From: "Hinchliffe, Lisa W" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 01:40:16 +0000

It is absolutely the case that current reality does not match the thought
experiment - as Sandy's example demonstrates.

On the other hand, if all content were open as posited in the thought
experiment, the links Sandy found in GS would have been to an open copy.

Lisa


--Lisa Janicke Hinchcliffe
Professor/Coordinator for Information Literacy Services and Instruction
University Library 434, University of Illinois,
Urbana, Illinois 61801
[log in to unmask]



On 5/5/16, 3:40 PM, "LibLicense-L Discussion Forum on behalf of
LIBLICENSE" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 23:53:03 -0500
>
>I tried using Google Scholar to locate my most recently published
>article: Open-Access Monograph Publishing and the Origins of the
>Office of Digital Scholarly Publishing at Penn State University. It
>appeared in the April 2015 issue of the Journal of Scholarly
>Publishing.  Google Scholar takes me to two sites, the publisher's
>site (UTP) and Project Muse. Interestingly, it does not take me to
>Penn State's IR where the Green OA version of the article may be
>obtained. So, in this instance, although an OA version of the article
>is available, Google Scholar does not help locate it.
>
>Sandy Thatcher
>
>
>
>At 9:21 PM -0400 5/4/16, LIBLICENSE wrote:
>>
>> From: "Hinchliffe, Lisa W" <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 23:24:19 +0000
>>
>> I always enjoy a thought experimentŠ.
>>
>> If content were all open (and in this thought experiment let's assume
>> that is retroactive as well), GS could serve the function (as long as
>> GOOG keeps it around). But, if we in libraries could re-purpose all
>> the effort that is currently spent in libraries on enabling
>> toll-access and mitigating against breaches, we might also create
>> in-the-workflow tools for research groups/communities/campuses that
>> would put access and discovery into existing information task tools
>> rather than relying on a separate GS or the like system where
>> information resources are retrieved and then brought into other
>> systems for use, manipulation, etc. They could instead be accessed in
>> situ. Especially if we are talking known item retrieval. For topical
>> searches, I think the lessons of many studies of web-scale discovery
>> thus far show that - as much value as there can be in "here's
>> everything search across it" - there is also value in curated
>> collections for particular communities and content areas. So, we could
>> do more of that as well if we didn't have to always battle against
>> content being in different toll-access systems.
>>
>> Lisa