Taf >This is why a project that does not limit contribution rights is bound to run into all the problems we have been talking about with the open access sites. But just to make it clear, my comments about wiki software as a platform for working on articles in an online team are not meant to be an argument that all work should be done as massively open online work. Wikis do not need to be set-up that way. (Even on Wikipedia itself articles are often locked to normal editors, who can only contribute to those articles by proposing changes or drafts that then need to be approved by more senior editors. So the possibility exists. But on Wikipedia this is only used in emergency situations.) In the side discussion about whether it is inevitable that the big wikis will eventually be better, I think we can just leave it open and find out. I work on big wikis and I hope, but I often despair also! On the other hand no small wiki has really turned up to contribute to anyway (which I think is partly because of the limitations of the media being used). The small group online collaborations so far have mainly turned out looking like personal websites, or a sort of online journal, or a blog, because (I think) it is very hard to maintain free flowing teamwork, even with 3 people, if the system involves writing articles, passing them around, and then uploading them one by one. Regards Andrew