How you scan the news

I’ve had a subscription to PC Magazine for a while now.  Honestly, it’s a mixed bag.  Sometimes it contains really useful information; other times, it just seems like a forum for tech writers to blow hot air.  (Case in point, the terrible article written a few issues back by the previous editor-in-chief, Jim Louderback, predicting the utter failure of the iPhone.  This is the same guy who admitted in the most recent issue that he was totally wrong to sing the praises of Windows Vista.  Hmm.)

Whenever I receive an issue, I sit down and leaf through it looking for new and interesting things.  A story that caught my attention was one that discussed a report that studied website users’ eye movements when visiting news sites.  Below is a link to the heart of the report which is a schematic of a website labeling distinct areas where users’ eyes tend to focus, and for what kinds of content.  This is quite interesting stuff to me, not just because of thinking about how FML might be improved, but also in relation to my extensive involvement with a bunch of other people on launching a new library portal at my place of work.  We’re only now at the stage where user testing can commence in earnest.  User tests have been done before but now that we have something solid and functional in place, we can begin to see where improvements in the user interface and experience can be improved.

NASIG Site Selection Survey results published

This afternoon, Kathryn Wesley, NASIG Newsletter Editor-in-Chief, announced the availability of results of a site selection survey of NASIG members.  Check it out here.

Some initial thoughts:

  • I am happy to see a lot of interest in having NASIG return to Vancouver as a conference site.  The last time NASIG was in Vancouver was in the mid-1990s and it was one of the best conference venues, ever.
  • I am shocked that so many people apparently would be ok with doing away with most of the group meals.  Put me on the side of those who absolutely want to see all or most conference meals continue to be a “group thing” rather than a “do it on your own thing.”
  • 48% of respondents are ok with spending $120-140 per night for a hotel room.  Again, I am rather surprised.  I can say that I am not ok with spending that much money, even if at the same time, I recognize that the likelihood of the organization finding rooms for less $$ is very slim
  • I had to laugh when I read that one of the oft repeated comments by responders regarding meals at conferences was “Too much chicken”!

Elsevier’s response to depositing articles in E-LIS

Recently I decided to explore E-LIS, an independent, international, open access repository of information (articles, papers, presentations, syllabi, etc.) relating to library and information science, with the goal of depositing some of my material there. One of the first things I wished to deposit was articles I had written for the journal, Serials Review, published by Elsevier. My sense was that Elsevier’s recent policy change for author copyrights allowed this but upon reviewing the terms again, I began to have doubts. Below is an email I sent to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, who forwarded it on to Elsevier for comment and a response:

“Recently I thought about the possibility of self-archiving articles I’ve published in SR in an OA repository such as E-LIS. I thought that this was specifically permissible under terms of copyright agreed to by Elsevier sometime back in 2004. However when I went over the conditions and terms it seems to me that this permission is institution-specific. In other words, if I worked at [XYZ University] and [XYZ University] had an IR then I could deposit any articles I’ve written for SR there with no problem. Can you tell me specifically if depositing them in a third party repository such as E-LIS is in violation of Elsevier’s terms?”

Today I received Elsevier’s formal reply:

“…Elsevier policy permits authors to post a personal version of the final paper on a personal site or their institute’s website. You are correct in assuming that we do not permit posting of the papers in a third party repository.”

I am not a happy camper. This is an arbitrary distinction, in my view, particularly since I no longer have a direct institutional affiliation. (An email conversation on this issue with Peter Suber, author of the Open Access News blog as well as the SPARC Open Access Newsletter, confirmed this.) At the very least such contractual language as exists should be enhanced to make this distinction clear. It certainly isn’t clear now. Just fyi, below is the specific language from Elsevier regarding an author’s right to deposit a personal copy of his or her article in an institutional repository (taken directly from Elsevier’s Author Gateway website > Getting Published > Copyright Information section) with the relevant passage highlighted:

“As an author, you retain rights for large number of author uses, including use by your employing institute or company. These rights are retained and permitted without the need to obtain specific permission from Elsevier.
the right to make copies of the article for their own personal use, including for their own classroom teaching use;
the right to make copies and distribute copies (including through e-mail) of the article to research colleagues, for the personal use by such colleagues (but not commercially or systematically, e.g. via an e-mail list or list serve);
the right to post a pre-print version of the article on Internet web sites including electronic pre-print servers, and to retain indefinitely such version on such servers or sites – see also our information on electronic preprints for a more detailed discussion on these points.
the right to post a revised personal version of the text of the final article (to reflect changes made in the peer review and editing process) on the author’s personal or institutional web site or server, with a link to the journal home page (on elsevier.com);
the right to present the article at a meeting or conference and to distribute copies of such paper or article to the delegates attending the meeting;
for the author’s employer, if the article is a ‘work for hire’, made within the scope of the author’s employment, the right to use all or part of the information in (any version of) the article for other intra-company use (e.g. training);
patent and trademark rights and rights to any process or procedure described in the article;
the right to include the article in full or in part in a thesis or dissertation (provided that this is not to be published commercially);
the right to use the article or any part thereof in a printed compilation of works of the author, such as collected writings or lecture notes (subsequent to publication of the article in the journal); and
the right to prepare other derivative works, to extend the article into book-length form, or to otherwise re-use portions or excerpts in other works, with full acknowledgement of its original publication in the journal.
Other uses by authors should be authorized by Elsevier through the Global Rights Department, and authors are encouraged to let Elsevier know of any particular needs or requirements.”