[OAI-general] Re: proposed collaboration: google + open citation linking

[Terry Winograd]

>But to date, it is totally unnecessary. Those preprints and postprints
>are all SELF-CERTIFIED as such by their authors, and with virtually no
>exceptions what they say is true. Why? Because this is an esoteric
>literature, written BY researchers, FOR researchers -- for their peers
>(the same peers who do the peer review). And there is simply no
>motivation to cheat. (What would be the motivation?)

Yes, I agree, and this is why the physics archives have worked.  I don't 
think the approach will work as well in areas where there are commercial 
interests (e.g., computing technologies and medical cures) or ideological 
differences (e.g., the archaeological history of Palestine) and when a mass 
audience is present (people who aren't researchers but want to find a 
medical cure or buy a piece of technology).  The motivation to cheat will 
rear its ugly head..

Getting a mass search engine like Google involved ups the ante.  I think 
that having a separate portal for "scientific-scholarly" resources that 
don't have mass visibility may be better.  This might piggyback off of the 
Google database if that can be done effectively.

How about the simplest possible implementation - a search page that calls 
google and automatically adds the equivalent of "and ''oams' in meta tags" 
to the query.  Anyone can get a page included by putting this in the meta 
information, but as you say, we need to count on people not to cheat.  It 
doesn't enforce compliance with a standard, but does let them declare that 
something is scholarly/scientific.  It makes it a lot easier to get people 
to buy in, rather than persuading them to implement complex meta-data.
-t