[open-science] [Open-access] OKF at Open Repositories 2014

[Peter Murray-Rust]

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Emanuil Tolev <emanuil at cottagelabs.com>wrote:

>
> On 5 December 2013 12:16, Jenny Molloy <jenny.molloy at okfn.org> wrote:
>
>
>> People seem to be pointing towards:
>> 1) Automatic/crowdsourced deposition of OA work into repositories via
>> OAButton system or other means (maybe we could persuade a few live
>> repositories to implement the deposit button Mark discussed).
>>
>
> Hmm... if the OAButton showed you your own research (e.g. just by name),
> showed you how many people hit a paywall trying to get your article(s) and
> prompted you to deposit, that seems like a good way of convincing more
> people to do it. Would it not be insanely complex in terms of finding WHERE
> to deposit to though? (I.e. has to be a local institutional repo because UK
> is not Norway, correct me if I'm wrong.)
>

?? Why does it have to be a local institutional repo? This religious
insistence on Universities at the centre has held us back. I use to work
for Glaxo - where do I put my papers? Where do Cottagelabbers put them? The
fewer outlets (> 1 but small) the better. Options include:

* arXiv
* EuropePMC
* CKAN
* Wikipedia

and perhaps national libraries.

>>Also I'm not sure how much metadata they hold about the articles people
report using the OAButton. An integration between the OAButton data and
CrossRef has more chance here, and is a cool idea. There's not enough
integration between OAButton and repos yet, though we do use CORE to look
stuff up automatically for our users.

Why should we base the future on a system that clearly isn't (yet) working.
Given the choice of going to Wikipedia and
theUniversityOfNowhereIHaveHeardOf where would people want to go?


> 2) Indexing content for search and discovery.
>

>>I think Jorum, the open educational resource system, is built on DSpace,
and that's doing fine with its catalogue: http://find.jorum.ac.uk/

Is it? Can I search for (say) "Blackbird" or "Turdus Merula"? I don't get
any results. We need to build our own.

>>But I guess what the audience will really want to hear about is basically
an open alternative to Google Scholar.

Yes.

>>One thing which can attach information to very large amounts of DOI-s is
http://oag.cottagelabs.com/ , a mass license checker - goes directly to
publisher websites and scrapes them (or uses API-s where available). So
this is not precisely discovery just yet, but it does fill the legal gap
(the license of the items we index for discovery and search).

Excellent.

>>Many have tried to build an open index of scholarship (I've tried with
others too, still trying) but I haven't heard of a big one just yet. While
this is probably the "ultimate" topic of such a workshop, I don't think
we're at the stage where you can base a workshop on that idea. Maybe the
other 2 examples above + other existing projects come together to a greater
whole worthy of a workshop though.

There is no technical reason why not, and I think the need is becoming
clearer. Figshare showed that one graduate student can change the world,
OAButton showed that undergraduates will. Wikipedia has built a better
knowledge engine than almost any university. We have all the indexing tools
built (we can add Pubcrawler to the Cottagelab tools) and the problem can
be scaled with committed humans.



-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20131205/4beadcdd/attachment.html>