Open Archives Initiative (OAI) 3 Workshop
| Date | 01 March 2004 |
| Pages | 6-7 |
| Published date | 01 March 2004 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/07419050410537590 |
| Author | Valentina Comba |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science |
Open Archives Initiative (OAI) 3
Workshop
Valentina Comba
6LIBRARY HITECH NEWS Number 3 2004, pp. 6-7, #Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 0741-9058, DOI 10.1108/07419050410537590
A very lively discussion between
scientists has closed the Third Open
Archives Initiative (OAI) Workshop on
Innovations in Scholarly Communication:
Implementing the Benefits of OAI. The
workshop held at CERN in Geneva
from February 12-14, 2004 addressed
new implementations and a follow-up
of OAI infrastructures for e-publishing
and research. The final panel session
turned out to be a passionate discussion
between the ``most in favour'' and ``the
most conservative'' protagonists of the
workshop, and the central issue turned
out to be why authors should publish in
Open AccessJournals and in Institutional
Open Archive Repositories.
The OAI3 conference attracted 182
participants from 29 countries[1], 21
speakers, four chairpersons; some very
important organizers and speakers
could not be present in person but were
there virtually: Herbert Van De Sompel
and Thomas Krichel, specifically.
Sponsors of the Conference included
LIBER, SPARC, SPARC Europe, OSI
and JISC[2]. This year's programme
included also four tutorials[3]. The
CERN Library offered very efficient
support to all the speakers and the
participants. The conference sessions
were broadcast, and the powerpoint
presentations immediately posted on
the Web site[4] which is ``powered'' by
CDSware, the software used as
middleware for organizing the
conference.
The workshop was opened by a
very interesting overview delivered by
Diann Rusch Feja about OAI and its
relation to scientific publishing: she
remarked that during the last few
years and especially during 2003
there has been an important
movement toward open access and
more OA repositories. Just after her
speech, Carl Lagoze presented a
brilliant paper written with Herbert
Van De Sompel about new
implementations of OAI-PMH,
especially developed in the Los
Alamos National Laboratory, both on
the OAI static repository and OAI-
MPH-based access to DL usage logs.
In the second part of the afternoon
we listened to papers about DARE
(The Netherlands Digital Academic
Repositories), about the UK FAIR
programme, which includes a number
of different sub-projects, and the
recent work of the OA forum in
Europe; a very interesting activity of
certification which has been
developed by the German active
promoters of OAI, called Deutsche
Initiative fuÈr NetzwerkInformation
(DINI). From Germany an overview
of the Max Planck activity was also
presented; and, in the late afternoon,
we listened to Colin Steele who gave
a very interesting paper about the
Australian initiatives, and to a
summary of the SCIX Open
Publication Services by Ziga Turk
from Ljubljana University.
On Friday 13, the morning the
papers by David Prosser (SPARC
Europe), Raym Crow (SPARC
Consulting Group), Lotte Jorgensen
(from Lund University: the nest of the
doaj directory) and Krot/Yakimischak
(JSTOR) were presented; one of the
most interesting presentations was
about the CreativeCommons, the
initiative to create and support new
licences models for authors, in order
to publish scientific content and to be
able to retain own copyright and have
some protection for the content
diffusion (see http://creativecommons.
org).
During the afternoon the seven
breakout discussion groups gathered
and met for about two hours. The
groups were about the following
subjects:
.Implementation: the FAIR and
DARE experience.
.The relationship between OAI-
PMH and Dublin Core: required,
recommended or other?
.Possible enhancements to OAI-
PMH including meta-searching
and authentication.
.Overlay journals.
.The OAI-PMH community: how to
enable better communication
between data and service provi-
ders.
.Open Access Citation Index.
.If you build it, will they come?
Filling an institutional repository.
I attended the ``Open Access
Citation Index'' group, chaired by
Jean Claude Guedon, who was able to
summarize in a very clear and
brilliant way the main problem and
the viable solutions in order to make
more open access journals reviewed
and cited, and, at least, considered
into some credible indicators. In the
conclusions (which were drafted by
Bas Savenije for this group), it was
proposed to:
.discuss issues about quality and
coverage of more published jour-
nals (not included by Science
Citation Index: from 10,000 to
34,000 titles);
.automate the harvesting of biblio-
graphies and citations;
.develop better measurements (i.e.
collect metadata and citations from
all OAI compliant journals and
sources; compare results of open
access journals with those from
``toll access journals''); and
.keep in touch in an informal
working group about these topics.
All the groups reported on their
discussions which are reported in the
agenda.
The final touch to the workshop
was the panel discussion, where we
had Thomas Krichel who communicated
To continue reading
Request your trial