56 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. partnerships, networking, and revenue generation such as donations, memberships, pay what you want, and crowdfunding

      I have thought long about the same issue and beyond. The triple (wiki, Hypothesis, donations) could be a working way to search for OER, form a social group processing them, and optionally support the creators.

      I imagine that as follows: a person wants to learn about X. They can head to the wiki site about X and look into its Hypothesis annotations, where relevant OER with their preferred donation method can be linked. Also, study groups interested in the respective resource or topic can list virtual or live meetups there. The date of the meetups could be listed in a format that Hypothesis could search and display on a calendar.

      Wiki is integral as it categorizes knowledge, is comprehensive, and strives to address biases. Hypothesis stitches websites together for the benefit of the site owners and the collective wisdom that emerges from the discussions. Donations support the creators so they can dedicate their time to creating high-quality resources.

      Main inspirations:

      Deschooling Society - Learning Webs

      Building the Global Knowledge Graph

      Schoolhouse calendar

  2. Nov 2022
    1. 3/ Champion your competition’s work<br><br>With his reading list email, on podcasts, in his bookstore, Ryan promotes other books more than his own.<br><br>When asked, he’ll say:<br><br>“Authors think they’re competing with other authors. They’re not. They’re competing with people not reading.”

      — Billy Oppenheimer (@bpoppenheimer) August 24, 2022
      <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
  3. Oct 2022
    1. “The one inhibition I felt using AnswerGarden [was] knowing that the experts were typically busy and workingon projects more important than my little application programs....

      So rather than distributing input over time, why not have a one-day deep dive with everyone (luncheon retreat)?

  4. Aug 2022
  5. Apr 2022
    1. Under the impact of the Carolingian Renaissance, flori-legia included classical authors as well, often arranged haphazardly in the order in which they were read.

      Florilegia began to include classical authors in addition to biblical passages and those of church fathers due to the influence of the Carolingian Renaissance.

  6. Jan 2022
    1. <small><cite class='h-cite via'> <span class='p-author h-card'>John Philpin</span> in // John Philpin (<time class='dt-published'>01/05/2022 22:55:00</time>)</cite></small>

    1. St. Bonaventura (1221-1274) found that there are basically four ways of 'making books' (modi faciendi librum):"A man might write the work of others, adding and changing nothing in which case he is simply called a 'scribe' (scriptor).""Another writes the work of others with additions which are not his own; and he is called a 'compiler (compilator).""Another writes both others’ work and his own, but with others’ work in principal place, adding his own for purposes of explanation; and he is called a 'commentator' (commentator) …""Another writes both his own work and others' but with his own work in principal place adding others' for purposes of confirmation; and such a man should be called an 'author' (auctor).’"
  7. Oct 2021
    1. List only the first author’s name followed by “et al.” in every citation, even the first, unless doing so would create ambiguity between different sources.

      APA 7 3 or more authors

  8. May 2021
  9. Apr 2021
  10. Mar 2021
    1. Use “01” for an unknown or inexact month or day, and “00” for any unknown or inexact time portion.

      "Use a midpoint for any unknown portion. For instance, if only the year is known, use a date in the middle of the year, and if the datetime is known down to a day, use noon for the time."

    1. Oliver Genschow, Mareike Westfal, Jan Crusius, Léon Bartosch, Kyra Isabel Feikes, Nina Pallasch,and Mirella Wozniak

      I assume that they are all from the same University.

    1. to group the volumes together

      Group them how / where? I'm reading this as "to present the volumes together in a IIIF viewer" or similar, with an implication later in the sentence of changing "while maintaining . . . " to something like "while allowing the user to browse each volume separately [as well]".

    1. http://iiif.io

      Should be https

    2. 1987-01-01T05:00:00Z

      Add to implentation notes above: "If the exact time is not known, then “00:00:00” should be used. Similarly, the month or day should be 01 if not known."

      And change here to 00:00:00

    3. lack of viewer support at this

      "lack of viewer support for date-aware navigation for single manifests"

    4. consumption by

      consumption only by

    5. entries

      Put bit about defaulting to zeroes here.

    6. periodical articles (journal, magazine, etc.)

      change to "resources"

  11. Nov 2020
  12. Oct 2020
    1. Could I also use Indie Web tools for a persona, or is that not in keeping with the community?

      The community is all about websites and identity, so having a website for a pen name is exactly the sort of thing you should definitely do! I'm sure there are a few who have done it, but I'm unaware of any documenting it yet. Starting a stub page on the wiki for pen name could be a good start if you do.

  13. Sep 2020
  14. Jul 2020
  15. Feb 2019
  16. Oct 2018
    1. yet the response of Kleaf to mean maximum mesophyll path length (Dm) fell into two distinct groups.

      Two groups

      1. highly signficant regression
      2. Conifers and cycads with schrieds.
    2. an intimate association between light-saturated net CO2 assimilation rate (Amax) and the hydraulic conductance (Kleaf) of whole leaves was found
  17. Aug 2018
  18. Apr 2017
  19. Nov 2016
    1. Ghost authors:This phrase is used in two ways. Itusually refers to professional writers (often paid bycommercial sponsors) whose role is not acknowledged.Although such writers rarely meet ICMJE criteria, sincethey are not involved in the design of studies, or thecollection or interpretation of data, it is important toacknowledge their contribution, since their involvementmay represent a potential conflict of interest. The termcan also be used to describe people who made asignificant contribution to a research project (and fulfilthe ICMJE criteria) but are not listed as authors. TheICMJE guidelines clearly condemn this practice and statethat ‘All persons designated as authors should qualify forauthorship, and all those who qualify should be listed.’
  20. Aug 2015
  21. Feb 2014
    1. I n B u r r o w - G i l e s , t h e C o u r t d i s t i l l e d t h e s a m e r e q u i r e m e n t f r o m t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n ' s u s e o f t h e w o r d " a u t h o r s . " T h e C o u r t d e f i n e d " a u t h o r , " i n a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s e n s e , t o m e a n " h e t o w h o m a n y t h i n g o w e s i t s o r i g i n ; o r i g i n a t o r ; m a k e r . " 1 1 1 U . S . , a t 5 8 ( i n t e r n a l q u o t a t i o n m a r k s o m i t t e d ) . A s i n T h e T r a d e - M a r k C a s e s , t h e C o u r t e m p h a s i z e d t h e c r e a t i v e c o m p o n e n t o f o r i g i n a l i t y . I t d e s c r i b e d c o p y r i g h t a s b e i n g l i m i t e d t o " o r i g i n a l i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n c e p t i o n s o f t h e a u t h o r , " 1 1 1 U . S . , a t 5 8 , a n d s t r e s s e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f r e q u i r i n g a n a u t h o r w h o a c c u s e s a n o t h e r o f i n f r i n g e m e n t t o p r o v e " t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h o s e f a c t s o f o r i g i n a l i t y , o f i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o d u c t i o n , o f t h o u g h t , a n d c o n c e p t i o n . " I d . , a t 5 9 - 6 0 .

      In Burrow-Giles the court defined authors, in a constitutional sense, to mean "he to whom anything owes its origin, originator, maker" and emphasized the creative component of originality.

    2. I n T h e T r a d e - M a r k C a s e s , t h e C o u r t a d d r e s s e d t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s c o p e o f " w r i t i n g s . " F o r a p a r t i c u l a r w o r k t o b e c l a s s i f i e d " u n d e r t h e h e a d o f w r i t i n g s o f a u t h o r s , " t h e C o u r t d e t e r m i n e d , " o r i g i n a l i t y i s r e q u i r e d . " 1 0 0 U . S . , a t 9 4 . T h e C o u r t e x p l a i n e d t h a t o r i g i n a l i t y r e q u i r e s i n d e p e n d e n t c r e a t i o n p l u s a m o d i c u m o f c r e a t i v i t y : " [ W ] h i l e t h e w o r d w r i t i n g s m a y b e l i b e r a l l y c o n s t r u e d , a s i t h a s b e e n , t o i n c l u d e o r i g i n a l d e s i g n s f o r e n g r a v i n g , p r i n t s , & c . , i t i s o n l y s u c h a s a r e o r i g i n a l , a n d a r e f o u n d e d i n t h e c r e a t i v e p o w e r s o f t h e m i n d . T h e w r i t i n g s w h i c h a r e t o b e p r o t e c t e d a r e t h e f r u i t s o f i n t e l l e c t u a l l a b o r , e m b o d i e d i n t h e f o r m o f b o o k s , p r i n t s , e n g r a v i n g s , a n d t h e l i k e . " I b i d . ( e m p h a s i s i n o r i g i n a l ) .

      In The Trade-Mark Cases the Court addressed the constitutional scope of writings saying for a particular work to be classified "under the head of writings of authors," the Court determined, "originality is required"; independent creation plus a modicum of creativity.

    3. O r i g i n a l i t y i s a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e q u i r e m e n t . T h e s o u r c e o f C o n g r e s s ' p o w e r t o e n a c t c o p y r i g h t l a w s i s A r t i c l e I , § 8 , c l . 8 , o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , w h i c h a u t h o r i z e s C o n g r e s s t o " s e c u r [ e ] f o r l i m i t e d T i m e s t o A u t h o r s . . . t h e e x c l u s i v e R i g h t t o t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e W r i t i n g s . " I n t w o d e c i s i o n s f r o m t h e l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y — T h e T r a d e - M a r k C a s e s , 1 0 0 U . S . 8 2 ( 1 8 7 9 ) ; a n d B u r r o w - G i l e s L i t h o g r a p h i c C o . v . S a r o n y , 1 1 1 U . S . 5 3 ( 1 8 8 4 ) — t h i s C o u r t d e f i n e d t h e c r u c i a l t e r m s " a u t h o r s " a n d " w r i t i n g s . " I n s o d o i n g , t h e C o u r t m a d e i t u n m i s t a k a b l y c l e a r t h a t t h e s e t e r m s p r e s u p p o s e a d e g r e e o f o r i g i n a l i t y .

      This Court defined the crucial terms authors and writings.