[Open-access] @ccess versus open access

[Mike Taylor]

On 1 June 2012 12:26, Tom Olijhoek <tom.olijhoek at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am not completely in agreement with the reasoning for wanting "BOAI
> compliant open access" as the choice term.
>
> My most important objection is that the Berlin declaration added description
> of open access to data and metadata which as far as I can see were not
> included in Budapest Decl which focussed on scholarly publications.

That is an important issue, for sure.

I am not 100% sure that it's the SAME important issue, though.

> The
> Bethesda declaration was strong on the use of open access publication
> records of scientists for appointments:

I am VERY strongly in favour of that!

But it has no place in a *definition* of what Open Access means, which
is really what we're dealing with here.

>  Then second I find the term BOAI compliant a bit cumbersome and not very
> appealing.

Google for "BOAI". The top hit is the right one.

Now Google for "BBB". The meaning we intend for it isn't anywhere on
the first five pages of results. (I got bored of looking for that.)
When "BBB" is mentioned in tweets, no-one who's not already an insider
has any chance of figuring out what we mean by it.

But the real clincher for me is that if we say BOAI there is one place
that someone has to look. If they're trying to determine whether
something is BBB-compliant, then need to look in three places,
compare, contrast, interpret, try to determine whether and where the
definitions are compatible, how they diverge, and so on. All a waste
of time. This needs to be quick, simple and painless.

-- Mike.




>
> Third I think that in the time of having all info only 1 click away ,
> looking up definitions is not really a big deal,  I wonder whether many will
> do so anyway. Interested people can also find all info on BBB definition in
> one place in the Wikipedia chapter on open access.
>
> I am also not wildly enthousiastic about B3 or 3B but I think we should
> refer to all three definitions since they are complementary and have added
> value.
>
>
> cheers
>
> TOM
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Ross Mounce <ross.mounce at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I agree with what Mike has written.
>> >
>> > I also prefer BOAI as it's very easy to look up on the web and there is
>> > a
>> > single definition to read
>>
>>
>> Ditto. All one needs to say is BOAI-compliant Open Access
>> and link to http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read  to define *exactly*
>> what one means. Clear and simple to me.
>>
>>
>> Ross
>>
>> --
>> -/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-
>> Ross Mounce
>> PhD Student & Panton Fellow
>> Fossils, Phylogeny and Macroevolution Research Group
>> University of Bath, 4 South Building, Lab 1.07
>> http://about.me/rossmounce
>> -/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-access mailing list
>> open-access at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
>
>