BOAI/Section4 - Revision history

Hgibson at 12:28, 26 September 2012

2012-09-26T12:28:21Z

Hgibson at 10:24, 24 September 2012

2012-09-24T10:24:44Z

Hgibson at 10:23, 24 September 2012

2012-09-24T10:23:30Z

Hgibson at 16:49, 19 September 2012

2012-09-19T16:49:53Z

Hgibson at 16:33, 19 September 2012

2012-09-19T16:33:29Z

Hgibson at 16:33, 19 September 2012

2012-09-19T16:33:08Z

Hgibson: /* 4.1 */

2012-09-19T09:39:15Z

4.1

Hgibson at 09:38, 19 September 2012

2012-09-19T09:38:31Z

Hgibson at 07:02, 19 September 2012

2012-09-19T07:02:12Z

Hgibson at 19:57, 18 September 2012

2012-09-18T19:57:21Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
   '''[[BOAI|Back to INDEX]]'''
-=On advocacy and coordination=
+==Budapest Open Access Initiative - On advocacy and coordination==
 ==4.1==
 *We should do more to make publishers, editors, referees and researchers aware of standards of professional conduct for OA publishing, for example on licensing, editorial process, soliciting submissions, disclosing ownership, and the handling of publication fees.
 *Editors, referees and researchers should evaluate opportunities to engage with publishers and journals on the basis of these standards of professional conduct.
@@ Line 10: / Line 11: @@
 *<font color="red">'''We encourage all OA publishers and OA journals to apply best practices recommended by OASPA or to seek membership in the association, which would entail a review of their practices and an opportunity to amend these where necessary.'''</font>
-==4.2==
+===4.2===
 We should develop guidelines to universities and funding agencies considering OA policies, including recommended policy terms, best practices, and answers to frequently asked questions.
-==4.3==
+===4.3===
 *We encourage development of a consolidated resource where it is easy to follow the progress of OA through the most relevant numbers and graphics.
 *Each bit of information should be updated regularly, and its provenance or method of computation clearly indicated.
-==4.4==
+===4.4===
 *The OA community should act in concert more often.
 *Wherever possible, OA organizations and activists should look for ways to coordinate their activities and communications in order to make better use of their resources, minimize duplication of effort, strengthen the message, and demonstrate cohesion.
@@ Line 25: / Line 26: @@
 *This is an opportunity for helping to educate all stakeholder groups about OA and new proposals to advance it.
-==4.5==
+===4.5===
 *The worldwide campaign for OA to research articles should work more closely with the worldwide campaigns for OA to books, theses and dissertations, research data, government data, educational resources, and source code.
 *We should coordinate with kindred efforts less directly concerned with access to research, such as copyright reform, orphan works, digital preservation, digitizing print literature, evidence-based policy-making, the freedom of speech, and the evolution of libraries, publishing, peer review, and social media.
 *<font color="red">'''We should look for ways to amplify our separate voices when defending common principles.'''</font>
-==4.6==
+===4.6===
 <font color="red">'''We need to articulate more clearly, with more evidence, and to more stakeholder groups the following truths about OA:'''</font>
 *OA benefits research and researchers, and the lack of OA impedes them.

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 ==4.6==
-We need to articulate more clearly, with more evidence, and to more stakeholder groups the following truths about OA:
+<font color="red">'''We need to articulate more clearly, with more evidence, and to more stakeholder groups the following truths about OA:'''</font>
 *OA benefits research and researchers, and the lack of OA impedes them.
 *OA for publicly-funded research benefits taxpayers and increases the return on their investment in research. It has economic benefits as well as academic or scholarly benefits.

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 *The worldwide campaign for OA to research articles should work more closely with the worldwide campaigns for OA to books, theses and dissertations, research data, government data, educational resources, and source code.
 *We should coordinate with kindred efforts less directly concerned with access to research, such as copyright reform, orphan works, digital preservation, digitizing print literature, evidence-based policy-making, the freedom of speech, and the evolution of libraries, publishing, peer review, and social media.
-*We should look for ways to amplify our separate voices when defending common principles.
+*<font color="red">'''We should look for ways to amplify our separate voices when defending common principles.'''</font>
 ==4.6==

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 *OA is consistent with copyright law everywhere in the world, and gives both authors and readers more rights than they have under conventional publishing agreements.
 *OA is consistent with the highest standards of quality.
 __NOTOC__

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 *Members of the association are screened according to this code.
 *Complaints about OASPA-member publishers and suggestions for improving the code of conduct should be sent to [http://www.oaspa.org OASPA].
-<font color="red">'''*We encourage all OA publishers and OA journals to apply best practices recommended by OASPA or to seek membership in the association, which would entail a review of their practices and an opportunity to amend these where necessary.'''</font>
+*<font color="red">'''We encourage all OA publishers and OA journals to apply best practices recommended by OASPA or to seek membership in the association, which would entail a review of their practices and an opportunity to amend these where necessary.'''</font>
 ==4.2==

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 *Editors, referees and researchers should evaluate opportunities to engage with publishers and journals on the basis of these standards of professional conduct.
 *Where publishers are not meeting these standards we should help them improve as a first step.
-*As one means for evaluating a new or unknown OA publisher or OA journal, we recommend that researchers consult the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) and its code of conduct.
+*As one means for evaluating a new or unknown OA publisher or OA journal, we recommend that researchers consult the [http://www.oaspa.org Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association] (OASPA) and its code of conduct.
 *Members of the association are screened according to this code.
 *Complaints about OASPA-member publishers and suggestions for improving the code of conduct should be sent to OASPA.