From: "Shillum, Chris (ELS-NYC)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 18:30:48 +0000
Lisa,
Your point is absolutely valid. The transition of RA21 into a joint
STM/NISO initiative has just been finalised, following the completion
of the NISO voting procedure on the matter. A very high priority on
our agenda is now to revise the governance model to include
stakeholders from all sectors.
I believe that RA21 presents a great opportunity to improve access to
scholarly information resources for researchers and students. However,
it will only succeed with cooperation from all parties involved in
providing those resources - librarians, publishers, platform vendors,
and Identity and Access Management experts. We have had great
participation from across those sectors in the meetings and workshops
we've held to date, and we look forward to that continuing in the
future.
Regards
Chris Shillum
VP Platform and Data Integration, Elsevier
Co-chair RA21
T: +1 212 462 1987 M: +1 646 250 8029 E: [log in to unmask]
A: 230 Park Avenue, Suite 800, New York, NY 10169-0935, USA
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1108-3660
-----Original Message-----
From: "Hinchliffe, Lisa W" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:05:40 +0000
I'm not at all of the "no compromise" perspective that many librarians
take. I'm firmly on record (even on video!) of the need to serve all
of the principles in the library code of ethics - including both the
obligation to confidentiality and the obligation to quality service.
What that means in practice is of course always a continuous process
of reflection, careful decision-making, etc.
My concern with RA21 is, notwithstanding Nettie's very helpful posting
earlier today including her hope that librarians engage, is that the
steering committee includes no librarians
(https://ra21.org/index.php/about/). I want to see librarians as part
of the team that develops the strategy for this project and not just
on implementation teams.
Lisa
P.S. Not my first time being disappointed in an STM initiative and how
they conceptualize the role of libraries:
https://www.digital-science.com/blog/perspectives/substantial-enduring-roles-libraries-article-sharing-part-2/
--
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe
Professor/ Coordinator for Information Literacy Services and
Instruction University Library, University of Illinois, 1408 West
Gregory Drive, Urbana, Illinois 61801 [log in to unmask],
217-333-1323 (v), 217-244-4358 (f)
________________________________________
From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 11:16:53 -0400
I am not sure how I feel about these issues or how to think about
them. Culturally and personally I am very much in Lisa's camp, but the
pragmatist in me is not so sure.
First, though, let me be clear that I am not trying to defend anything
the STM Association or anyone else is doing or not doing with regard
to SciHub. That's a commercial issue, but Lisa is getting at something
more important.
What perplexes me is how to influence discussion without entering the
discussion. If one's opening and foundational position is "no
compromise to privacy," strong forces, political as well as
commercial, will simply not engage you in conversation. Is the more
prudent role, if less satisfying philosophically, to soften the tone
and role up one's sleeves?
I have written about this elsewhere:
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2016/06/23/libraries-may-have-gotten-the-privacy-thing-all-wrong/
I am truly perplexed by this entire issue and how to move it forward.
Joe Esposito
|
