Pete, and all,
> However, I'd be curious to know if any repository managers on this
list
> agree that keystroke inertia is the main reason. I think the picture
is
> vastly more complicated than just keystrokes - the mistrust of Open
> Access and what it might do for an academics career for example.
This has been discussed at length on the American Scientist Open Access
Forum. I pointed out to Stevan there that academics are actually
unwilling to deposit, no doubt in great part through fear and lack of
understanding of repositories, not just too "lazy". He put it to me that
they "wanted" to deposit but these difficulties meant that they did not
realise this. This is of course rather an alternative way of looking at
the same issue, so it does not seem worth debating it all over again.
For my part at least, as a repository manager, my experience confirms
your suspicion.
I may add that there are additional factors in the case of theses, e.g.
will it affect later monograph publishing etc.
>> (3) I /profoundly/ doubt that if an article lacks some key keywords,
>> they cannot be inferred by smart text-processing software.
This is a really interesting point. A separate but linked point is
whether software can apply subject headings.
> and in other situations irritating) is happening). But a slapdash
> attitude to deposit seems dangerous and asking for trouble - it
implies
> too much faith in technology to solve our problems and look where that
> is getting us in other aspects of life!
>
> Maybe I'm old fashioned, maybe I'm just cautious. Probably I'm both!
:-)
I'm right with you here, not because I think either of us is a
reactionary (considering our professions!) but because we need to make
sure that tools are appropriate for the job, and do what we think they
do, before advocating them.
Thanks,
Talat
|