Re: [jats-list] Open Access Indicators in JATS

Subject: Re: [jats-list] Open Access Indicators in JATS
From: "Nikos Markantonatos nikos@xxxxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 15:30:42 -0000
Hi Shaun,

Two requests on this subject were placed for review by the JATS v1.1 maintenance committee a little less than a year ago and were reviewed this past January. Here's what the committee recommended on them:

"A subcommittee of Jeff Beck, Debbie Lapeyre, Mary McRae, and Evan Owens will investigate this, post comments on the draft NISO recommended practice guidelines for open access metadata and indicators (NISO RP-22-201x), and report our conclusions back to the JATS Standing Committee by email. No action will be taken at this time."

Best,
Nikos Markantonatos
Atypon


On 10/10/2014 08:58 PM, Halloran, Shaun shalloran@xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi,

Itbs been a while since Ibve seen any mention of Open Access indicators
on the list.  Webre in the early stages of implementing FundRef for our
journals, and Ibm attempting to come up with a tagging solution for the
Public Access items (such as what was mandated by the OSTP memo).  Webre
currently using JATS 1.0 Green.

Ibm already using the JATS recommendation of <license
license-type=bopen-accessb> for my open access content, and Ibm planning
to use bpublic-accessb for federally funded content that must be made
live following an embargo period (and to be clear, Ibm not attempting to
spark a debate on public vs. open access b everyone is free to call it
whatever they want).  My problem is that, in the current tag set, I have
no way of specifying the embargo period directly b this is something the
NISO recommendation sought to fix.

I thought about using a <date> element in the history for this, but I
donbt like how it would be disassociated from the license information.
So instead, I plan to use multiple <license> elements, as suggested by
CHORUS, to identify public access articles and the licenses that apply
to each published object (accepted manuscript and VOR), and <license-p
content-type> (or perhaps <named-content content-type> within
<license-p> to allow for start and end dates) to identify the embargo
dates associated with each license.  This essentially fits with the
CHORUS recommendation, but is somewhat out of line with the bparagraph
of textb description of what <license-p> is supposed to be.

Before I finalize my decision, I wanted to see if any other publishers
had already gone down this road, and what approach they have taken for
specifying embargo dates.  I will say that Ibm attempting to not
superset the DTD with additional NISO-based elements because I doubt
that our online platform would be willing to support those tags (they
were hoping for an official JATS solution in 1.1, but it looks like
webll have to wait a little longer for that).

I appreciate any feedback on this approach.

Cheers,

Shaun

Shaun Halloran

Senior Manager, Production

American Society of Civil Engineers

1801 Alexander Bell Drive

Reston, VA 20191

703-295-6215

shalloran@xxxxxxxx



------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered
safely by Mimecast.
For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JATS-List info and archive <http://www.mulberrytech.com/JATS/JATS-List/>
EasyUnsubscribe <-list/244090>
(by email <>)


--
Confidentiality Notice: This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contain information that may be confidential and/or legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this communication by someone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.


Current Thread