31 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2024
    1. Every few years a new shiny object takes over calls for proposals, grant application themes, and social media commentary. Some last longer than others, while some quickly fade from memory.

      Someone should repeat the research that MIT Press funded in 2019 around open infrastructure and tools. It definitely highlighted this shiny object syndrome.

      https://mindthegap.pubpub.org/

  2. Jun 2024
  3. Feb 2024
  4. Dec 2023
  5. Aug 2023
  6. Nov 2022
    1. In an Open Science context,  “infrastructure” -- the "structures and facilities" -- refers to the scholarly communication resources and services, including software, that we depend upon to enable the scientific and scholarly community to collect, store, organise, access, share, and assess research.
  7. Apr 2022
    1. Infrastructure is a socio-technical system rather than a technical product.

      This is great to see as so often infrastructure is considered to be only within a purely technical layer.

    2. Infrastructure is dynamic.

      Also key: A common view of infrastructure as more permanent structures like "roads and bridges", or even digital networks, shapes understanding away from infrastructure as a more dynamic socio-technical system.

  8. Nov 2021
    1. it builds on the following key pillars: open scientific knowledge, open science infrastructures, science communication, open engagement of societal actors and open dialogue with other knowledge systems.

      penerbitan makalah di jurnal open access jelas hanyasebagian kecil saja dari lima pilar kunci: open scientific knowledge, open science infrastructures, science communication, open engagement of societal actors.

  9. Sep 2021
    1. We need more SCOSS-like experimentation. We need initiatives with short iterations of conceptualization and execution, a sort of trial-and-error mentality as we navigate this complex issue. We need research organisations and libraries to create budget lines for open infrastructures. We need funders to start supporting the maintenance of open infrastructures like the eLife Innovation Initiative or the Chan Zuckerberg Foundation.

  10. Apr 2021
  11. Mar 2021
  12. Jun 2020
  13. Apr 2020
    1. Establish standard models and criteria for funding alternatives to “pay for access” or “pay to publish” (transactional funding models) so that libraries can more easily invest in diverse content and services, including open infrastructure

      Yes!

  14. Dec 2019
  15. Nov 2019
  16. Oct 2019
  17. Jul 2019
  18. May 2019
    1. By “Infrastructure” we mean

      ​The definition of "open infrastructure" (or the software component of open infrastructure) should include an explicit requirement for open-source code.​ Even an explicit recommendation short of a requirement would be better than the current definition, which is entirely silent the value of opening the code. The Elsevier acquisition of bepress (to use one example among many) would have been much less harmful to the community if the code had been open and user institutions could hold on to the platform, fork it if they wanted, take it in their own direction, and continue using it without becoming Elsevier customers.

  19. Apr 2019
    1. A Vision for Scholarly Communication Currently, there is a strong push to address the apparent deficits of the scholarly communication system. Open Science has the potential to change the production and dissemination of scholarly knowledge for the better, but there is no commonly shared vision that describes the system that we want to create.

      A Vision for Scholarly Communication

  20. Mar 2019
    1. Engaging the Public Through Wikipedia: Strategies and Tools Show affiliations

      Engaging the Public Through Wikipedia: Strategies and Tools

    1. There is a serious crisis of discoverability. To overcome it, we have to tear down the walls of dark knowledge and invest in the open discovery infrastructure, esp. user interfaces.

  21. Dec 2016
    1. competencies or learning outcomes, educational resources that support the achievement of those outcomes, assessments by which learners can demonstrate their achievement of those outcomes, and credentials that certify their mastery of those outcomes to third parties.

      These all feel very product driven from my perspective. Perhaps it's a necessarily administrative position. Of course, David himself has written about this elsewhere, but what about the process, what about pedagogy?