Difference between revisions of "Revising this guide"

From Harvard Open Access Project
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(21 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
* This is a section within [[Best practices for university OA policies]].
+
* This is a section within [[Good practices for university open-access policies]].
  
 
{| align="right"
 
{| align="right"
Line 7: Line 7:
 
== Substance ==
 
== Substance ==
  
Here some topics under discussion, on which best practices are hard to identify or yet to emerge.
+
Here are some topics under discussion. In some cases, we're still working out our recommendations. In some cases, good practices are hard to identify or yet to emerge.
  
* What are the best practices for responding to the Elsevier policy allowing green OA except at institutions with OA mandates?
+
* How should universities assure OA for approved theses and dissertations?
 +
** Until the guide adds entries on theses and dissertations, see Recommendation 1.2 of the [http://www.soros.org/openaccess/boai-10-recommendations ten-year anniversary statement of the Budapest Open Access Initiative] (September 2012): "Every institution of higher education offering advanced degrees should have a policy assuring that future theses and dissertations are deposited upon acceptance in the institution's OA repository. At the request of students who want to publish their work, or seek a patent on a patentable discovery, policies should grant reasonable delays rather than permanent exemptions." Also see Peter Suber, [http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:4727443 Open access to electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs)], ''SPARC Open Access Newsletter'', July 2, 2006.
  
* What are the best practices for responding to authors who want to withdraw an article from the repository, for example, because it is mistaken, embarrassing, or superseded by a newer version?
+
== Procedure ==
 +
 
 +
* The guide is written and edited by [http://www.seas.harvard.edu/~shieber/ Stuart Shieber] and [http://bit.ly/suber-gplus Peter Suber], in consultation with a growing list of experts. For the latest list, see the [[Good practices for university open-access policies#Preface|Preface]].
 +
 
 +
* To suggest a revision, or to be listed as an endorsing organization, please [mailto:shieber@seas.harvard.edu,psuber@cyber.law.harvard.edu contact Stuart and Peter] directly.
  
== Procedure ==
 
  
///Here we should explain who wrote the guide, who decides what counts as a best practice (including whether to accept suggested revisions), how others may submit suggestions, and how others may join the group making editorial decisions.
 
  
///Here we should also explain how an organization may add its name to the group endorsing the guide and what that means for decisions about future revisions.
+
----
  
///If we're open to recommending divergent practices on some points, say so here.
+
Return to the [[Good_practices_for_university_open-access_policies|table of contents]].

Latest revision as of 20:54, 27 October 2014

Substance

Here are some topics under discussion. In some cases, we're still working out our recommendations. In some cases, good practices are hard to identify or yet to emerge.

  • How should universities assure OA for approved theses and dissertations?
    • Until the guide adds entries on theses and dissertations, see Recommendation 1.2 of the ten-year anniversary statement of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (September 2012): "Every institution of higher education offering advanced degrees should have a policy assuring that future theses and dissertations are deposited upon acceptance in the institution's OA repository. At the request of students who want to publish their work, or seek a patent on a patentable discovery, policies should grant reasonable delays rather than permanent exemptions." Also see Peter Suber, Open access to electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs), SPARC Open Access Newsletter, July 2, 2006.

Procedure



Return to the table of contents.