What Is Open?
AbstractThere is a broad difference of opinion among the many stakeholders in scholarly publishing about how to precisely define open access publishing. Are Ã¢â¬Åopen accessÃ¢â¬Â and Ã¢â¬Åopen dataÃ¢â¬Â what we mean by open? Does Ã¢â¬ÅopenÃ¢â¬Â mean anything else? Does it mean Ã¢â¬Åto make available,Ã¢â¬Â or Ã¢â¬Åto make freely available in a particular format?Ã¢â¬Â Is a clearer definition needed (or maybe just better education on the current definition)? Why or why not? At present, some stakeholders see public access as being an acceptable stopping point in the move toward open access. Others see Ã¢â¬ÅopenÃ¢â¬Â as requiring free and immediate access with articles being available in CC-BY format. The range of opinions between these extremes is vast. How should these differences be decided? Who should decide? Is it possible to make binding recommendations (and how)? Is consensus necessary? What are the consequences of the lack of consensus?
Copyright (c) 2016 Rick Anderson, Seth Denbo, Diane Graves, Susan Haigh, Steven Hill, Martin Kalfatovic, Roy Kaufman, Catherine Murray-Rust, Kathleen Shearer, Dick Wilder, Alice Wise
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.