[open-science] Working Group Profile in PLoS Biology

Peter Murray-Rust pm286 at cam.ac.uk
Mon Aug 15 08:05:20 UTC 2011

Thaks Jenny - tremendous material to get started with.

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Jenny Molloy <jenny.molloy at okfn.org>wrote:

> Hi All
> The OKF was approached recently by PLoS Biology to write a piece on the
> working group for their Community pages. I've drafted one, and it would be
> great if some of you could take a look and comment!
> http://okfnpad.org/sciencewg-PLoSBiology
> Please make edits, add comments throughout the text or at the end.
> Things to note:
> It is requested that we don't use this entirely as a self promotion
> activity and therefore focus mainly on a few things we do as opposed to
> listing them all,

Agreed. It may be worth pointing out that the OKF(-science) can act as a
tool to collect and refine opintions and protocols. Unlike real-life
meetings where the attendence is based on protoplasm, this approach allows
anyone to participate. However the "product" is a considerable refinement of
the ideas that went in. OKF takes its output quality seriously.

so I've tried to find a balance whilst including enough activities to
> demonstrate the breadth of our scope. The focus is:
> The Open Definition
> The Panton Principles
> I have taken it as our position that we support the idea that scientific
> data should be open by default according to the Panton Principles (with all
> the usual caveats for privacy, special cases etc). I'm pretty sure that this
> reflects the views of most of the group, but I have mentioned that we are a
> diverse bunch :)
> I'd particularly like comments on:
> Have I made it clear enough that the piece is discussing data associated
> with published science (as per the PP)?
> Are there interesting cases/examples/analogies that you think would fit in
> the piece?
> Any general comments on content or style
> Please be frank - this is a great opportunity to get some exposure for the
> group (and make us citeable) so we want this to be as good as possible.
I agree we shouldn't advertise ourselves per se but it is worth making it
clear that OKF can have a role to play as a formal part in the development
of new protocols and approaches.

Thanks very much for your help!
> Jenny
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science

Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20110815/a196889c/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the open-science mailing list