Issue with OA status on closed asset with open manuscript
There seems to be no way to add an open access manuscript to an asset for a work whose published version is closed without listing the entire asset as OA.
This is a major issue because a central use case for Esploro is to provide openly accessible manuscript versions of closed works. This problem means that we currently cannot add an open manuscript to a non-OA asset (i.e. journal article) without marking the entire asset as OA, which is incorrect and misleading.
There is a workaround, but fixing this would be extremely helpful in the long run as we scale up.
Christopher Barnes
shared this idea
-
AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Ex Libris)
commented
Thanks for your ideas I think that adding support for the designation "Free to Read" is a great suggestion and especially for the situation described where the published version is closed but an accepted manuscript is available.
(Edited by admin) -
Nancy Schuler commented
I agree that this issue prevents us from accurately representing non-OA versions of works. In addition, there is no way to make an asset file available without making it OA as well. We have many assets such as presentations, conference programs, newletters, etc., that are freely available to read but aren't really "open access". A different designation would be more helpful for this. In addition, I have noticed that if a asset file is uploaded but marked as closed, it does not allow the OpenURL resolver link to show on the record. Many of our researchers upload files for the Publisher record, not realizing they are not OA versions. We have to mark these as "Closed" do make them inaccessible, but this prevents the OpenURL links from showing and the only way to resolve this is to delete the file.
I think multiple fixes are necessary to address these issues and it may be worth exploring with more users. Here are some suggestions:
1) There should be a "Free to Read" marker in addition to the "Open Access" marker for non-OA assets that are openly available. I noticed that this was previously suggested in a Basecamp group by Southern Cross and I think it makes sense.
2) Assets with files marked as "Closed" should not display "Open Access" flag.
3) Assets with files marked "Closed" should still display the Open URL links.
4) Perhaps assets with "Accepted" or other openly available manuscript versions should have another flag as well such as "Accepted version available" or "Pre-print available" since the "open access" label is misleading.