14 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2021
  2. Apr 2020
    1. Web science

      As it is, it looks like it refers to science of the web. Not to scientific practices in a web-like way (which seems to be the goal of the Linked Resarch project).

  3. Feb 2019
  4. Feb 2017
  5. Jan 2016
    1. While there are some features shared between a university repository and us we are distinctly different for the following reasons: We offer DOIs to all content published on The Winnower All content is automatically typeset on The Winnower Content published on the winnower is not restricted to one university but is published amongst work from peers at different institutions around the world Work is published from around the world it is more discoverable We offer Altmetrics to content  Our site is much more visually appealing than a typical repository  Work can be openly reviewed on The Winnower but often times not even commented on in repositories. This is not to say that repositories have no place, but that we should focus on offering authors choices not restricting them to products developed in house.

      Over this tension/complementary between in house and external publishing platforms I wonder where is the place for indie web self hosted publishing, like the one impulsed by grafoscopio.

      A reproducible structured interactive grafoscopio notebook is self contained in software and data and holds all its history by design. Will in-house solutions and open journals like The Winnower, RIO Journal or the Self Journal of Science, support such kinds of publishing artifacts?

      Technically there is not a big barrier (it's mostly about hosting fossil repositories, which is pretty easy, and adding a discoverability and author layer on top), but it seems that the only option now is going to big DVCS and data platforms now like GitHub or datahub alike for storing other research artifacts like software and data, so it is more about centralized-mostly instead of p2p-also. This other p2p alternatives seem outside the radar for most alternative Open Access and Open Science publishers now.

  6. Dec 2015
  7. Nov 2015
    1. Les représentants de la Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF) annoncèrent leur objectif de ramener le délai de traitement des documents à six semaines en moyenne

      C’était long, en 2002! Où en est la BnF, aujourd’hui? D’une certaine façon, ce résumé semble prédire la venue des données, la fédération des catalogues, etc. Pourtant, il semble demeurer de nombreux obstacles, malgré tout ce temps. Et si on pouvait annoter le Web directement?