Search (15 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Pinfield, S.: How do physicists use an e-print archive? : implications for institutional e-print services (2001) 0.04 
    0.037608087 = product of:
  0.075216174 = sum of:
    0.06049643 = weight(_text_:services in 1226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06049643 = score(doc=1226,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.3512885 = fieldWeight in 1226, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1226)
    0.014719742 = product of:
      0.029439485 = sum of:
        0.029439485 = weight(_text_:management in 1226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029439485 = score(doc=1226,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 1226, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1226)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    It has been suggested that institutional e-print services will become an important way of achieving the wide availability of e-prints across a broad range of subject disciplines. However, as yet there are few exemplars of this sort of service. This paper describes how physicists make use of an established centralized subject-based e-prints service, arXiv (formerly known as the Los Alamos XXX service), and discusses the possible implications of this use for institutional multidisciplinary e-print archives. A number of key points are identified, including technical issues (such as file formats and user interface design), management issues (such as submission procedures and administrative staff support), economic issues (such as installation and support costs), quality issues (such as peer review and quality control criteria), policy issues (such as digital preservation and collection development standards), academic issues (such as scholarly communication cultures and publishing trends), and legal issues (such as copyright and intellectual property rights). These are discussed with reference to the project to set up a pilot institutional e-print service at the University of Nottingham, UK. This project is being used as a pragmatic way of investigating the issues surrounding institutional e-print services, particularly in seeing how flexible the e-prints model actually is and how easily it can adapt itself to disciplines other than physics.
  2. Pampel, H.: Empfehlungen für transformative Zeitschriftenverträge mit Publikationsdienstleistern veröffentlicht (2022) 0.01 
    0.014818538 = product of:
  0.059274152 = sum of:
    0.059274152 = weight(_text_:services in 805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059274152 = score(doc=805,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.344191 = fieldWeight in 805, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=805)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Mailtext: "Im Rahmen der Schwerpunktinitiative "Digitale Information" der Allianz der Wissenschaftsorganisationen wurden jetzt "Empfehlungen für transformative Zeitschriftenverträge mit Publikationsdienstleistern" veröffentlicht. Die formulierten Kriterien dienen als gemeinsamer und handlungsleitender Rahmen der Akteur:innen aus allen Wissenschaftsorganisationen, d.h. Hochschulen ebenso wie außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtungen, für Verhandlungen mit Publikationsdienstleistern. Dabei bildet die Forderung nach größtmöglicher Kostentransparenz und Kosteneffizienz im Gesamtsystem den Kern des Handelns der Wissenschaftsorganisationen im Kontext ihrer Open-Access-Strategie für die Jahre 2021-2025. Diese Kriterien gliedern sich in die Aspekte Transformation von Zeitschriften, Preisgestaltung, Transparenz, Workflow, Preprints, Qualitätssicherung, Metadaten und Schnittstellen, Statistiken, Tracking und Waiver. Deutsche Version: https://doi.org/10.48440/allianzoa.045 Englische Version: https://doi.org/10.48440/allianzoa.046 Siehe auch: Empfehlungen für transformative Zeitschriftenverträge mit Publikationsdienstleistern veröffentlicht https://www.allianzinitiative.de/2022/11/24/empfehlungen-fuer-transformative-zeitschriftenvertraege-mit-publikationsdienstleistern-veroeffentlicht/ Recommendations for Transformative Journal Agreements with Providers of Publishing Services published https://www.allianzinitiative.de/2022/11/24/recommendations-for-transformative-journal-agreements-with-providers-of-publishing-services-published/?lang=en"
  3. Snowhill, L.: E-books and their future in academic libraries (2001) 0.01 
    0.012224671 = product of:
  0.048898686 = sum of:
    0.048898686 = weight(_text_:services in 1218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048898686 = score(doc=1218,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.28394312 = fieldWeight in 1218, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1218)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The University of California's California Digital Library (CDL) formed an Ebook Task Force in August 2000 to evaluate academic libraries' experiences with electronic books (e-books), investigate the e-book market, and develop operating guidelines, principles and potential strategies for further exploration of the use of e-books at the University of California (UC). This article, based on the findings and recommendations of the Task Force Report, briefly summarizes task force findings, and outlines issues and recommendations for making e-books viable over the long term in the academic environment, based on the long-term goals of building strong research collections and providing high level services and collections to its users.
  4. Fallaw, C.; Dunham, E.; Wickes, E.; Strong, D.; Stein, A.; Zhang, Q.; Rimkus, K.; ill Ingram, B.; Imker, H.J.: Overly honest data repository development (2016) 0.01 
    0.012224671 = product of:
  0.048898686 = sum of:
    0.048898686 = weight(_text_:services in 3371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048898686 = score(doc=3371,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.28394312 = fieldWeight in 3371, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3371)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    After a year of development, the library at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has launched a repository, called the Illinois Data Bank (https://databank.illinois.edu/), to provide Illinois researchers with a free, self-serve publishing platform that centralizes, preserves, and provides persistent and reliable access to Illinois research data. This article presents a holistic view of development by discussing our overarching technical, policy, and interface strategies. By openly presenting our design decisions, the rationales behind those decisions, and associated challenges this paper aims to contribute to the library community's work to develop repository services that meet growing data preservation and sharing needs.
  5. Wolchover, N.: Wie ein Aufsehen erregender Beweis kaum Beachtung fand (2017) 0.01 
    0.011234601 = product of:
  0.044938404 = sum of:
    0.044938404 = product of:
      0.08987681 = sum of:
        0.08987681 = weight(_text_:22 in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08987681 = score(doc=3582,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3582, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3582)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 4.2017 10:42:05
    22. 4.2017 10:48:38
  6. Ginther, C.; Lackner, K.: Predatory Publishing : Herausforderung für Wissenschaftler/innen und Bibliotheken (2019) 0.01 
    0.010478289 = product of:
  0.041913155 = sum of:
    0.041913155 = weight(_text_:services in 5330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041913155 = score(doc=5330,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.2433798 = fieldWeight in 5330, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5330)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Predatory Publishing ist seit der umfangreichen internationalen Medienberichterstattung im Sommer 2018 auch der breiten Öffentlichkeit ein Begriff. Zeitschriften, Radio und Fernsehen in zahlreichen Ländern, darunter auch im deutschen Sprachraum, berichteten über mehrere Wochen ausführlich zu diesen betrügerischen Geschäftspraktiken. Das Problem ist in Fachkreisen jedoch bereits seit einigen Jahren bekannt und nimmt seither immer stärker zu. Die Publikationsservices an der Universität Graz beraten und informieren seit 2017 die Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler, aber auch die Studierenden zum Thema Predatory Publishing. Der folgende Beitrag bietet bietet im ersten Abschnitt wesentliche Informationen zu Predatory Publishing sowie damit in Zusammenhang stehend, auch die im Zuge der Medienkampagne 2018 kolportierten Themen Fake Science und Fake News, und wendet sich in den folgenden zwei Abschnitten der Praxis zu, wenn es zum einen um die Grundlagen der Auseinandersetzung mit Predatory Publishing an Universitäten geht und zum anderen die Aufklärungsarbeit und Services an der Universität Graz durch Mitarbeiter/innen der Universitätsbibliothek als Fallbeispiel aus der Praxis vorgestellt werden.
  7. Geschuhn, K.: Vertragsunterzeichnung Springer Nature und Projekt DEAL (2020) 0.01 
    0.009879026 = product of:
  0.039516103 = sum of:
    0.039516103 = weight(_text_:services in 5654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039516103 = score(doc=5654,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.22946067 = fieldWeight in 5654, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5654)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Text der Mail: "Anknüpfend an das im August 2019 unterzeichnete Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) geben Springer Nature und MPDL Services GmbH im Namen von Projekt DEAL heute bekannt, dass der formale Vertrag der bislang weltweit umfangreichsten transformativen Open-Access-Vereinbarung unterzeichnet wurde. Seit dem 1. Januar 2020 werden Publikationen in Springer Nature-Subskriptionszeitschriften aus den mehr als 700 teilnahmeberechtigten deutschen wissenschaftlichen Einrichtungen Open Access publiziert. Teilnehmende Institutionen erhalten umfassenden Zugang zum Zeitschriftenportfolio von Springer Nature. Lesen Sie die Pressemitteilung hier: https://www.hrk.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilung/meldung/springer-nature-und-projekt-deal-unterzeichnen-weltweit-umfangreichsten-open-access-transformationsv/ Der vollständige Vertragstext wird zusammen mit dem Start des Teilnahmeverfahrens für deutsche Einrichtungen in der zweiten Januarhälfte veröffentlicht. MPDL Services GmbH wird in den kommenden Wochen weitere Informationen zur Verfügung stellen und sich mit den teilnahmeberechtigten Institutionen in Verbindung setzen. Informationen zu den Eckpunkten der Vereinbarung finden Sie hier: https://www.projekt-deal.de/springer-nature-vertrag/ Bitte beachten Sie, dass der Start der Open-Access-Gold-Komponente auf den 1.8.2020 verschoben wurde."
  8. Brand, A.: CrossRef turns one (2001) 0.01 
    0.007409269 = product of:
  0.029637076 = sum of:
    0.029637076 = weight(_text_:services in 1222) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029637076 = score(doc=1222,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.1720955 = fieldWeight in 1222, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1222)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Citation linking is thus also a huge benefit to journal publishers, because, as with electronic bookselling, it drives readers to their content in yet another way. In step with what was largely a subscription-based economy for journal sales, an "article economy" appears to be emerging. Journal publishers sell an increasing amount of their content on an article basis, whether through document delivery services, aggregators, or their own pay-per-view systems. At the same time, most research-oriented access to digitized material is still mediated by libraries. Resource discovery services must be able to authenticate subscribed or licensed users somewhere in the process, and ensure that a given user is accessing as a default the version of an article that their library may have already paid for. The well-known "appropriate copy" issue is addressed below. Another benefit to publishers from including outgoing citation links is simply the value they can add to their own journals. Publishers carry out the bulk of the technological prototyping and development that has produced electronic journals and the enhanced functionality readers have come to expect. There is clearly competition among them to provide readers with the latest features. That a number of publishers would agree to collaborate in the establishment of an infrastructure for reference linking was thus by no means predictable. CrossRef was incorporated in January of 2000 as a collaborative venture among 12 of the world's top scientific and scholarly publishers, both commercial and not-for-profit, to enable cross-publisher reference linking throughout the digital journal literature. The founding members were Academic Press, a Harcourt Company; the American Association for the Advancement of Science (the publisher of Science); American Institute of Physics (AIP); Association for Computing Machinery (ACM); Blackwell Science; Elsevier Science; The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE); Kluwer Academic Publishers (a Wolters Kluwer Company); Nature; Oxford University Press; Springer-Verlag; and John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Start-up funds for CrossRef were provided as loans from eight of the original publishers.
  9. Schleim, S.: Warum die Wissenschaft nicht frei ist (2017) 0.01 
    0.0063552503 = product of:
  0.025421001 = sum of:
    0.025421001 = product of:
      0.050842002 = sum of:
        0.050842002 = weight(_text_:22 in 3882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050842002 = score(doc=3882,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3882, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3882)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    9.10.2017 15:48:22
  10. Krüger, N.; Pianos, T.: Lernmaterialien für junge Forschende in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften als Open Educational Resources (OER) (2021) 0.01 
    0.0055608437 = product of:
  0.022243375 = sum of:
    0.022243375 = product of:
      0.04448675 = sum of:
        0.04448675 = weight(_text_:22 in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04448675 = score(doc=252,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 252, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=252)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 5.2021 12:43:05
  11. Strecker, D.: Nutzung der Schattenbibliothek Sci-Hub in Deutschland (2019) 0.00 
    0.004766437 = product of:
  0.019065749 = sum of:
    0.019065749 = product of:
      0.038131498 = sum of:
        0.038131498 = weight(_text_:22 in 596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038131498 = score(doc=596,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 596, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=596)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    1. 1.2020 13:22:34
  12. Bailey, C.W. Jr.: Scholarly electronic publishing bibliography (2003) 0.00 
    0.004415923 = product of:
  0.017663691 = sum of:
    0.017663691 = product of:
      0.035327382 = sum of:
        0.035327382 = weight(_text_:management in 1656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035327382 = score(doc=1656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1656, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    Table of Contents 1 Economic Issues* 2 Electronic Books and Texts 2.1 Case Studies and History 2.2 General Works* 2.3 Library Issues* 3 Electronic Serials 3.1 Case Studies and History 3.2 Critiques 3.3 Electronic Distribution of Printed Journals 3.4 General Works* 3.5 Library Issues* 3.6 Research* 4 General Works* 5 Legal Issues 5.1 Intellectual Property Rights* 5.2 License Agreements 5.3 Other Legal Issues 6 Library Issues 6.1 Cataloging, Identifiers, Linking, and Metadata* 6.2 Digital Libraries* 6.3 General Works* 6.4 Information Integrity and Preservation* 7 New Publishing Models* 8 Publisher Issues 8.1 Digital Rights Management* 9 Repositories and E-Prints* Appendix A. Related Bibliographies by the Same Author Appendix B. About the Author
  13. Geschuhn, K.; Sikora, A.: Management von Article Processing Charges : Herausforderungen für Bibliotheken (2015) 0.00 
    0.004415923 = product of:
  0.017663691 = sum of:
    0.017663691 = product of:
      0.035327382 = sum of:
        0.035327382 = weight(_text_:management in 2147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035327382 = score(doc=2147,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2147, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2147)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  14. Taglinger, H.: Ausgevogelt, jetzt wird es ernst (2018) 0.00 
    0.003972031 = product of:
  0.015888125 = sum of:
    0.015888125 = product of:
      0.03177625 = sum of:
        0.03177625 = weight(_text_:22 in 4281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03177625 = score(doc=4281,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4281, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4281)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 1.2018 11:38:55
  15. Somers, J.: Torching the modern-day library of Alexandria : somewhere at Google there is a database containing 25 million books and nobody is allowed to read them. (2017) 0.00 
    0.0031776251 = product of:
  0.0127105005 = sum of:
    0.0127105005 = product of:
      0.025421001 = sum of:
        0.025421001 = weight(_text_:22 in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025421001 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3608, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    You were going to get one-click access to the full text of nearly every book that's ever been published. Books still in print you'd have to pay for, but everything else-a collection slated to grow larger than the holdings at the Library of Congress, Harvard, the University of Michigan, at any of the great national libraries of Europe-would have been available for free at terminals that were going to be placed in every local library that wanted one. At the terminal you were going to be able to search tens of millions of books and read every page of any book you found. You'd be able to highlight passages and make annotations and share them; for the first time, you'd be able to pinpoint an idea somewhere inside the vastness of the printed record, and send somebody straight to it with a link. Books would become as instantly available, searchable, copy-pasteable-as alive in the digital world-as web pages. It was to be the realization of a long-held dream. "The universal library has been talked about for millennia," Richard Ovenden, the head of Oxford's Bodleian Libraries, has said. "It was possible to think in the Renaissance that you might be able to amass the whole of published knowledge in a single room or a single institution." In the spring of 2011, it seemed we'd amassed it in a terminal small enough to fit on a desk. "This is a watershed event and can serve as a catalyst for the reinvention of education, research, and intellectual life," one eager observer wrote at the time. On March 22 of that year, however, the legal agreement that would have unlocked a century's worth of books and peppered the country with access terminals to a universal library was rejected under Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. When the library at Alexandria burned it was said to be an "international catastrophe." When the most significant humanities project of our time was dismantled in court, the scholars, archivists, and librarians who'd had a hand in its undoing breathed a sigh of relief, for they believed, at the time, that they had narrowly averted disaster.

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 12
  • b 1

Themes