Open Source Publishing and Distribution Platform for OA Books – Open Book Publishers

“An important part of OBP’s business model has been the ability to harness emerging digital technologies to bring down the publication costs associated with scholarly texts. In addition we have developed an extensive and cost effective distribution network for both digital and printed editions of our titles.

We now intend to reformat and update our software and processes for release as Open Source content, and make all the code freely available for others to adopt and adapt from our GitHub account. As we will be using and maintaining this code for our own operations, on completion we will be in a position to provide a complete, modular, managed, Open Source book publishing and distribution platform for others to freely adopt as they wish.”

We need a GitHub for academic research.

“[T]he academic paper has some inherent limitations—chief among them that it can provide only a summary of a given research project. Even an outstanding paper cannot provide direct access to all of the research data collected or to the record of discussions among scientists that is reflected in lab notes. These windows into the messy and halting process of science, which can be extremely valuable learning objects, are not yet part of the official record of a research study.

But it doesn’t have to be this way. If we take advantage of the unique capabilities of the web to tell the full story of a research project—rather than merely using it as a faster printing press as we do today—we can build greater transparency into our approach to reporting science. Besides improving information-sharing among scientists, a push toward transparency could improve public trust in science and scientists. Now, when the very concepts of fact and truth under assault and many scientists feel compelled to march in response, is the perfect time to rethink our approach to scientific communication altogether….”

GitHub and more: sharing data & code | Innovations in Scholarly Communication

“Among those researchers that do archive and share data, GitHub is indeed the most often used, but just as many people indicate using ‘others’ (i.e. tools not mentioned as one of the preselected options). Figshare comes in third, followed by Bitbucket, Dryad, Dataverse, Zenodo and Pangaea (Figure 3)….Another surprising finding is the overall low use of Zenodo – a CERN-hosted repository that is the recommended archiving and sharing solution for data from EU-projects and -institutions. The fact that Zenodo is a data-sharing platform that is available to anyone (thus not just for EU project data) might not be widely known yet….”

The Open Journal by arfon

“Along with a few friends, we’ve written code to support peer review as a service. It assumes that some group of people (think editors or academic community) want to make comments on a thing (think paper). All you need is a URL for the thing – we think that GitHub repositories offer lots of nice advantages but it could be a dropbox link, or an arXiv paper or anything. Comments are just a list of issues on the paper or on specific parts of it; they are opened by a reviewer and then resolved by the reviewer after dialogue with the author, authors or editors. Once (enough) issues are resolved, your paper is ‘accepted’ and the service will proclaim the news to anything listening.1

That’s all you actually need to start your own publishing revolution. To give you an idea of how this might work, imagine building a new journal. Let’s call it the Open Journal of Astrophysics….”