tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6424557775521599908.post6307472962105145035..comments2009-05-13T08:36:34.922-07:00Comments on One Big Lab: A win for Open Accessshwuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10635857272681128326noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6424557775521599908.post-30319018712509983002008-02-05T22:52:00.000-08:002008-02-05T22:52:00.000-08:00It's interesting, because I wrote about that same ...It's interesting, because I wrote about that same sentiment (free will vs forced) in a more recent post: http://onebiglab.blogspot.com/2008/02/sharing-in-news.html<BR/><BR/>I wonder if this is too much stick and not enough carrot, but I suppose we'll never know how fast things would have progressed without some central involvement.shwuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10635857272681128326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6424557775521599908.post-68801797673538099672008-02-05T18:19:00.000-08:002008-02-05T18:19:00.000-08:00I am probably less of a fan of this move than most...I am probably less of a fan of this move than most, perhaps cause I'd rather see the community go this way on its own, essentially forcing the closed publishers to go open. <BR/><BR/>The other thing that publishers need to do is think beyond the PDF model, and go the PLoS One way, i.e. a web journal first and a paper journal second. As you point out, the ability to search (structured, unstructured, media, etc) only adds to the usefulness of scientific publications. <BR/><BR/>A web-based model also allows you to think beyond text, although until we can do a better job with capturing metadata in other media forms text is best. You could even start thinking about mashups of a traditional paper and a journal like JoVE :).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com