Free as a bird?
| 26 July, 2011 | Richard P. Grant |
4
|
|
There was a fascinating-looking evaluation yesterday from James Duffin, Toronto, on a J Appl Phys article: Point: Counterpoint “High Altitude is / is not for the Birds!”.
Unfortunately there’s no abstract, and I can’t get access to the article (despite the journal site telling me the PDF is free). It looks like some kind of structured discussion but I can’t tell, and I can’t tell you whether I “agree with the authors’ premise” because… well, you work it out. Which is a shame, because I’m a fan of all flying things, especially the feathered kind.
UPDATE: Oh, this is fantastic. Note the “call for comments“?
Yeah. Subscription required. That’s not going to work.
|
|
previous post
Hang on, I thought F1000 was a subscription-based initiative.
Your point being?
Well, you’re complaining about journals limiting their access when F1000 does as well. This could equally well apply to F1000: “Yeah. Subscription required. That’s not going to work.”
BTW, they’re using the same publishing system as the Royal Society, which regularly screws up the statement about whether the viewer can see the full article.
Oh, and a quick look at the article (or rather, the pictures) suggests it’s about llamas. Llovely.
no, not quite. I was saying it’s a shame I can’t read that article (even with the access to various publishers we do have); and I was making the point that asking for comments outside the subscription barrier, yet having the actual call inside, is counterproductive.
And yes, as you recognized, the access privilege notification is messed up. I think I’ve mentioned that before with this publishing system.