scholarly journals Advancing an Open Ethos with Open Peer Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 78 (4) ◽  
pp. 406
Author(s):  
Emily Ford

Open source. Open access. Open data. Open notebooks. Open government. Open educational resources. Open access workflows. To be open is to have a disposition favoring transparent and collaborative efforts.Open is everywhere. Since the late 90’s when developers in Silicon Valley adopted the term ‘open source’ (suggested by Christine Peterson), the open movement has grown by leaps and bounds. The developers, who met after the web browser company Netscape made its source code open, articulated that ‘open’ “…illustrated a valuable way to engage with potential software users and developers, and convince them to create and improve source code by participating in an engaged community.”1 It also separated ‘open source’ “…from the philosophically- and politically-focused label ‘free software.’”2

F1000Research ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Corpas ◽  
Rafael Jimenez ◽  
Seth J Carbon ◽  
Alex García ◽  
Leyla Garcia ◽  
...  

BioJS is a community-based standard and repository of functional components to represent biological information on the web. The development of BioJS has been prompted by the growing need for bioinformatics visualisation tools to be easily shared, reused and discovered. Its modular architecture makes it easy for users to find a specific functionality without needing to know how it has been built, while components can be extended or created for implementing new functionality. The BioJS community of developers currently provides a range of functionality that is open access and freely available. A registry has been set up that categorises and provides installation instructions and testing facilities at http://www.ebi.ac.uk/tools/biojs/. The source code for all components is available for ready use at https://github.com/biojs/biojs.


The open source and open access movements, both philosophical concepts as well as models of information flow, have been instrumental in the development of the business of free. This chapter defines both models and traces their history. Open source shaped the growth of the Web and changed consumer expectations, and as a result, companies have developed various ways to generate revenue even while giving their products away. The open access movement grew in tandem with electronic publishing and has led to both the user expectation of free content and a question of how publications can survive that expectation. Open source and open access will continue to influence the software industry, which is developing a “freemium” model for generating revenue from free products. The publishing industry will need to evolve radically, and open source and open access may also drive the integration of “open government” principles into our political systems.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicky Steeves

An open source database and website that lists and maps women who have shown great leadership in open everything -- open education resources, open source, open access, etc.! This repository holds the source code and data for a list of women leaders in openness! This website contains a searchable, sortable list of women who do work in the field of openness: open access, open science, open scholarship, open source code, open data, open education resources -- anything open. There is also a map available for folks who would like to look for women leaders nearest them -- the hope is that this map makes planning conferences, workshops, and events more convenient. The data comes from April Hathcock’s Google Doc and merge requests to this repository.


Author(s):  
Luc Schneider

This contribution tries to assess how the Web is changing the ways in which scientific knowledge is produced, distributed and evaluated, in particular how it is transforming the conventional conception of scientific authorship. After having properly introduced the notions of copyright, public domain and (e-)commons, I will critically assess James Boyle's (2003, 2008) thesis that copyright and scientific (e-) commons are antagonistic, but I will mostly agree with the related claim by Stevan Harnad (2001a,b, 2008) that copyright has become an obstacle to the accessibility of scientific works. I will even go further and argue that Open Access schemes not only solve the problem of the availability of scientific literature, but may also help to tackle the uncontrolled multiplication of scientific publications, since these publishing schemes are based on free public licenses allowing for (acknowledged) re-use of texts. However, the scientific community does not seem to be prepared yet to move towards an Open Source model of authorship, probably due to concerns related to attributing credit and responsability for the expressed hypotheses and results. Some strategies and tools that may encourage a change of academic mentality in favour of a conception of scientific authorship modelled on the Open Source paradigm are discussed.


Author(s):  
D. Berry

Open source software (OSS) is computer software that has its underlying source code made available under a licence. This can allow developers and users to adapt and improve it (Raymond, 2001). Computer software can be broadly split into two development models: • Proprietary, or closed software, owned by a company or individual. Copies of the binary are made public; the source code is not usually made public. • Open-source software (OSS), where the source code is released with the binary. Users and developers can be licenced to use and modify the code, and to distribute any improvements they make. Both OSS and proprietary approaches allow companies to make a profit. Companies developing proprietary software make money by developing software and then selling licences to use the software. For example, Microsoft receives a payment for every copy of Windows sold with a personal computer. OSS companies make their money by providing services, such as advising clients on the GPL licence. The licencee can either charge a fee for this service or work free of charge. In practice, software companies often develop both types of software. OSS is developed by an ongoing, iterative process where people share the ideas expressed in the source code. The aim is that a large community of developers and users can contribute to the development of the code, check it for errors and bugs, and make the improved version available to others. Project management software is used to allow developers to keep track of the various versions. There are two main types of open-source licences (although there are many variants and subtypes developed by other companies): • Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) Licence: This permits a licencee to “close” a version (by withholding the most recent modifications to the source code) and sell it as a proprietary product; • GNU General Public Licence (GNU, GPL, or GPL): Under this licence, licencees may not “close” versions. The licencee may modify, copy, and redistribute any derivative version, under the same GPL licence. The licencee can either charge a fee for this service or work free of charge. Free software first evolved during the 1970s but in the 1990s forked into two movements, namely free software and open source (Berry, 2004). Richard Stallman, an American software developer who believes that sharing source code and ideas is fundamental to freedom of speech, developed a free version of the widely used Unix operating system. The resulting GNU program was released under a specially created General Public Licence (GNU, GPL). This was designed to ensure that the source code would remain openly available to all. It was not intended to prevent commercial usage or distribution (Stallman, 2002). This approach was christened free software. In this context, free meant that anyone could modify the software. However, the term “free” was often misunderstood to mean no cost. Hence, during the 1990s, Eric Raymond and others proposed that open-source software was coined as a less contentious and more business-friendly term. This has become widely accepted within the software and business communities; however there are still arguments about the most appropriate term to use (Moody, 2002). The OSMs are usually organised into a network of individuals who work collaboratively on the Internet, developing major software projects that sometimes rival commercial software but are always committed to the production of quality alternatives to those produced by commercial companies (Raymond, 2001; Williams, 2002). Groups and individuals develop software to meet their own and others’ needs in a highly decentralised way, likened to a Bazaar (Raymond, 2001). These groups often make substantive value claims to support their projects and foster an ethic of community, collaboration, deliberation, and intellectual freedom. In addition, it is argued by Lessig (1999) that the FLOSS community can offer an inspiration in their commitment to transparency in their products and their ability to open up governmental regulation and control through free/libre and open source code.


eLife ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin C McKiernan ◽  
Philip E Bourne ◽  
C Titus Brown ◽  
Stuart Buck ◽  
Amye Kenall ◽  
...  

Open access, open data, open source and other open scholarship practices are growing in popularity and necessity. However, widespread adoption of these practices has not yet been achieved. One reason is that researchers are uncertain about how sharing their work will affect their careers. We review literature demonstrating that open research is associated with increases in citations, media attention, potential collaborators, job opportunities and funding opportunities. These findings are evidence that open research practices bring significant benefits to researchers relative to more traditional closed practices.


Author(s):  
Shyamalendu Kandar ◽  
Sourav Mondal ◽  
Palash Ray

Open-source software abbreviated as OSS is computer software that is available with source code and is provided under a software license that permits users to study, change, and improve the software. For the commercial software the source code and certain other rights are normally reserved for copyright holders,i.e. the company who developes the software. A group of people in a collaborative manner often developes the Open source software, not under the roof of a large organization. This strategy makes open source software cheap, reliable and modifiable if needed. In this context we shall discuss mainly the features of Open Source Software, differences of open source and free software and open source software movement in Indian perspective.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomislav Hengl ◽  
Ichsani Wheeler ◽  
Robert A MacMillan

Using the term "Open data" has become a bit of a fashion, but using it without clear specifications is misleading i.e. it can be considered just an empty phrase. Probably even worse is the term "Open Science" — can science be NOT open at all? Are we reinventing something that should be obvious from start? This guide tries to clarify some key aspects of Open Data, Open Source Software and Crowdsourcing using examples of projects and business. It aims at helping you understand and appreciate complexity of Open Data, Open Source software and Open Access publications. It was specifically written for producers and users of environmental data, however, the guide will likely be useful to any data producers and user.


Database ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guilherme Viteri ◽  
Lisa Matthews ◽  
Thawfeek Varusai ◽  
Marc Gillespie ◽  
Marija Milacic ◽  
...  

Abstract Reactome is a manually curated, open-source, open-data knowledge base of biomolecular pathways. Reactome has always provided clear credit attribution for authors, curators and reviewers through fine-grained annotation of all three roles at the reaction and pathway level. These data are visible in the web interface and provided through the various data download formats. To enhance visibility and credit attribution for the work of authors, curators and reviewers, and to provide additional opportunities for Reactome community engagement, we have implemented key changes to Reactome: contributor names are now fully searchable in the web interface, and contributors can ‘claim’ their contributions to their ORCID profile with a few clicks. In addition, we are reaching out to domain experts to request their help in reviewing and editing Reactome pathways through a new ‘Contribution’ section, highlighting pathways which are awaiting community review. Database URL: https://reactome.org


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document