Publishing – Page 99 – DigitalKoans

"Public Availability of Published Research Data in High-Impact Journals"

Alawi A. Alsheikh-Ali et al. have published "Public Availability of Published Research Data in High-Impact Journals" in PLOS ONE.

Here's an excerpt:

We reviewed the first 10 original research papers of 2009 published in the 50 original research journals with the highest impact factor. For each journal we documented the policies related to public availability and sharing of data. Of the 50 journals, 44 (88%) had a statement in their instructions to authors related to public availability and sharing of data. However, there was wide variation in journal requirements, ranging from requiring the sharing of all primary data related to the research to just including a statement in the published manuscript that data can be available on request. Of the 500 assessed papers, 149 (30%) were not subject to any data availability policy. Of the remaining 351 papers that were covered by some data availability policy, 208 papers (59%) did not fully adhere to the data availability instructions of the journals they were published in, most commonly (73%) by not publicly depositing microarray data. The other 143 papers that adhered to the data availability instructions did so by publicly depositing only the specific data type as required, making a statement of willingness to share, or actually sharing all the primary data. Overall, only 47 papers (9%) deposited full primary raw data online. None of the 149 papers not subject to data availability policies made their full primary data publicly available.

| Digital Curation Resource Guide | Digital Scholarship |

Copyright Clearance Center Launches New Service for Publishers: Open Access Solutions

The Copyright Clearance Center has launched a new service for Publishers called Open Access Solutions.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

CCC helps publishers manage variable Open Access (OA) models through its RightsLink™ platform, which supports unique pricing rules, licenses and messaging for OA journals, encouraging compliance with funding agency requirements. . . .

CCC makes it easier for publishers to charge different Open Access fees pre-publication based on variables such as author affiliation/membership, funding source and journal type; communicates publisher-specified reuse rights post-publication to users seeking permissions for all content including Open Access articles; captures valuable data about user interest in and reuse of publishers' Open Access publications; and provides the ability for publishers to add RightsLink to its content wherever it resides online, even in third-party repositories such as HighWire or PubMed Central.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Confronting the Crisis in Scientific Publishing: Latency, Licensing and Access"

Jorge L. Contreras has self-archived "Confronting the Crisis in Scientific Publishing: Latency, Licensing and Access" in the American University Washington College of Law Digital Commons.

Here's an excerpt:

In this article, I propose an alternative private ordering solution based on latency values observed in open access stakeholder negotiation settings. Under this proposal, research institutions would collectively develop and adopt publication agreements that do not transfer copyright ownership to publishers, but instead grant publishers a one-year exclusive period in which to publish a work. This limited period of exclusivity should enable the publisher to recoup its costs and a reasonable profit through subscription revenues, while restoring control of the article copyright to the author at the end of the exclusivity period. This balanced approach addresses the needs of both publishers and the scientific community, and would, I believe, avoid many of the challenges faced by existing open access models.

| Digital Scholarship Overview | Digital Scholarship |

New Open Access Series from UC Berkeley: California Classical Studies

The University of California, Berkeley's Department of Classics has established a new open access series, California Classical Studies.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The series is intended to provide a peer-reviewed open-access venue for disseminating basic research, data-heavy research, including archaeological research, and highly specialized research of the kind that is either hard to place with the leading publishers in Classics or extremely expensive for libraries and individuals when produced by a leading academic publisher. . . .

Apart from aiming to publish 15 titles in the first three to four years, the startup phase will also test different workflows for production and assess the impact of various pricing models for Print on Demand and ebook versions. Some works will have images, plans, datasets, or other material offered only online. While every work will be available in full for page view from the date of first appearance, the series will experiment with the feasibility of shorter and longer embargo periods, or no embargo period, before free download of a full PDF is made available. Finally, the project is intended to find a path to sustainability, which will depend partly on how much revenue can be generated from sales and how far down production costs can be driven, but also on the willingness of institutions, administrators, and individual scholars with access to research grants to make an initial investment in open-access scholarly communication rather than bear the costs of library purchases and especially of ongoing licensing fees for digital material controlled by major publishers.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Hathitrust Wins Authors Guild, Inc. et al. v. Hathitrust et al. Case

James Grimmelmann reports in "HathiTrust Wins" that Hathitrust has won the Authors Guild, Inc. et al. v. Hathitrust et al. case .

Here's an excerpt:

On every substantive copyright issue, HathiTrust won:

Section 108 on library privileges doesn't limit the scope of fair use.

A search index and access for the print-disabled are both fair uses.

Search indexing is a transformative use.

The libraries aren't making commercial uses, even though they partnered with Google to get the scans.

The plaintiffs haven't proven that HahiTrust is creating any security risks.

There is no market for scanning and print-disabled access, nor is one likely to develop.

UM is required under the ADA to provide equal access to the print-disabled, and is allowed to under Section 121 of the Copyright Act.

| Reviews of Digital Scholarship Publications | Digital Scholarship |

Google and Publishers Settle Seven-Year-Old Copyright Lawsuit over Google Library Project

Google and the Association of American Publishers have settled the copyright lawsuit over Google Library Project. The related Authors Guild lawsuit has not been settled.

Here's an excerpt from the Google press release:

The agreement settles a copyright infringement lawsuit filed against Google on October 19, 2005 by five AAP member publishers. As the settlement is between the parties to the litigation, the court is not required to approve its terms.

The settlement acknowledges the rights and interests of copyright-holders. US publishers can choose to make available or choose to remove their books and journals digitized by Google for its Library Project. Those deciding not to remove their works will have the option to receive a digital copy for their use.

Apart from the settlement, US publishers can continue to make individual agreements with Google for use of their other digitally-scanned works. . . .

Google Books allows users to browse up to 20% of books and then purchase digital versions through Google Play. Under the agreement, books scanned by Google in the Library Project can now be included by publishers.

Open Access: SCOAP3 Launched

The SCOAP3 open access initiative has been launched at a meeting at CERN, and it will become operational in 2014.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

In the SCOAP3 model, libraries and funding agencies pool resources currently used to subscribe to journal content and use them to support the peer-review system directly instead. Journal publishers then make their articles Open Access, which means that anyone can read them. Authors retain the copyright, and generous licenses for re-use are used.

Publishers of 12 journals, accounting for the vast majority of articles in the field, have been identified for participation in SCOAP3 through an open and competitive process, and the SCOAP3 initiative looks forward to establishing more partnerships with key institutions in Europe, America and Asia as it moves through the technical steps of organizing the re-direction of funds from the current subscription model to a common internationally coordinated fund.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Understanding and Making Use of Academic Authors’ Open Access Rights"

David R. Hansen has published "Understanding and Making Use of Academic Authors' Open Access Rights" in the latest issue of the Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication.

Here's an excerpt:

METHODS To understand the scope of author-retained rights (including the right to purchase hybrid or other open access options) at some sample universities, author-rights data through the SHERPA/RoMEO API was combined with individual article citations (from Thomson Reuters' Web of Science) for works published over a one-year period (2011) and authored by individuals affiliated with five major U.S. research universities. RESULTS Authors retain significant rights in the articles that they create. Of the 29,322 unique articles authored over the one year period at the five universities, 28.83 percent could be archived in final PDF form and 87.95 percent could be archived as the post-print version. Nearly 43.47 percent also provided authors the choice of purchasing a hybrid paid open access option. DISCUSSION A significant percentage of current published output could be archived with little or no author intervention. With prior approval through an open access policy or otherwise, article manuscripts or final PDFs can be obtained and archived by library staff, and hybrid paid-OA options could be negotiated and exploited by library administrators.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Important Changes for Users and Participants of the Open Access Tracking Project

The Open Access Tracking Project is migrating to TagTeam.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) is moving to TagTeam.

If you previously subscribed to OATP feeds as a reader, or helped build OATP feeds as a tagger, this page explains how to continue with the TagTeam version of the project. If you haven't previously participated in OATP, this page explains how to get started.

As a reader, you should stop subscribing to the Connotea versions of the OATP feeds and start subscribing to the TagTeam versions. Starting September 17, 2012, only the TagTeam versions will be comprehensive.

As a tagger, you may continue to tag at Connotea if you wish. But you are now free to tag for OATP from other tagging platforms as well. Either way, you'll have to tell TagTeam to follow your OATP tagging activity.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Budapest Open Access Initiative Issues Recommendations for Next Ten Years of Open Access Development

The Budapest Open Access Initiative has issued recommendations for the next ten years of open access development.

Here's an excerpt:

Ten years ago the Budapest Open Access Initiative launched a worldwide campaign for open access (OA) to all new peer-reviewed research. It didn't invent the idea of OA. On the contrary, it deliberately drew together existing projects to explore how they might "work together to achieve broader, deeper, and faster success." But the BOAI was the first initiative to use the term "open access" for this purpose, the first to articulate a public definition, the first to propose complementary strategies for realizing OA, the first to generalize the call for OA to all disciplines and countries, and the first to be accompanied by significant funding. . . .

The problems that previously held up the adoption and implementation of OA are solved, and the solutions are spreading. But until OA spreads further, the problems for which OA is a solution will remain largely unsolved. In this statement, we reaffirm the ends and means of the original BOAI, and recommit ourselves to make progress. But in addition, we specifically set the new goal that within the next ten years, OA will become the default method for distributing new peer-reviewed research in every field and country.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Publishers Appeal Georgia State E-reserves Case

Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and Sage Publications have filed an appeal in the Cambridge University Press et al. v. Patton et al. case.

Here's an excerpt from the press release announcing the publishers' intent to appeal:

This case had the potential to mark a significant first step toward addressing the need for clarity around issues of copyright in the context of higher education, where current practices around fair use in a digital environment vary widely and could benefit from sound judicial guidance. Our hope was that the District Court would provide that guidance.

Instead, the Court's rulings, culminating in the August injunction decision, shift radically from long-accepted fair use principles and introduce, among other errors, unsustainable policies regarding the proportion of a work not readily available for digital licensing that can be digitally copied without restriction. We have no alternative but to appeal, to protect our authors' copyrights and advocate for a balanced and workable solution.

Read more about it at "Publishers Appeal Ruling in GSU E-Reserves Case."

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010: "SEP [Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography] is compiled with utter professionalism. It reminds me of the work of the best artisans who know not only every item that leaves their workshops, but each component used to create them—providing the ideal quality control." — Péter Jacsó ONLINE 27, no. 3 (2003): 73-76. | Digital Scholarship |

UK Government Allocates £10 Million to Support Open Access

The UK Government has allocated £10 million to support open access in UK research universities.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The investment will enable a number of research-intensive UK institutions to kick-start the process of developing policies and setting up funds to meet the costs of article processing charges (APCs). This is in line with the recommendations of the Finch report on open access, published in June. . . .

The investment will be made to 30 institutions receiving funding through Research Councils and UK higher education funding councils. It is in addition to the contribution RCUK will be making to institutions to support payment of APCs associated with open access through block funding grants from 1 April 2013 onwards. More details of this will be announced in the autumn.

The UK Funding Councils will launch a consultation this autumn on implementing a requirement that research outputs submitted to any future Research Excellence Framework (REF) should be as widely accessible as possible.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Researcher Attitudes and Behaviour Towards the ‘Openness’ of Research Outputs in Agriculture and Related Fields

Coherence in Information for Agricultural Research for Development has released Researcher Attitudes and Behaviour Towards the 'Openness' of Research Outputs in Agriculture and Related Fields.

Here's an excerpt:

An online worldwide survey of researchers in agriculture and related fields was carried out in March 2011 by the CGIAR, FAO and GFAR on behalf of the CIARD (Coherence in Information for Agricultural Research for Development) initiative. The aim of the survey was to gain greater understanding of researcher behaviours and attitudes in relation to communicating research outputs and making such outputs open and accessible. There were almost 1500 responses to the survey, with 50% of respondents identifying that they worked in Latin America and 33% in Africa. The survey analysis shows that, although researchers are driven in their work by many different and interacting motivations, institutional/organizational factors are very important and have much influence over individuals' behaviour. Often, making a research output freely and openly available can be in the hands of the individual, and some will act in this way. However, for many others there are perceived barriers to this, such as the lack of required resources and of institutional policies to drive these activities. Further, current behaviours in choosing routes to communicate research results are still strongly biased toward the traditional routes of publishing in journals and books and appearing at conferences, though the availability and increasing use of digital formats is starting to broaden the spread of communication pathways used. The paper ends with reference to the relevance and importance to the CIARD initiative of the results of the survey.

| Open Access Bibliography: Liberating Scholarly Literature with E-Prints and Open Access Journals | Digital Scholarship |

"Tectonic Movements toward OA in the UK and Europe"

Peter Suber has published "Tectonic Movements toward OA in the UK and Europe" in the latest issue of the SPARC Open Access Newsletter.

Here's an excerpt:

Because this article is long, I'm including a table of contents:

1. Three major OA announcements from the UK on the same day

2. Some recent history as context for these announcements

3. Basics of the new RCUK policy

4. Basics of the Finch recommendations

5. General agreement between the RCUK policy and Finch recommendations

6. Appreciation of the large-scale shift to OA in the UK

7. Some consequences for journals and authors

8. Responding to publisher fears of green OA

9. Objections and recommendations

10. Announcements from Europe the day after the UK announcements

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography: "This bibliography is recommended for everyone interested in open access publishing." — M. Blobaum, Journal of the Medical Library Association 100, no. 1 (2012): 73. | Digital Scholarship |

Publisher Plaintiffs Issue Statement on Order in Georgia State University E-Reserves Copyright Case

The publisher plaintiffs have issued a statement on Judge Orinda Evans' order in the Georgia State University e-reserves copyright case.

Here's an excerpt:

The District Court's decision is marred by a number of serious legal errors. The fair use exception cannot be stretched beyond recognition simply because course materials are delivered in a digital format by an educational institution. The ruling excuses copyright violations by GSU and endorses unauthorized copying and distribution of academic works well beyond what the law allows and what universities across the country consider reasonable. The decision devalues academic scholarship by treating such work as 'factual' compilations. . . .

As with the initial decision to bring suit, the decision regarding an appeal will be based on a considered assessment that takes into account the extent to which this ruling, which we believe to be legally vulnerable on multiple grounds, endangers the creation and dissemination of high-quality academic work

Georgia State University has also issued a statement about the order.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Weblog | Digital Scholarship |

Wiley Open Access Program Adopts Creative Commons Attribution Licence

Effective immediately, journals in the Wiley Open Access program will use the Creative Commons Attribution Licence for articles.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Rachel Burley, Vice President and Director, Open Access, commented, "Wiley is committed to meeting the evolving needs of the authors who wish to provide open access to the published articles that convey the results of their research."

Burley continued, "Our announcement today concerns Wiley’s fully open access journals. We are also reviewing the licensing arrangements for our hybrid program OnlineOpen, our open access option for individual articles published in subscription journals. In consultation with our publishing partners, we aim to continue to develop and deliver sustainable open access products providing author choice and high levels of service."

In the first instance, the journals moving to the CC-BY licence are Brain and Behavior, Ecology and Evolution, MicrobiologyOpen, Cancer Medicine, Food Science & Nutrition, Evolutionary Applications, Geoscience Data Journal and EMBO Molecular Medicine.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Ebook Acquisition and Lending Briefing: Public, Academic and Research Libraries

The Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals has released Ebook Acquisition and Lending Briefing: Public, Academic and Research Libraries .

Here's an excerpt:

This paper presents some of the legal, strategic and technical problems that arise from the addition of scholarly and trade ebooks to library collections, together with possible solutions. Some of the most common business models are briefly set out. The latest data on ebook usage is also included.

Also of interest: ALA's recent Ebook Business Models for Public Libraries.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

"It Was Never a Universal Library: Three Years of the Google Book Settlement"

Walt Crawford has published "It Was Never a Universal Library: Three Years of the Google Book Settlement" in Cites & Insights: Crawford at Large.

Here's an excerpt:

Remember the Google Books settlement? It was going to settle a four-year-old pair of lawsuits (four years old then, eight years old now) against Google (by the Association of American Publishers, AAP, and the Authors Guild, AG) asserting that Google was infringing on copyright through its two-line snippets from in-copyright books scanned in the Google Library Project—and by the scanning itself. Later, a third group representing media photographers also sued Google for the same actions. . . .

This is a long set of notes and comments (cites & insights). It strikes me that the topic and complexity deserve that length—but note that I'm offering much briefer excerpts and comments on most items than I normally would in this sort of roundup.

After two sets of general notes and overviews (one before the settlement was rejected, one after) I'm breaking the discussion down by topics rather than chronologically.

| Google Books Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

The Journal of Heredity Joins Growing Number of Journals Mandating Data Archiving

The American Genetic Association has mandated the Joint Data Archiving Policy for the Journal of Heredity. The Joint Data Archiving Policy (JDAP) page lists other journals that mandate data archiving.

| Digital Curation and Preservation Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

Royal Society of Chemistry Launches £1 Million Gold Open Access Initiative

The Royal Society of Chemistry has launched a £1 million gold open access initiative for British researchers.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

'Gold for Gold' is an innovative experiment to support the funder led evolution to Gold OA, by recognising institutes that subscribe to RSC Gold, a premium collection of 37 international journals, databases and magazines offering online access to all published material.

UK institutes who are RSC Gold customers will shortly receive credit equal to the subscription paid, to enabling their researchers, who are being asked to publish Open Access but often do not yet have funding to pay for it directly, to make their paper available via Open Science, the RSC's Gold OA option.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Open Access versus Subscription Journals: A Comparison of Scientific Impact"

Bo-Christer Björk and David Solomon have published "Open Access versus Subscription Journals: A Comparison of Scientific Impact" in BMC Medicine.

Here's an excerpt:

Overall, average citation rates, both unweighted and weighted for the number of articles per journal, were about 30% higher for subscription journals. However, after controlling for discipline (medicine and health versus other), age of the journal (three time periods) and the location of the publisher (four largest publishing countries versus other countries) the differences largely disappeared in most subcategories except for journals that had been launched prior to 1996. OA journals that fund publishing with article processing charges (APCs) are on average cited more than other OA journals. In medicine and health, OA journals founded in the last 10 years are receiving about as many citations as subscription journals launched during the same period.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Open Access Status of Journal Articles from ERC-Funded Projects

The European Research Council has released Open Access Status of Journal Articles from ERC-Funded Projects.

Here's an excerpt:

The main objective of this analysis is to estimate the extent to which journal articles from ERC funded projects are available in an open access. . . .

The results show that 62 % of journal articles from ERC funded projects are available in open access. The share of articles in open access varies across research domains. It is close to 70 % in Life Sciences, 65 % in Physical Sciences and Engineering and nearer 50 % in Social Sciences and Humanities. A comparison with the data on open access status provided by the grant holders in their mid-term reports shows that self-reporting leads to an underestimation of the proportion of open access articles.

| Open Access Bibliography: Liberating Scholarly Literature with E-Prints and Open Access Journals | Digital Scholarship |

After UK’s RCUK Policy, European Commission Announces Another Major Open Access Policy

Yesterday DigitalKoans reported on the Research Councils UK's new open access policy. Today, the European Commission has announced another major open access policy.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The European Commission today outlined measures to improve access to scientific information produced in Europe. Broader and more rapid access to scientific papers and data will make it easier for researchers and businesses to build on the findings of public-funded research. This will boost Europe's innovation capacity and give citizens quicker access to the benefits of scientific discoveries. In this way, it will give Europe a better return on its €87 billion annual investment in R&D. The measures complement the Commission's Communication to achieve a European Research Area (ERA), also adopted today.

As a first step, the Commission will make open access to scientific publications a general principle of Horizon 2020, the EU's Research & Innovation funding programme for 2014-2020. As of 2014, all articles produced with funding from Horizon 2020 will have to be accessible:

articles will either immediately be made accessible online by the publisher ('Gold' open access)—up-front publication costs can be eligible for reimbursement by the European Commission; or

researchers will make their articles available through an open access repository no later than six months (12 months for articles in the fields of social sciences and humanities) after publication ('Green' open access).

The Commission has also recommended that Member States take a similar approach to the results of research funded under their own domestic programmes. The goal is for 60% of European publicly-funded research articles to be available under open access by 2016.

The Commission will also start experimenting with open access to the data collected during publicly funded research (e.g. the numerical results of experiments), taking into account legitimate concerns related to the fundee's commercial interests or to privacy.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Government Response to the Finch Group Report: ‘Accessibility, Sustainability, Excellence: How to Expand Access to Research Publications’"

David Willetts, the UK Minister for Science and Universities, has issued "Government Response to the Finch Group Report: 'Accessibility, Sustainability, Excellence: How to Expand Access to Research Publications'."

Here's an excerpt:

The Government has listened carefully to what publishers, learned societies and the Finch Group collectively have had to say on this issue. We prefer the 'gold' over the 'green' model, especially where the research is taxpayer funded so the Government agrees with the sentiment expressed in the Finch Report. Embargo periods allowed by funding bodies for publishers should be short where publishers have chosen not to take up the preferred option of their receiving an Article Processing Charge (which provides payment in full for immediate publication by the 'gold OA' route). Where APC funds are not available to the publisher or learned society, for the publication of publicly-funded research, then publishers could reasonably insist on a longer more equitable embargo period. This could be up to 12 months for science, technology and engineering publications and longer for publications in those disciplines which require more time to secure payback. Even so, publications with embargo periods longer than two years may find it difficult to argue that they are also serving the public interest.

| Open Access Bibliography: Liberating Scholarly Literature with E-Prints and Open Access Journals | Digital Scholarship |

Research Councils UK Adopts New Open Access Policy

The Research Councils UK has adopted a new open access policy.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Research Councils UK (RCUK) has today, 16th July 2012, unveiled its new Open Access policy. Informed by the work of the National Working Group on Expanding Access to Published Research Findings, chaired by Professor Dame Janet Finch, the policy at once harmonises and makes significant changes to existing Research Councils' Open Access policies. . . .

The new policy, which will apply to all qualifying publications being submitted for publication from 1 April 2013, states that peer reviewed research papers which result from research that is wholly or partially funded by the Research Councils:

must be published in journals which are compliant with Research Council policy on Open Access, and;

must include details of the funding that supported the research, and a statement on how the underlying research materials such as data, samples or models can be accessed.

Criteria which journals must fulfill to be compliant with the Research Councils' Open Access policy are detailed within the policy, but include offering a 'pay to publish'; option or allowing deposit in a subject or institutional repository after a mandated maximum embargo period. In addition, the policy mandates use of 'CC-BY', the Creative Commons 'Attribution' license, when an APC is levied. The CC_BY licence allows others to modify, build upon and/or distribute the licensed work (including for commercial purposes) as long as the original author is credited.

The Research Councils will provide block grants to eligible UK Higher Education Institutions, approved independent research organisations and Research Council Institutes to support payment of the Article Processing Charges (APCs) associated with 'pay-to-publish'. In parallel, eligible organisations will be expected to set-up and manage their own publication funds. The Research Councils will work with eligible organisations to discuss the detail of the new approach to funding APCs and to ensure that appropriate and auditable mechanisms are put in place to manage the funds.

Along with HEFCE and other relevant Funding Bodies, we shall monitor these policies actively, both to review their effects and to ensure that our joint objectives on Open Access are being met.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |