Arguing in favour of the centralisation of open book content, chemical element suggests that libraries finance within the Open analysis Library contribute to the event of an infatuated infrastructure for the worldwide analysis community’. while this can be in accordance with KU’s mission statement to supply ‘a central place to support Open Access’, it raises the broader question: for whom will centralisation produce value?
The ORL can host OA book content on a proprietary platform engineered by BiblioLab. it’ll not solely host OA book content that’s tormented by the chemical element funding procedure, however aims to incorporate all OA book content. chemical element remains obscure on what this means; in some material they state that the ORL are going to be ‘the most comprehensive single website for peer-reviewed Open Access books’. But, can chemical element check the referee procedures of all the twenty,000 books they aim to include? Another profit chemical element emphasises is data: the ORL can provide ‘[r]ich information components like ORCID & DOIs’ and ‘[h]igh quality brandy records’. however this knowledge adds worth, once it’s already offered by existing community-governed platforms, or by publishers, is once more questionable.
In addition, titles on the ORL appear to be downsized for improvement functions of the platform. As Open Book Publishers illustrate, one in every of their titles which has embedded transmission was downsized from one hundred twenty to a pair of.9MB. whereas this might not clash with licencing, it significantly affects the standard of the content. If this were a partnership, chemical element would indicate this curtailment on their platform and supply links to the initial, life-size versions.
During a resultant webinar, chemical element offered to ‘clarify’ aspects of the ORL and more even the pass on the grounds of: discoverability and coarseness. Yet, gathering all content on one platform doesn’t essentially build analysis easier to seek out, rather it might need enhancements to information, search engines, and professional curation. However, there’s barely any curation on the ORL. Libraries should buy the choice to reverend their own collections with a premium supporter account (£1,800 each year for a three-year period). Curation is so solely attainable among the bounds set by KU’s platform.
Moreover, chemical element partners with research worker App, a young, working capital funded start-up that makes a reading app for researchers. Readers could eventually be ready to scan on numerous screens, annotate, and share aspects of their reading expertise, that sounds nice, however is ultimately damaging to the thought of openness, because the system locks the user into a golden cage.