------------
http://brembs.net
Neurobiology
Freie Universität Berlin
Germany
More information about the open-access
mailing list