I would suggest that future campaigns need to also focus on faculty and the researchers, and simplifying OA so that clear and correct messages about the true nature and benefits of OA ('Open in order to accelerate progress towards solving global challenges') are understood. More equitable forms of OA are absolutely needed but we must be careful that we don't alienate researchers even further.

And it's not just commercial publshers but faculty and researchers too.

And Indonesia

Surely the growth of the internet, networking platforms and social media since BOAI has contributed largely to this?

Are DOIs assigned to all articles, or are there some articles published without them?

How prominent is the use and influence of IFs in South Korea?

So, what is a modest amount of datasets by South Korean standards?

I assume that this refers to the Global North (for want of a better term)? In Latin America, there is predominantly one model and that is fairly stable.

Could you explain in what ways book metrics are different from journal citation metrics?

Are there any examples of OSIs in Croatia having been privatised or commercialised?

What makes an OSI more prone to privatisation/commercialisation? E.g. can we say that an OSI with a national user base (the users are within one country) stands a lower risk of being privatised than an OSI with an international user base?

Jadranka, could you give examples of such countries and the respective OS initiatives/infrastructures?

What are examples of such binary/discriminatory criteria?

Does TU Delft have its own OA journal publishing platform that you would like to try this on? And if yes, have you started with experimenting on review workflows?

Does TU Delft have an RDM policy at the moment?

What is your motivation for using resources on advocating for a practice that has no legal effect?

Public Knowledge Project. OJS - Open Journal Systems. OMP - Open Monograph Press.