User:Daniel Mietchen/Notebook/Open Science/2010/09/24

{| width="800"
 * style="background-color: #EEE"|[[Image:owwnotebook_icon.png|128px]] What would science look like if it were open?
 * style="background-color: #F2F2F2" align="center"|  |Main project page
 * style="background-color: #F2F2F2" align="center"|  |Main project page


 * colspan="2"|
 * colspan="2"|

The evolution of the Library of Open Science

 * A thought experiment on the future of science publishing and libraries, available also via YouTube:



Explanation

 * At the beginning was the Library: L.
 * The concept proliferated, and after a while, some of them became open to the public: +P.
 * Yet later, science came into play: +S.
 * Soon, Libraries of science started: S ==> LoS.
 * The two types of libraries started to interact: PL LoS.
 * The Public Libary of Science was started: PLoS.
 * Yet it actually started out as just a Public Library of Science Papers (ignoring the Public Libraries of notebooks and blogs, for instance): +P.
 * Public Library of Open-Access Science Papers, to be precise: +OA.
 * Yet there is no scientific argument for writing papers any more: -P.
 * Access to the scholarly literature is just one aspect of science that needs to be open; we need Open Process Science: OA ==> OP.
 * If the whole process is open, that would be true Open Science: -P.
 * Thanks to the Openness, there is a capital O in there already, so the small auxiliary one can be dropped: -o.
 * Open science is public by default anyway, so no need to state the obvious: -P.
 * Let's get started (in German)!

Note: Uploading problems &mdash; mov and avi versions were too small for Vimeo.


 * }