A note about Reapplications

Eventually, about 99.3% of all the journals that are currently indexed in DOAJ will have to reapply to ensure that they meet the new criteria requested by the application form. With our technical partners, Cottage Labs, we are developing a system that will make the reapplication process as easy as possible. It will allow reapplications for both single journals and for a group of journals (for those publishers with more than 10 journals).

Until that process is in place (Autumn 2014), we request that editors and publishers DO NOT fill out the new application form as we will be unable to match the new application to an existing record. It is vital that we can make this match for several reasons:

  1. Article metadata: if the journal already provides article metadata to us, there is no way to match the new application to the existing metadata.
  2. Discoverability: each journal has a unique URL in DOAJ. This URL is indexed in search engines and can be bookmarked by users. A new application cannot be matched to the same URL.
  3. Versioning: the reapplication process will create a new version of the existing record, allowing the old (now invalid) journal entry to be overwritten. It is important that this happens so that a journal only has ONE entry and it is most-up-to-date.

Until further notice, all reapplications by journals already in DOAJ will be automatically rejected. We kindly ask our publishers and editors to please wait until we announce that reapplications are open.

About these ads

3 thoughts on “A note about Reapplications

  1. GETTING PREPARED FOR (RE)APPLICATION — DEPOSIT POLICY (Question 49)

    Question 49 is qualifier 6 of 6 for the DOAJ Seal. Your journal needs to have a registered deposit policy at least in one place (most likely SHERPA/RoMEO) if the journal wants to receive DOAJ’s Seal.

    SHERPA/RoMEO
    Based at the University of Nottingham, UK.
    Accepts publishers from all over the world. 1578 publishers in database.
    http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/statistics.php
    Well known. Get listed here!
    http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo

    Héloïse
    Only for “francophone” publishers. 49 publishers in database.
    http://heloise.ccsd.cnrs.fr
    Does not mention in “Bienvenue chez Héloïse” that it is only for “francophone” publishers. International publishers get rejected after signing in for an account.
    Criticized: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/2012-June/000629.html

    Duclinea
    Only for Spanish scholarly journals. 1641 journals in database.
    http://www.accesoabierto.net/dulcinea

    OAKList: Only for Australia. Presently not available online.
    http://www.oaklist.qut.edu.au/

    Diadorim: Only for Brazilian scientific journals.
    http://diadorim.ibict.br

    Who knows of any other deposit policy directories?

  2. GETTING PREPARED FOR (RE)APPLICATION — DIGITAL ARCHIVING POLICY (Question 23)
    .
    Question 23 is qualifier 1 of 6 for the DOAJ Seal. Your journal needs to have an archival arrangement in place with at least one external party, if the journal wants to receive DOAJ’s Seal. DOAJ offers proposals and is open for others:
    .
    LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, Portico, PMC/Europe PMC/PMC Canada, A national library, Other.
    .
    (Select all that apply. Institutional archives and publishers’ own online archives are not valid.)
    Archiving is not a “MUST HAVE” requirement for a journal to be accepted in the DOAJ. See: http://doajournals.wordpress.com/2014/05/22/doaj-publishes-lists-of-journals-removed-and-added/comment-page-1/#comment-2

    .
    DETAILS ABOUT DOAJ’s ARCHIVING OPTIONS
    .
    LOCKSS (http://www.lockss.org):
    „An institution’s LOCKSS Box delivers content to authorized readers … when the publisher’s website is unavailable …“ This means: LOCKSS does not serve Open Access, but only participating libraries and its readers.
    Does not accept publishers on http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers

    CLOCKSS (http://www.clockss.org):
    Delivers triggered content Open Access! Suitable for Open Access journals!
    Does not accept publishers on http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers

    Portico (http://www.portico.org):
    „Portico provides access to its library participants when specific conditions or ‚trigger events’ occur“. This means: Portico does not serve Open Access, but only participating libraries and its readers. However, Portico has recently started also to publish triggered content Open Access. E.g.: http://www.portico.org/Portico/#!journalLOVIView/cs=ISSN_15391515?ct=E-Journal%20Content
    Does also accept publishers on http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers if they follow Portico’s “Steps for Participation”.

    PMC (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc)
    A full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM). Authors can upload their papers or publishers can submitted papers on behalf of their authors This is only possible for authors whose research has been funded by NIH. Publishers can also arrange a bulk upload of all papers from selected journals. This is based on high technical and content requirements.

    Europe PubMed Central (http://europepmc.org)
    PubMed Central Canada (http://pubmedcentralcanada.ca/pmcc)

    These archives are discipline-specific and suitable for selected journals, but not an overall publisher’s archiving solution.

    .
    NATIONAL LIBRARIES
    .
    National Libraries most active in archiving in Europe are:

    British Library (http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/stratpolprog/digi/webarch/webarchives.html): Crawls content of UK web pages. No specific journal archiving in place.

    National Library of the Netherlands (http://www.kb.nl/en/information-for-international-publishers): Willing to archive Open Access journals. Is presently restructuring. Ask in 2015.

    German National Library (http://www.dnb.de/EN/Netzpublikationen/Ablieferung/Ablieferungsverfahren/ablieferungsverfahren_node.html): Archives Open Access journals, but only those who are from or about Germany or in German.

    CONCLUSION
    To set up an archiving scheme for a publisher is not a trivial task. A publisher’s willingness to archiving does not mean it can be put into practice easily and quickly.

    Who knows of any other archiving options?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s