Revising this guide: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Here some topics under discussion, on which good practices are hard to identify or yet to emerge. | Here some topics under discussion, on which good practices are hard to identify or yet to emerge. | ||
* | * How should universities respond to the Elsevier policy allowing green OA except at institutions with OA mandates? | ||
* | * How should repositories respond to authors who ask to withdraw an article from the repository, for example, because it is mistaken, embarrassing, or superseded by a newer version? | ||
== Procedure == | == Procedure == |
Revision as of 12:27, 18 September 2012
- This is a section within Good practices for university open-access policies.
Substance
Here some topics under discussion, on which good practices are hard to identify or yet to emerge.
- How should universities respond to the Elsevier policy allowing green OA except at institutions with OA mandates?
- How should repositories respond to authors who ask to withdraw an article from the repository, for example, because it is mistaken, embarrassing, or superseded by a newer version?
Procedure
- The guide is edited and written by Stuart Shieber and Peter Suber, in consultation with a growing list of other experts. For the latest list, see the Preface.