Open access combined with Web 2.0 networking tools is fast changing the traditional journal’s functions and framework and the publisher’s role. As content is more and more available online in digital repositories and on the web, an integrated, interconnected, multidisciplinary information environment is evolving and Oldenburg’s model disintegrates: the journal is no longer the main referring unit for scholarly output, as it used to be, for Scientific, Technical, and Medical disciplines, but scholars’ attention is now more focused on the article level. New journals models are thus evolving. The first part of this paper discusses these new experimental journal models, i.e. overlay journals, interjournals and different levels journals. The second part directs readers’ attention to the role commercial publishers could play in this digital seamless writing arena. The authors consider that publishers should concentrate much more on value-added services for authors, readers and libraries, such as navigational services, discovery services, archiving and evaluation services.
Armbruster, Chris. ( 2007) Moving out of Oldenburg’s long shadow: what is the future for society publishing?Learned Publishing, 20 (4) 259-266. Available at: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/alpsp/lp/2007/00000020/00000004/art00004 (accessed 4 December 2009).
2.
Bergstrom, Ted C.; Lavaty, Rosemarie. ( 2007) How often do economists self-archive?Department of Economics, University of California, Santa Barbara. Available at: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/69f4b8vz (accessed 30 November 2009).
3.
Björk, Bo-Christer; Roos, Annikki and Lauri, Mauri. ( 2009) Scientific journal publishing: yearly volume and open access availability. Information Research, 14 (1). Available at: http://informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html (accessed 30 November 2009).
4.
Brody, Tim; Carr, Les; Gingras, Yves; Hajjem, Chawki; Harnad, Stevan and Swan, Alma. ( 2007) Incentivizing the Open Access Research Web. CTWatch Quarterly. 3 (August). Available at http://www.ctwatch.org/quarterly/articles/2007/08/incentivizing-the-open-access-research-web/ (accessed 4 December 2009).
5.
Casati, Fabio; Giunchiglia, Fausto and Marchese, Maurizio. ( 2007) Publish and perish: why the current publication and review model is killing research and wasting your money. ACM Ubiquity , 8 (3). Available at http://eprints.biblio.unitn.it/archive/00001086/01/066.pdf (accessed 30 November 2009).
6.
Cope, Bill; Kalantzis, Mary. ( 2009) Sign of epistemic disruption: transformations in the knowledge system of the academic journal. First Monday, 14 (4-6 April). Available at http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2309/2163 (accessed 30 November 2009).
7.
Dall’Aglio, Paolo. ( 2006) Peer review and journal models. ArXiv. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0608307 (accessed 4 December 2009).
8.
Gibbons, Michael; Limoges, Camille; Schwartzman, Simon; Nowotny, Helga; Trow, Martin and Scott, Peter. ( 1994) The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
9.
Ginsparg, Paul. ( 1996) Winners and losers in the global research. Electronic Publishing in Science. Paris, UNESCO HQ, 19-23 February 1996. Available at: http://arXiv.org/blurb/pg96unesco.html (accessed 30 November 2009).
10.
Ginsparg, Paul. ( 2001) Creating a global knowledge network. Electronic Publishing in Science. Paris, UNESCO HQ, 19-23 February 2001. Available at: http://people.ccmr.cornell.edu/∼ginsparg/blurb/pg01unesco.html (accessed 30 November 2009).
11.
Goldschmidt-Clermont, Luisella. (1965) Communications patterns in high energy physics. Republished in HEP Libraries Webzine. ( 2002) March. Available at: http://eprints.rclis.org/445/ (accessed 30 November 2009).
12.
Guédon, Jean-Claude. ( 2001) In Oldenburg’s long shadow. Librarians, research scientists, publishers, and the control of scientific publishing. Proceedings ARL Membership Meeting, 23-25 May 2001. Available at: http://www.arl.org/arl/proceedings/138/guedon.html (accessed 4 December 2009).
13.
Harnad, Stevan. ( 2005) Fast-forward to the green road to Open Access: the case against mixing up Green and Gold. ARIADNE, 42 (January). Available at: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue42/harnad/ (accessed 11 December 2009).
14.
Hultman Özek, Yvonne. ( 2005) Lund Virtual Medical Journal makes self-archiving attractive and easy for authors. D-Lib Magazine, 11 (October). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/october05/ozek/10ozek.html (accessed 4 December 2009).
15.
Maron, Nancy L.; Smith, K. Kirby. ( 2008) Current models of digital scholarly communication: Results of an investigation conducted by Ithaka for the Association of Research Libraries . Association of Research Libraries. Available at: http://www.arl.org/bm∼doc/current-models-report.pdf (accessed 4 December 2009).
16.
McCormack, Nancy. ( 2009) Peer review and legal publishing: What law libraries need to know about open, single blind and double blind reviewing. Law Library Journal, 101. 59-70. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1339227 (accessed 4 December 2009).
17.
Nature debate on peer-review. (2006). Available at: http://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview/debate/index.html (accessed 30 November 2009).
18.
Nichols, Stephen G. ( 2009) Time to change our thinking: dismantling the silo model of digital scholarship. ARIADNE, 58 (January). Available at: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue58/nichols/ (accessed 4 December 2009).
19.
Polydoratou, Panayiota; Moyle, Martin. ( 2008) Publishing scientific research: is there ground for new ventures? In: ELPUB2008. Open Scholarship: Authority, community, and sustainability in the age of Web 2.0 (eds. L. Chan and S. Mornati). Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Electronic Publishing, Toronto, Canada 25-27 June 2008. Available at: http://elpub.scix.net/cgi-bin/works/Show?_id=079_elpub2008&sort=DEFAULT&search=%2ftype%3a%22normal%20paper%22&hits=151 (accessed 4 December 2009).
20.
Press, Gil. ( 2007) In brief. EMC heritage trust project awards. D-Lib Magazine. 13 (September/October). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september07/09inbrief.html (accessed 4 December 2009).
21.
Rodriguez, Marko; Bollen, Johan and Van de Sompel, Herbert. ( 2005) The convergence of digital libraries and the peer-review process. Journal of Information Science, 32 (2) 149-159. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DL/0504084 (accessed 30 November 2009).
22.
Roosendaal, Hans E.; Geurts, Peter A.Th. M. ( 1997) Forces and functions in scientific communication: an analysis of their interplay. Presented in: Cooperative Research Information Systems in Physics: CRISP 97, Oldenburg, Germany 31 August-4 September 1997. Available at: http://www.physik.uni-oldenburg.de/conferences/crisp97/roosendaal.html (accessed 4 December 2009).
23.
Rowlands, Ian; Nicholas, Dave. ( 2005) New journal publishing models: an international survey of senior researchers: a Ciber report for the Publishers Association and the International Association of STM Publishers. 22 September 2005. Available at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ciber/ciber_2005_survey_final.pdf (accessed 4 December 2009).
24.
Shulenburger, David. ( 2007) University research publishing or distribution strategies? ARL Bimonthly Report, 252/253 (august). Available at: http://www.arl.org/news/pr/univ-pub-27nov07.shtml (accessed 4 December 2009).
25.
Smith, Arthur P. ( 2000) The journal as an overlay on preprint databases. Learned Publishing, 13 (1), 43-48. Available at: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/alpsp/lp/2000/00000013/00000001 (accessed 4 December 2009).
26.
Spier, Ray. ( 2002) The history of the peer-review process. Trends in Biotechnology, 20 (8), 357-358.
27.
Suber, Peter. ( 2009) Open Access in 2008. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 12 (February). Available at: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=jep;cc=jep;rgn=main;view=text;idno=3336451.0012.104 (accessed 4 December 2009).
28.
Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory, 2009. http://www.ulrichsweb.com/ulrichsweb/ (accessed 11 December 2009).
29.
Van de Sompel, Herbert; Payette, Sandy; Erickson, John; Lagoze, Carl and Warner, Simeon. ( 2004) Rethinking scholarly communication: building the system that scholars deserve. D-Lib Magazine, 10 (September). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september04/vandesompel/09vandesompel.html (accessed 4 December 2009).
30.
Ware, Mark. ( 2008) Peer-review: perceptions, benefits and alternatives. Publishing Research Consortium. Summary report available at: http://www.publishingresearch.net/documents/PRCsummary4Warefinal.pdf (accessed 30 November 2009).
31.
Warner, Simeon. ( 2005) The transformation of scholarly communication. Learned Publishing18 (3), 177-185. Available at: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/alpsp/lp/2005/00000018/00000003/art00003 (accessed 4 December 2009).
