Altmetrics Come to OJS: Announcing the Paperbuzz Plugin | Public Knowledge Project

PKP is pleased to announce the release of the Paperbuzz Plugin for Open Journal System (OJS) versions 3.1.2 and above, built in cooperation with the Paperbuzzteam at Impactstory. This new plugin will bring free altmetrics (an alternative to traditional citation-based metrics) based on open data to thousands of OJS journals….”

Open Journal Systems (OJS) sets new standards to achieve OpenAIRE compliance with JATS – OpenAIRE Blogs

Open Journal Systems (OJS, https://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/) is an open source journal management and publishing system, developed by the Public Knowledge Project (PKP, https://pkp.sfu.ca/). Around 10,000 journals worldwide and over a thousand journals published in Europe use Open Journal Systems. The latest major version OJS 3 was released in 2016, and since then hundreds of OJS journals have upgraded including large national journal platforms like Tidsskrift.dk and Journal.fi.Therefore, it is important to help the growing number of OJS 3 journals to become compliant with the OpenAIRE infrastructure in terms of comprehensive metadata descriptions of open access articles on research in Europe and beyond….”

Open Journal Systems (OJS) sets new standards to achieve OpenAIRE compliance with JATS – OpenAIRE Blogs

Open Journal Systems (OJS, https://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/) is an open source journal management and publishing system, developed by the Public Knowledge Project (PKP, https://pkp.sfu.ca/). Around 10,000 journals worldwide and over a thousand journals published in Europe use Open Journal Systems. The latest major version OJS 3 was released in 2016, and since then hundreds of OJS journals have upgraded including large national journal platforms like Tidsskrift.dk and Journal.fi.Therefore, it is important to help the growing number of OJS 3 journals to become compliant with the OpenAIRE infrastructure in terms of comprehensive metadata descriptions of open access articles on research in Europe and beyond….”

Introducing the new OJS-ORCID plugin | ORCID

The recent launch of version 3.1.2 of PKP‘s Open Journal System (OJS) marks an exciting moment — an upgraded ORCID API plugin! Journals upgrading to OJS 3.1.2 can now request authenticated iDs from both contributing authors and co-authors, and Member API users can assert published works directly to an author’s ORCID record with the author’s permission. All journals that upgrade to the latest version of OJS can benefit from the new features.

Like ORCID, OJS is an open-source, community-driven platform, which benefits from an engaged community of developer contributors. ORCID API support enabling collection of authenticated ORCID iDs was first launched in 2016 with OJS 3.0, through the work of community developers including the University of Pittsburgh. The latest additions were developed by a team of OJS community members in Germany, including Nils Weiher and Dulip Withanage of Heidelberg University (also an ORCID member through the German national consortium)….”

Making the Move to Open Journal Systems 3: Recommendations for a (mostly) painless upgrade

Abstract:  From June 2017 to August 2018, Scholars Portal, a consortial service of the Ontario Council of University Libraries, upgraded 10 different multi-journal instances of the Open Journal Systems (OJS) 3 software, building expertise on the upgrade process along the way. The final and the largest instance to be upgraded was the University of Toronto Libraries, which hosts over 50 journals. In this article, we will discuss the upgrade planning and process, problems encountered along the way, and some best practices in supporting journal teams through the upgrade on a multi-journal instance. We will also include checklists and technical troubleshooting tips to help institutions make their upgrade as smooth and worry-free as possible. Finally, we will go over post-upgrade support strategies and next steps in making the most out of your transition to OJS 3. This article will primarily be useful for institutions hosting instances of OJS 2, but those that have already upgraded, or are considering hosting the software, may find the outlined approach to support and testing helpful.

Plan S feedback | Innovations in Scholarly Communication

We have a few overall recommendations:

  • Improve on the why: make it more clear that Plan S is part of a broader transition towards open science and not only to make papers available and OA cheaper. It is part of changes to make science more efficient, reliable and reusable.
  • Plan S brings great potential, and with that also comes great responsibility for cOAlition S funders. From the start, plan S has been criticized for its perceived focus (in intent and/or expected effects) on APC-based OA publishing. In our reading, both the principles and the implementation guidance recognize for all forms of full OA publishing, including diamond OA and new forms of publishing like overlay journals. However, it will depend to no small extent on the actual recognition and support of non-APC based gold OA models by cOAlitionS funders whether plan S will indeed encourage such bibliodiversity and accompanying equity in publishing opportunities. Examples of initiatives to consider in this regard are OJS journal systems by PKP, Coko open source technology based initiatives, Open Library of HumanitiesScoap3Free Journal Network, and also Scielo and Redalyc in Latin America.
  • The issue of evaluation and assessment is tied closely to the effects Plan S can or will have. It is up to cOAlitionS funders to take actionable steps to turn their commitment to fundamentally revise the incentive and reward system of science in line with DORA into practice, at the same time they are putting the Plan S principles into practice. The two can mutually support each other, as open access journals that also implement other open science criteria such as pre-registration, requirements for FAIR data and selection based on rigorous methodological criteria will facilitate evaluation based on research quality.  
  • Make sure to (also) provide Plan S in the form of one integrated document containing the why, the what and the how on one document. Currently it is too easy to overlook the why. That document should be openly licensed and shared in a reliable archive.
  • In the implementation document include a (graphical) timeline of changes and deadlines….”

Plan S feedback | Innovations in Scholarly Communication

We have a few overall recommendations:

  • Improve on the why: make it more clear that Plan S is part of a broader transition towards open science and not only to make papers available and OA cheaper. It is part of changes to make science more efficient, reliable and reusable.
  • Plan S brings great potential, and with that also comes great responsibility for cOAlition S funders. From the start, plan S has been criticized for its perceived focus (in intent and/or expected effects) on APC-based OA publishing. In our reading, both the principles and the implementation guidance recognize for all forms of full OA publishing, including diamond OA and new forms of publishing like overlay journals. However, it will depend to no small extent on the actual recognition and support of non-APC based gold OA models by cOAlitionS funders whether plan S will indeed encourage such bibliodiversity and accompanying equity in publishing opportunities. Examples of initiatives to consider in this regard are OJS journal systems by PKP, Coko open source technology based initiatives, Open Library of HumanitiesScoap3Free Journal Network, and also Scielo and Redalyc in Latin America.
  • The issue of evaluation and assessment is tied closely to the effects Plan S can or will have. It is up to cOAlitionS funders to take actionable steps to turn their commitment to fundamentally revise the incentive and reward system of science in line with DORA into practice, at the same time they are putting the Plan S principles into practice. The two can mutually support each other, as open access journals that also implement other open science criteria such as pre-registration, requirements for FAIR data and selection based on rigorous methodological criteria will facilitate evaluation based on research quality.  
  • Make sure to (also) provide Plan S in the form of one integrated document containing the why, the what and the how on one document. Currently it is too easy to overlook the why. That document should be openly licensed and shared in a reliable archive.
  • In the implementation document include a (graphical) timeline of changes and deadlines….”

Reflections and Directions After PKP’s First Two Decades | Public Knowledge Project

“The Public Knowledge Project (PKP) is entering its third decade. Like any project that has been around this long, PKP is facing the substantial responsibilities of maturity, seeking ways that will enable it to best serve the thousands of people who utilize our software to operate and index the journals and presses with which they work. It is out of this sense of responsibility that PKP, in the fall of 2017, submitted a proposal to the Laura and John Arnold Foundation boldly entitled “Sustaining Open Access’ Most Widely Used Publishing Software.” With this planning grant, PKP contracted the consulting services of BlueSky to Blueprint, with its principal Nancy Maron embarking on an exploration of PKP’s standing and prospects among a sample of those involved in scholarly publishing, including current, former, and potential users of its software.”

Reflections and Directions After PKP’s First Two Decades | Public Knowledge Project

“The Public Knowledge Project (PKP) is entering its third decade. Like any project that has been around this long, PKP is facing the substantial responsibilities of maturity, seeking ways that will enable it to best serve the thousands of people who utilize our software to operate and index the journals and presses with which they work. It is out of this sense of responsibility that PKP, in the fall of 2017, submitted a proposal to the Laura and John Arnold Foundation boldly entitled “Sustaining Open Access’ Most Widely Used Publishing Software.” With this planning grant, PKP contracted the consulting services of BlueSky to Blueprint, with its principal Nancy Maron embarking on an exploration of PKP’s standing and prospects among a sample of those involved in scholarly publishing, including current, former, and potential users of its software.”

ATLA Publications Moving to Open Access

 The American Theological Library Association (ATLA) is moving the Theology Cataloging Bulletin (TCB) and the ATLA Summary of Proceedings, two valued and frequently consulted resources of the ATLA membership and others, to open access. ?

 

For more than 25 years, TCB has provided readers with information about new and changed Library of Congress subject headings and classification numbers as well as announcements of upcoming training opportunities, a bibliography of recently published articles, and other stories of interest to religion/theology catalogers. The Proceedings is the historical record of ATLA’s annual conference. It includes summaries of pre-conference professional development workshops; reports of business meetings, interest group meetings, denominational sessions, and conversation groups; and the full text or abstracts of plenary sessions, papers, posters, and workshops presented during the conference. Readers of the Proceedings learn about the rich and varied interests of ATLA members and of the work being done in the field of theological librarianship.