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:
Wed, 19 Mar 2014 20:55:00 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (68 lines)
From: "Pikas, Christina K." <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:03:21 -0400

A common misconception is that all physics is in ArXiv. While some
areas of physics are covered as much as 80%, others like AMO are only
covered at about 20%. That's one reason the journals are still needed.
For HEP, the SCOAP3 deal will make the articles available. Once again,
that's just a small area of Physics.

Christina

Christina K. Pikas
Librarian
The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----

From: David Groenewegen <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 12:01:10 +1100

Given that these are all Physics titles it would be really interesting
to know if arXiv becomes the default option for accessing these
articles in the future. Have you thought about trying to track that?

Are you planning to direct your users there as an option for accessing articles?

David Groenewegen


On 17/03/2014 7:27 AM, LIBLICENSE wrote:
>
> From: "Nunnenmacher, Lothar" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:20:16 +0000
>
> Dear colleagues
>
> In the last summer, there was a discussion about the new APS tiering
> system here in the list, which is based solely on usage. It was
> discussed, whether this is fair and whether smaller institutions
> suffer most from it.
>
> Actually, we - the Library for the Research Institutes within the ETH
> domain - did suffer. And we draw consequences of this. We cut down the
> subscription from APS-ALL to two titles. Some of you might be
> interested in seeing our news on this topic, where we also explain,
> that tiering according to usage is a bad idea:
>
> http://www.lib4ri.ch/news.html++/year/2014/item/82/
>
> We did not have many reactions of our users, yet (which is a also good
> indicator for a reasonable decision), but at least one senior
> researcher will cease doing reviews for APS as long as he has no
> access to the journals. And the decision was discussed in several
> directorates within our research institutes.
>
> I know from similar problems in France and Belgium:
>
> http://www.mysciencework.com/news/11109/an-epidemic-of-journal-subscri
> ption-cancellations
>
> However, with a cursory search on the web I did not find any such news
> from UK, US or elsewhere. Was there no problem with these immense
> price increases?
>
> Lothar

ATOM RSS1 RSS2