Matching OA projects with programmers

“Are you an #openaccess project in need of programming help? Are you a programmer or programming team willing to donate time to an OA project? 

Either way, please list yourselves on the new page at the Open Access Directory set up match OA projects with programmers. …”

Towards a Scholarly Commons – Moving to Open since 2017

“Welcome! This is the modest home page for our immodest effort to reclaim the system of scholarly communication by encouraging investment in open technologies and open content, and through collective action, create the infrastructure, policies, and practices needed to effect this change….”

Copernicus open access hub – GeoMappando

“The Copernicus Open Access Hub is the European Copernicus project service , which allows access to and download the “open” data provided by Sentinel satellites   (1 2 and 3), as set out by ESA on 15 November 2013; the terms of use are specified in the relevant Legal Notice .

As is well-known, these satellites, which are orbiting ESA since 2014, provide high-resolution radar and optical imagery on our planet:”

The onward march of open science | The Horizons Tracker

“The increasingly open and transparent nature of academic research is something I’ve touched upon many times on this blog in recent years.  Further evidence of this general trend has emerged via the launch of MNI Open Research, a new platform for the publication of neuroscience research.

The platform aims to facilitate open and transparent peer-review, with all of the data used in the studies published, including null results, so that other researchers can avoid duplication, and also test the replicability of research.”

Student programming volunteers assist an #openaccess project.

“Student programmers are donating programming time to a major #openaccess initiative ( as a senior capstone project:

“Two teams of Computer Science students from Stevens Institute of Technology are working with us on Free Ebook Foundation projects. One team of five is working to renovate the user experience. As their senior-year capstone project, they’ll be implementing a responsive web framework that will make easy to use on mobile phones, tablets, and on desktops….”

(I’m quoting an email update from Unfortunately I can’t find the same update online, or I’d link to it here.)

Someone should start a web site to match OA projects in need of development support with student programmers (or more generally, any programmers) willing to donate their time. If no one else can arrange it, I’ll do it. If people or projects in either category send me their names and contact info, I’ll post them to a wiki page as a makeshift until someone can devise a better way to match them up.”


“PubSweet is a free, open source toolkit for building state-of-the-art publishing workflows.

It’s designed to be modular and flexible, consisting of a server and client that work together, components that can modify or extend the functionality of the server and/or client, and a command-line tool that helps manage PubSweet apps.

PubSweet is being used for book publishing, and academic journal production and preprint management services are in development. By drawing on the growing library of components, PubSweet can be used to rapidly create bespoke publishing systems. If the existing components don’t completely meet your needs, you can focus development on building new components to provide just the new functionality needed. Join the PubSweet community and help us build a common resource of open components for publishing by contributing components back….”

Substance Consortium – Collaborative Knowledge Foundation

“Last year, the Public Knowledge Project (PKP) and the Collaborative Knowledge Foundation (CoKo) partnered to support an open source ecosystem for knowledge creation and dissemination. Today, we are proud to announce that, in conjunction with Consortium Érudit, we are taking another concrete step towards this common goal. Our three organizations have identified Substance, a JavaScript library for web-based content editing, as a critical piece of infrastructure, and are inviting others to join us in a consortium to support Substance.

A consortium of organizations committed to supporting and integrating Substance will lead to the creation of a common-pool resource whose development is driven by community needs. We recognize that web-based multi-party editing of structured documents is needed in the authoring, editing, and production workflows of knowledge creation, and believe that we can best ensure Substance serves all these needs by coming together to support them.

By standing behind Substance, PKP, CoKo, and Érudit are declaring to all interested parties that we are invested in having an open source, general-purpose document editing toolkit that can be integrated into each of our own systems and workflows. We hope that by making this commitment, others will recognize that there is more to gain from jointly supporting Substance’s work rather than building local or custom solutions that cannot easily be used by others….”

Editoria – Scholarly Monograph Platform – Collaborative Knowledge Foundation

“Since the second quarter of this year, we have been building a platform with the University of California Press and the California Digital Library. Initially, we were a small team – Kristen, Jure, and Adam – and we were tasked with designing and building an open source monograph production platform with our good friends at UCP and CDL. 

It was an ambitious undertaking as we were building the platform against the yet-to-exist PubSweet backend, and we were also in need of deciding what our design and build paradigm would be, and who was going to do the actual work. In short, we needed to design a platform, build the backend platform on top of which we were to build the Editoria platform, plus find a team….

We proceeded in what is emerging as ‘the Coko way’. We used and supported existing open source projects where we could (Substance and Vivliostyle), we invented open source technology and processes that made sense to us, and found talented people to work with that we also liked….”

University of California Press and California Digital Library to Partner with Collaborative Knowledge Foundation to Build Open Source Monograph Publishing Platform – University of California Press Blog

“We’re excited to announce that the University of California Press and California Digital Library have partnered with Collaborative Knowledge Foundation to develop, Editoria, a new open source, digital-first  book production platform.

Through the generous support of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the University of California Press (UCP) and the California Digital Library (CDL) have embarked on a project to build an open source platform for content and workflow management of book-length works. The goal of the project is to create a shared resource for presses and library publishers to automate book production in multiple formats using a versatile, web-based production workflow system….”

Additional support for RCR: A validated article-level measure of scientific influence

“In their comment, Janssens et al. [1] offer a critique of the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR), objecting to the construction of both the numerator and denominator of the metric. While we strongly agree that any measure used to assess the productivity of research programs should be thoughtfully designed and carefully validated, we believe that the specific concerns outlined in their correspondence are unfounded.

Our original article acknowledged that RCR or, for that matter, any bibliometric measure has limited power to quantify the influence of any very recently published paper, because citation rates are inherently noisy when the absolute number of citations is small [2]. For this reason, in our iCite tool, we have not reported RCRs for papers published in the calendar year previous to the current year [3]. However, while agreeing with our initial assertion that RCR cannot be used to conclusively evaluate recent papers, Janssens et al. also suggest that the failure to report RCRs for new publications might unfairly penalize some researchers. While it is widely understood that it takes time to accurately assess the influence that new papers have on their field, we have attempted to accommodate this concern by updating iCite so that RCRs are now reported for all papers in the database that have at least 5 citations and by adding a visual indicator to flag values for papers published in the last 18 months, which should be considered provisional [3]. This modified practice will be maintained going forward.

Regarding article citation rates of older articles, we have added data on the stability of RCR values to the “Statistics” page of the iCite website [4, 5]. We believe that these new data, which demonstrate that the vast majority of influential papers retain their influence over the period of an investigator’s career, should reassure users that RCR does not unfairly disadvantage older papers. Our analysis of the year-by-year changes in RCR values of National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded articles published in 1991 reinforces this point (Fig 1). From 1992–2014, both on the individual level and in aggregate, RCR values are remarkably stable. For cases in which RCRs change significantly, the values typically increase. That said, we strongly believe that the potential for RCR to decrease over time is necessary and important; as knowledge advances and old models are replaced, publications rooted in those outdated models naturally become less influential….”