Difference between revisions of "Revising this guide"

From Harvard Open Access Project
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(19 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.
 +
 
 +
== 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.
  
* 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to authors who want to withdraw an article from the repository, for example, because it is mistaken, embarrassing, or superseded by a newer version?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 by [http://www.seas.harvard.edu/~shieber/ Stuart Shieber] and [http://bit.ly/suber-gplus Peter Suber], in consultation with a growing list of other experts. (For the latest list of experts, see the [[Best practices for university OA policies#Preface|Preface]].
+
----
  
* To suggest a revision, or discuss what it means to be listed as an endorsing organization, please contact [mailto:shieber@seas.harvard.edu Stuart] or [mailto:psuber@cyber.law.harvard.edu Peter] directly.
+
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.