[open-science] Definitions of Open Science?

[cameron.neylon at stfc.ac.uk]

I would say that the definitions, or at least visions that came out of the meeting in Geneva are as good as any. My personal position is that 'open science' is too big and diverse a church to capture with a single definition without offending at least some members of the broader community. Easier to articulate shared aims and to define more specific practices or beliefs within that.

Cheers

Cameron

On 28 Jul 2011, at 07:42, "Peter Murray-Rust" <pm286 at cam.ac.uk<mailto:pm286 at cam.ac.uk>> wrote:

I am at a small workshop which includes Michael Nielsen and I asked him this yesterday before I knew we were going to tackle this at repofringe. Michael is giving a series of lectures - ca 1/day over three months on the topic of Open Science. I'll see if he has a defintion or is interested in participating.

p.


On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Jo Walsh <<mailto:metazool at fastmail.net>metazool at fastmail.net<mailto:metazool at fastmail.net>> wrote:
Are there definitions of Open Science from which one could borrow for an Open Scholarship definition writing session at Repository Fringe?
(next week)



_______________________________________________
open-science mailing list
<mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>open-science at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>
<http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science>http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science



--
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
_______________________________________________
open-science mailing list
open-science at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
-- 
Scanned by iCritical.