<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Stevan,<br>
<br>
Repositories are not an authoritative source of metadata about
paper-journal relation. Metadata is put there by authors themselves
and it can be missing, incomplete or erroneous, in extreme cases
even fake. Thus in practice repository collections are flat even if
metadata is present.<br>
<br>
If you think that finding Green articles is impossible, then you
shall not be surprised that we focus on Gold first, right?<br>
<br>
Best<br>
Marcin<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/13/2014 02:14 PM, Stevan Harnad
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:401C70D8-E260-49A7-A06D-6483433D9D72@ecs.soton.ac.uk"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
On Oct 12, 2014, at 4:50 PM, Marcin Wojnarski <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mwojnarski@paperity.org">mwojnarski@paperity.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
<div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Dear Stevan,<br>
We started with Gold, because we believe that journals play
a fundamental role in the system</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> of scholarly
communication and every service that tries to facilitate
access to literature must</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">start with journals, not
only with a flat collection of papers like the one found in
repositories. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
Dear Marcin,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think there may be a fundamental misunderstanding here.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Green OA consists of self-archived <b>journal articles</b>
and their bibliographic metadata — including</div>
<div>journal name.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And institutional repositories consist of an institution’s <b>journal
article</b> output.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Nothing “flat” about those!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Were you perhaps thinking that repositories just contain
unpublished preprints and gray</div>
<div>literature?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">For 400 years, journals
have been the backbone of the system, the main structural
element. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
I don’t understand why you are pointing this out: From the very
outset the Open Access movement </div>
<div>has been very specifically about opening access to <b>journal
articles</b>. Please see the original BOAI statement:</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read">http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding:
0px;">
<div><span style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica;
background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><i>"The literature
that should be freely accessible online is that which
scholars </i></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica;
background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><i>give to the world
without expectation of payment. Primarily, this category </i></span></div>
<div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font
face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"><i>encompasses their <b>peer-reviewed
journal articles</b>…"</i></font></span></div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">They provide a brand
name for papers, create consistent editoral policy and take
responsibility</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">for the quality and
relevance of articles they publish - these features are of
topmost importance</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">for readers, without
them navigating through millions of articles becomes
infeasible.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
Marcin, it remains clear why you are telling us this. We all
know it. What I asked you was:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding:
0px;">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<blockquote
cite="mid:AE0EAD8D-CF20-442C-88D8-DD621988F52D@ecs.soton.ac.uk"
type="cite">Harvesting Gold OA journal articles is a
piece of cake. How will Paperity/redex harvest</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<blockquote
cite="mid:AE0EAD8D-CF20-442C-88D8-DD621988F52D@ecs.soton.ac.uk"
type="cite">
<div><b>Green OA articles published in non-OA journals</b>
but made OA somewhere on the</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<blockquote
cite="mid:AE0EAD8D-CF20-442C-88D8-DD621988F52D@ecs.soton.ac.uk"
type="cite">
<div>Web </div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">That said, we're fully
aware how much great unique content there is in repositories
and we’d</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">like very much to merge
these two streams - Gold and Green - in Paperity at some
point. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The great unique content in repositories is the very same
great unique content that there is in journals.</div>
<div>Gold OA and Green OA both consist of <b>journal articles</b>.
There are many more non-Gold journals</div>
<div>and non-Gold journal-articles than Gold ones. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Why is Paperity focusing on Gold?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Why is all the rest only to be merged "at some point”?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And how, exactly?</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">Although there are some
tensions inside OA community between the Gold and Green
camps,</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">I think they are
unjustified, because these routes are complementary, not
competitive. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
You are quite right, the two roads to OA are complementary, not
competitive.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But in order to complement one another they must both be
clearly understood, and much</div>
<div>of the tension is about misunderstandings, for example, that
OA = Gold OA while Green OA</div>
<div>is about something else (preprints, gray literature).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And another point of tension is about priorities: Which needs
to come first, Gold or Green?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(My own reply is that it is for many important reasons Green
that must come first: (1) because </div>
<div>Green does not cost the author money, (2) because Green can
be mandated by institutions and </div>
<div>funders, and (3) because by coming first Green will make
subscriptions unsustainable, force</div>
<div>journals to cut obsolete costs, downsize to providing peer
review alone, and convert to</div>
<div>to affordable, sustainable, Fair Gold instead of today’s
over-priced, double-paid pre-Green Fools Gold.</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://j.mp/fairgoldOA">http://j.mp/fairgoldOA</a></div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">As to indexing, it is
actually much easier to be done for repositories than for
journals,</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">because most repos
expose standardized interfaces. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Then why is Paperity starting with Gold OA journal articles
instead of Green OA journal</div>
<div>articles in repositories?</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">So we don't need Google
Scholar for this purpose, only as I said, we believe that
the</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">right order is journals
first.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
What you have said it that you believe the right order is Gold
OA first, but you have</div>
<div>certainly not explained why — apart from the fact that Gold
OA is certainly much</div>
<div><i>easier</i> to access and aggregate:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Gold OA journal article blibliographic data can be harvested
from the journals’</div>
<div>websites using DOAJ to identify all the journals.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But how are you going to find all the Green OA journal
articles, if not with</div>
<div>Google Scholar? (WoS or SCOPUS can find you all journal
articles, but</div>
<div>but won’t tell you which ones are Green OA.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(BASE provides some of these data; ROAR 2.0 will soon provide
it all.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best wishes,</div>
<div>Stevan</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <br>
Best<br>
Marcin<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/12/2014 01:51 PM, Stevan
Harnad wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:AE0EAD8D-CF20-442C-88D8-DD621988F52D@ecs.soton.ac.uk"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
Harvesting Gold OA journal articles is a piece of cake.
How will Paperity/redex harvest
<div>Green OA articles published in non-OA journals but
made OA somewhere on the</div>
<div>Web — via Google Scholar?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sounds like a splendid idea if it can be done… But
not if it is just Gold-biassed,</div>
<div>because most refereed research is not Gold, and the
fastest growing form of</div>
<div>OA is Green (because of mandates, and absence of
extra cost).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>SH</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Marcin Wojnarski, Founder of Paperity, <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.paperity.org/">www.paperity.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinwojnarski">www.linkedin.com/in/marcinwojnarski</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.facebook.com/Paperity">www.facebook.com/Paperity</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.twitter.com/Paperity">www.twitter.com/Paperity</a>
Paperity. Open science aggregated.
</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
GOAL mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org">GOAL@eprints.org</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org">GOAL@eprints.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Marcin Wojnarski, Founder of Paperity, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.paperity.org">www.paperity.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinwojnarski">www.linkedin.com/in/marcinwojnarski</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.facebook.com/Paperity">www.facebook.com/Paperity</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.twitter.com/Paperity">www.twitter.com/Paperity</a>
Paperity. Open science aggregated.
</pre>
</body>
</html>