1. Green OA means *OA provided by the author* (usually by self-archiving the refereed, revised, accepted final draft in an OA repository)
2. Gold OA means OA *provided by the journal* (often for a publication fee) 3. Gratis OA means free online access. 4. Libre OA means Gratis OA plus various re-use rights There is no "Platinum" OA. OA is about access, not about funding mechanisms (of which there are three: subscription fee, publication fee, or subsidy [the latter not to be confused with "gratis"]) After at least a decade and a half I think it would be a good idea to stop fussing about what to call it, and focus instead on providing it... Stevan Harnad, Erstwhile Archivangelist On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Beall, Jeffrey <[email protected] > wrote: > For the record, some also use the term "platinum open access," which > refers to open-access publications for which the authors are not charged > (no charge to the author and no charge to the reader). Using this term > brings great clarity to discussions of open-access journals and author > fees. Using "gold" to refer both to journals that charge authors (gold) and > those that do not charge authors (platinum) leads to confusion, ambiguity, > and misunderstanding. > > Some have abused the term "gold open access" to promote open access, > proclaiming, for example, that "most peer-reviewed open access journals > charge no fees at all." [1] This misleading statement is based on a 2012 > study that examined a non-representative subset of open-access journals, a > limited cohort, so conclusions that apply to all OA journals cannot, and > should not, be drawn from it. > > Jeffrey Beall > > [1]. > http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/oct/21/open-access-myths-peter-suber-harvard > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Danny Kingsley > Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:56 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [GOAL] Re: libre vs open - general language issues > > Thanks Helene, > > Yes you are not the first to be confused which was which because I put the > terms in a different order. > > Gold open access is 'born' open access - because it is published open in > an open access journal (with or without a cost), or in a hybrid journal > where the remainder of the journal remains under subscription (always > incurs a cost). There are many, many times that the terms 'gold open > access' has been taken to mean 'pay for open access'. Publishers of course > have done little to dissuade this impression. > > Green open access is 'secondary' open access because it is published in a > traditional manner (usually a susbcription journal) and a copy of the work > is placed in a repository - institutional or subject. > > I hope that is a bit clearer. I agree it would not be easy to change. But > we all used to call things preprints and postprints. That really made no > sense because post-prints were not yet printed. We do not use those terms > any more, not in the UK anyway. We use the terms Submitted Manuscript, > Author's Accepted Manuscript (AAM) and Version of Record (VoR). > > Regards, > > Danny > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was > > scrubbed... > > URL: > > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20150814/8a9 > > 4cdff/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:28:01 +0200 > > From: H?l?ne.Bosc <[email protected]> > > Subject: [GOAL] Re: libre vs open - general language issues > > To: "Global Open Access List \(Successor of AmSci\)" > > <[email protected]> > > Message-ID: <8A81FFDC57274D9287431EE2740BA515@PCdeHelene> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > Yes there is an appetite for trying to rebuilt the past in changing OA > names! > > But even if the words Green and Gold can hurt some people it has been > > adopted for years now by all institutions, for example in European > > reports, since 2006. See the last one in June 2015 : > > http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/open-access-scientific-informati > > on > > > > Of course, everybody can rename Green and Gold as well as Open Access. > But the difficulty will be to get the change worldwide. > > > > Nicolas Pettiaux, for example proposed in a previous mail, "Libre" > instead of "Open Access"! > > > > Therefore mixing his idea with your option, "Born Open Access" and > > "Secondary Open Access" could become "Born Libre" and "Trying to get > > Libre"... ;-) > > > > BTW, I am not sure that I have well understood what means Green and what > means Gold in your proposition! > > > > We could play on this list to find best definition and vote for it! But > the aim of Open Access is not to find the best OA word for 2015, then for > 2016 and for 2020! The aim is to stay clear for all stake holders, at the > time of important political decisions are taken. Policy makers seem to have > understood what is Green and what is Gold. They need only to have more > details on the true Gold and Green roads which really conduct to OA. > > > > To be efficient today, we just need to repeat what is precisely Green or > Gold, and how to get it, in each publication, conference, blog and forum, > as Stevan Harnad and Jean-Claude Gu?don do it for years now. > > > > H?l?ne Bosc > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Danny Kingsley > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 6:56 PM > > Subject: [GOAL] Re: libre vs open - general language issues > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > There is some appetite it seems for looking at definitions at the > moment. In the last couple of weeks I have tweeted about the following: > > > > a.. COAR has a 'Resource Type Vocabulary Draft' - standard naming > of items in repositories available for comment - > https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/ig-controlled-vocabularies-for-repository-assets/deliverables/ > > b.. Open Research Glossary' so we can all be more informed about > vastly complex topic 'Open Scholarship' - > http://blogs.egu.eu/network/palaeoblog/2015/07/14/the-open-research-glossary-round-2/ > > c.. 'We hope to build a common dictionary of terms about open > access to facilitate sharing of information' http:// > http://dictionary.casrai.org/Open_Access_APC_Report > > My issue is with the terms 'green' and 'gold' which are entirely > arbitrary. The main problem I have is that 'gold' implies 'the best' and it > implies 'expensive' and it is not necessarily either. > > > > If we have an option I think we should refer to these two routes to > OA as 'Born Open Access' and 'Secondary Open Access'. Considerably more > understandable to the external audience. > > > > Danny > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
