LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:41:01 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines)
From: Ivy Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 08:55:22 +0000

Sandy,

As UCSF is a health sciences campus and this was a press release
intended for a general audience, it isn't surprising that the release
referred to scientific articles, which many people would understand.
Those with a more professional interest and understanding would
doubtless read the actual policy and appreciate the fuller context, as
you have.

Best,
- Ivy

Ivy Anderson
Director of Collections
California Digital Library
University of California, Office of the President

-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 23:27:56 -0500

I don't consider it a "minor" point. Some institutions, in fact, have
established OA policies only for certain parts. Harvard, for example,
has an OA policy that applies to its Faculty of Arts and Sciences. I'm
not aware that it is a university-wide policy that applies also, for
example, to the Business School or the Law School. At Stanford it was
the School of Education that first adopted an OA policy.

The announcement mentions "scientific" throughout. One would never
know, without reading the actual policy, that it applies to the
humanities and social sciences as well. I consider that a failure to
properly communicate the actual facts of the policy.

Sandy Thatcher

ATOM RSS1 RSS2