JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives


JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives

JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives


JISC-REPOSITORIES@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

JISC-REPOSITORIES Home

JISC-REPOSITORIES Home

JISC-REPOSITORIES  March 2008

JISC-REPOSITORIES March 2008

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Need for a richer description, was: RE: Required and Desirable metadata ...

From:

Frances Shipsey <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:18:41 -0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (84 lines)

Hello

Sounds good.

The VERSIONS project toolkit Les mentions is available at:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/library/versions/VERSIONS_Toolkit_v1_final.pdf

Just to note that although the terms preprint, postprint etc are
understandable to the repository community, the term 'postprint'
especially is not a term that's easily understood by authors themselves
in my (and others' experience).  So, the toolkit refers to and defines
five different stages for journal articles, (with the first three based
on what our survey respondents told us they themselves call the
different stages) as:

Draft - Early version circulated as work in progress.
Submitted Version - The version that has been submitted to a journal for
peer review.
Accepted Version - The author-created version that incorporates referee
comments and is the accepted for publication version.
Published Version - the publisher-created published version.
Updated Version - A version updated since publication.

I think Submitted and Accepted can be mapped to preprint and postprint
fairly easily.  I'd suggest avoiding the use of the term 'postprint'
when explaining to our authors which versions to deposit, though it may
be fine as a shorthand for ourselves.

Any comments on the toolkit are welcome, for a toolkit version 2.

Best wishes

Frances

Frances Shipsey
eServices Librarian
Library
London School of Economics and Political Science
10 Portugal Street
London  WC2A 2HD

t: +44(0)20 7955 6915
f: +44(0)20 7955 7454
e: [log in to unmask]
w: www.lse.ac.uk/library 



-----Original Message-----
From: Repositories discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Leslie Carr
Sent: 05 March 2008 09:18
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Need for a richer description, was: RE: Required and
Desirable metadata ...

On 4 Mar 2008, at 15:41, John Smith wrote:

> The problem is that the item referred to may have been published in a 
> peer reviewed journal but the full text available from the repository 
> may not be the final peer reviewed version.

To try and clear up this ambiguity, the next version of EPrints will
ship with metadata as informed by the VERSIONS project toolkit, to try
and identify the role of each document in the scholarly communications
cycle. So each deposited 'eprint' for a published paper could contain
four separate PDFs, each now clearly identified as a preprint, a
postprint, some presentation slides and some supplemental data.  
Previously, authors could add a full-text description for each of the
documents, now they can also choose from a predefined set of values.  
Repository managers will now be able to reliably search for all
published items that only have PREPRINTS deposited, when the ROMEO
status of  the journal indicates that they could deposit postprints or
even publisher versions.

As if repository managers didn't already have enough on their plates :-)
--
Les Carr

PS I ought to say that the VERSIONS project makes no endorsement of
EPrints software, or its implementation of their toolkit
recommendations.

Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/secretariat/legal/disclaimer.htm

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JISCMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
November 2005
October 2005


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager