Publishing Group: Difference between revisions
From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (→Comments) |
|||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
*Hal Abelson and John Wilbanks gave interesting talks on [http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/270/ Open Networks and Open Society: The Relationship between Freedom, Law, and Technology]. | *Hal Abelson and John Wilbanks gave interesting talks on [http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/270/ Open Networks and Open Society: The Relationship between Freedom, Law, and Technology]. | ||
*An [http://www.oecd.org OECD] report on scientific publishing was published a couple of weeks ago and seems especially relevent. Here are links to the [http://www.oecd.org/document/55/0,2340,en_2649_34487_35397879_1_1_1_1,00.htm press release] and [http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/12/35393145.pdf report] | *An [http://www.oecd.org OECD] report on scientific publishing was published a couple of weeks ago and seems especially relevent. Here are links to the [http://www.oecd.org/document/55/0,2340,en_2649_34487_35397879_1_1_1_1,00.htm press release] and [http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/12/35393145.pdf report] | ||
*A new journal relevant to our discussions today [http://www.biology-direct.com/ Biology Direct]. Be sure to check out the [http://www.biology-direct.com/default/10078-aims.htm "novel peer review process"]. from [[Drew Endy | Drew]]. | |||
* Slashdot post on [http://it.slashdot.org/it/05/10/24/1054214.shtml?tid=230&tid=218 Indirect Documents At Last]. In particular, see this [http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=166183&threshold=1&commentsort=0&tid=230&tid=218&mode=thread&cid=13863332 post] with the full article text. It discusses a different type of document structure from that used now which formed a different vision for the web. Also touches on copyright issues. | |||
==Comments== | ==Comments== | ||
Perhaps we should begin gathering thoughts on a secondary page that synthesizes our discussions into a logical format. Perhaps the beginning of that is [[Publishing Group/Thoughts|here]]. -[[User:Skosuri|Sri Kosuri]] 15:22, 6 Oct 2005 (EDT) | Perhaps we should begin gathering thoughts on a secondary page that synthesizes our discussions into a logical format. Perhaps the beginning of that is [[Publishing Group/Thoughts|here]]. -[[User:Skosuri|Sri Kosuri]] 15:22, 6 Oct 2005 (EDT) |
Revision as of 11:46, 24 October 2005
There is a current opportunity in Synthetic Biology to re-evalute issues relating to scientific publishing. We are discussing possible improvements/alternatives that we would like to see, and how possibly to go about implementing them.
Announcements
Please add your ideas/questions below that you would like to discuss.
Past Meetings
Things to discuss
- Do we need a Synthetic Biology specific journal?
- Does the peer review process, as practiced work?
- Is peer review needed for engineering research articles?
- What features would we like for our papers? Reader comments? Reader Wiki?
- How should the structure of a paper be changed to reflect things like, well, the Internets?
- What existing journals are the most appropriate/receptive venues for publication of SB work?
- How is publishing on SB topics different from any other field?
- What are the other (if any) alternate publishing models already out there?
- Non-synthetic biology improvement:Author IDs or URIs or something. Noticed this while trying to set up myNCBI searches for people with more common names, what a pain. I'm changing my name to xyuitk.
- Can we ensure that publishing and access to publications is equally open to all institutions regardless of rank?
- <your question/idea>
Relevant material
- Hal Abelson and John Wilbanks gave interesting talks on Open Networks and Open Society: The Relationship between Freedom, Law, and Technology.
- An OECD report on scientific publishing was published a couple of weeks ago and seems especially relevent. Here are links to the press release and report
- A new journal relevant to our discussions today Biology Direct. Be sure to check out the "novel peer review process". from Drew.
- Slashdot post on Indirect Documents At Last. In particular, see this post with the full article text. It discusses a different type of document structure from that used now which formed a different vision for the web. Also touches on copyright issues.
Comments
Perhaps we should begin gathering thoughts on a secondary page that synthesizes our discussions into a logical format. Perhaps the beginning of that is here. -Sri Kosuri 15:22, 6 Oct 2005 (EDT)