Open collaborative writing with Manubot

Abstract:  Open, collaborative research is a powerful paradigm that can immensely strengthen the scientific process by integrating broad and diverse expertise. However, traditional research and multi-author writing processes break down at scale. We present new software named Manubot, available at https://manubot.org, to address the challenges of open scholarly writing. Manubot adopts the contribution workflow used by many large-scale open source software projects to enable collaborative authoring of scholarly manuscripts. With Manubot, manuscripts are written in Markdown and stored in a Git repository to precisely track changes over time. By hosting manuscript repositories publicly, such as on GitHub, multiple authors can simultaneously propose and review changes. A cloud service automatically evaluates proposed changes to catch errors. Publication with Manubot is continuous: When a manuscript’s source changes, the rendered outputs are rebuilt and republished to a web page. Manubot automates bibliographic tasks by implementing citation by identifier, where users cite persistent identifiers (e.g. DOIs, PubMed IDs, ISBNs, URLs), whose metadata is then retrieved and converted to a user-specified style. Manubot modernizes publishing to align with the ideals of open science by making it transparent, reproducible, immediate, versioned, collaborative, and free of charge.

Plan S: the final cut—response from cOAlition S – The Lancet

On behalf of the cOAlition S Executive Steering Group, I commend the Editors of The Lancet for their positive support for Plan S and the ambition to make full and immediate open access a reality. Finding ways in which researchers can seek to publish in their preferred journals, while ensuring that the outputs of funded research can be accessed and used by all, is a key part of our strategy.

It was especially pleasing to read that the Lancet group’s hybrid journals will be fully compliant with Plan S.
As the payment of article processing charges in hybrid journals will no longer be supported by Plan S funders, we welcome the stance the Lancet family of journals have adopted: researchers who have articles accepted for publication in these venues can self-archive the Author-Accepted Manuscript (at no cost) in a repository where it can be made publicly available at the time of publication (no embargo) under a CC BY Open Access license.
This approach is in line with that of other publishers such as the Royal Society and the Microbiology Society, and we look forward to other publishers moving to a fully open access model….”

The Orange Grove

“The Orange Grove repository is Florida’s digital repository for instructional resources. The repository provides an environment for educators to search for, use, remix, share, and contribute educational resources. The repository can also be integrated with your Learning Management Systems (e.g. Canvas, Blackboard, Desire 2 Learn). Discover, contribute, and import repository resources directly from your LMS.”

A single, open access journal may prevent the primary publishing problems in the life sciences: Accountability in Research: Vol 0, No 0

Abstract:  Herein, we discuss a novel way to knit current life sciences publishing structures together under the scope of a single life science journal that would countermand many of the issues faced in current publishing paradigms. Such issues include, but are not limited to, publication fees, subscription fees, impact factor, and publishing in more “glamorous” journals for career health. We envision a process flow involving (i) a single, overall, life sciences journal, (ii) divided into sections headed by learned societies, (iii) to whom all scientific papers are submitted for peer review, and (iv) all accepted scientific literature would be published open access and without author publication fees. With such a structure, journal fees, the merit system of science, and unethical aspects of open access would be reformed for the better. Importantly, such a journal could leverage existing online platforms; that is to say, it is conceptually feasible. We conclude that wholly inclusive publishing paradigms can be possible. A single, open access, online, life sciences journal could solve the myriad problems associated with current publishing paradigms and would be feasible to implement.

ASR – Interactive open access to climate observations from Germany

Abstract:  During recent years, Germany’s national meteorological service (Deutscher Wetterdienst, DWD) has significantly expanded the open access to its climate observations. A first step was a simple FTP-site with the possibility for downloading archives with various categories of data, e.g. national and international station-based meteorological data, derived parameters, gridded products and special categories as e.g. phenological data. The data are based on the observing systems of DWD for Germany as well as international activities of DWD. To improve the interactive and user-friendly access to the data, a new portal has been developed. The portal serves a variety of user requirements that result from the broad range of applications of DWD’s climate data. Here we provide an overview of the new climate data portal of DWD. It is based on a systematic implementation of OGC-based technologies. It allows easy graphical access to the station data, but also supports access via technical interfaces, esp. Web-Map- and Web-Feature-Services.

Open access policies of leading medical journals: a cross-sectional study | BMJ Open

Abstract

Objectives Academical and not-for-profit research funders are increasingly requiring that the research they fund must be published open access, with some insisting on publishing with a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to allow the broadest possible use. We aimed to clarify the open access variants provided by leading medical journals and record the availability of the CC BY licence for commercially funded research.

Methods We identified medical journals with a 2015 impact factor of ?15.0 on 24 May 2017, then excluded from the analysis journals that only publish review articles. Between 29 June 2017 and 26 July 2017, we collected information about each journal’s open access policies from their websites and/or by email contact. We contacted the journals by email again between 6 December 2017 and 2 January 2018 to confirm our findings.

Results Thirty-five medical journals publishing original research from 13 publishers were included in the analysis. All 35 journals offered some form of open access allowing articles to be free-to-read, either immediately on publication or after a delay of up to 12 months. Of these journals, 21 (60%) provided immediate open access with a CC BY licence under certain circumstances (eg, to specific research funders). Of these 21, 20 only offered a CC BY licence to authors funded by non-commercial organisations and one offered this option to any funder who required it.

Conclusions Most leading medical journals do not offer to authors reporting commercially funded research an open access licence that allows unrestricted sharing and adaptation of the published material. The journals’ policies are therefore not aligned with open access declarations and guidelines. Commercial research funders lag behind academical funders in the development of mandatory open access policies, and it is time for them to work with publishers to advance the dissemination of the research they fund.

Open access policies of leading medical journals: a cross-sectional study | BMJ Open

Abstract

Objectives Academical and not-for-profit research funders are increasingly requiring that the research they fund must be published open access, with some insisting on publishing with a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to allow the broadest possible use. We aimed to clarify the open access variants provided by leading medical journals and record the availability of the CC BY licence for commercially funded research.

Methods We identified medical journals with a 2015 impact factor of ?15.0 on 24 May 2017, then excluded from the analysis journals that only publish review articles. Between 29 June 2017 and 26 July 2017, we collected information about each journal’s open access policies from their websites and/or by email contact. We contacted the journals by email again between 6 December 2017 and 2 January 2018 to confirm our findings.

Results Thirty-five medical journals publishing original research from 13 publishers were included in the analysis. All 35 journals offered some form of open access allowing articles to be free-to-read, either immediately on publication or after a delay of up to 12 months. Of these journals, 21 (60%) provided immediate open access with a CC BY licence under certain circumstances (eg, to specific research funders). Of these 21, 20 only offered a CC BY licence to authors funded by non-commercial organisations and one offered this option to any funder who required it.

Conclusions Most leading medical journals do not offer to authors reporting commercially funded research an open access licence that allows unrestricted sharing and adaptation of the published material. The journals’ policies are therefore not aligned with open access declarations and guidelines. Commercial research funders lag behind academical funders in the development of mandatory open access policies, and it is time for them to work with publishers to advance the dissemination of the research they fund.

Plans for a new Open Access Book Network take shape – SPARC Europe

“Foundational planning is currently underway for the formation of an Open Access Book Network. Development of this network was the topic of a recent ELPUB 2019 Conference panel session led by Eelco Ferwerda from OAPEN,  with the University of Cambridge’s Rupert Gatti, Pierre Mounier of OPERAS, Andrea Bertino of SUB Goettingen, and SPARC Europe Director Vanessa Proudman.  

The original idea for the network was born in Autumn 2018 during an OA books event hosted by Knowledge Exchange in Brussels as a follow-up of the landscape study published earlier. Proudman initiated the concept to establish a sustainable knowledge network in Europe to accelerate the innovation of the OA book publishing industry, a network that is inclusive of all of Europe and that shares lessons learnt from all parts of the continent….”

Plans for a new Open Access Book Network take shape – SPARC Europe

“Foundational planning is currently underway for the formation of an Open Access Book Network. Development of this network was the topic of a recent ELPUB 2019 Conference panel session led by Eelco Ferwerda from OAPEN,  with the University of Cambridge’s Rupert Gatti, Pierre Mounier of OPERAS, Andrea Bertino of SUB Goettingen, and SPARC Europe Director Vanessa Proudman.  

The original idea for the network was born in Autumn 2018 during an OA books event hosted by Knowledge Exchange in Brussels as a follow-up of the landscape study published earlier. Proudman initiated the concept to establish a sustainable knowledge network in Europe to accelerate the innovation of the OA book publishing industry, a network that is inclusive of all of Europe and that shares lessons learnt from all parts of the continent….”

Microsoft is about to shut off its ebook DRM servers: “The books will stop working” / Boing Boing

” “The books will stop working”: That’s the substance of the reminder that Microsoft sent to customers for their ebook store, reminding them that, as announced in April, the company is getting out of the ebook business because it wasn’t profitable enough for them, and when they do, they’re going to shut off their DRM servers, which will make the books stop working.

Almost exactly fifteen years ago, I gave an influential, widely cited talk at Microsoft Research where I predicted this exact outcome. I don’t feel good about the fact that I got it right. This is a fucking travesty….”