Other Open Access

OPERAS Tools Research and Development White Paper

Arnaud Gingold; Francesca Di Donato; Patrick Gendre; Elena Giglia; Maciej Maryl; Tom Mowlam; Ghislain Sillaume; Heather Staines; Sofie Wennström

DataCite XML Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<resource xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://datacite.org/schema/kernel-4" xsi:schemaLocation="http://datacite.org/schema/kernel-4 http://schema.datacite.org/meta/kernel-4.1/metadata.xsd">
  <identifier identifierType="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.1324110</identifier>
      <creatorName>Arnaud Gingold</creatorName>
      <creatorName>Francesca Di Donato</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0003-0144-8934</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>Associazione Italiana Scienza Aperta (AISA)</affiliation>
      <creatorName>Patrick Gendre</creatorName>
      <creatorName>Elena Giglia</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0003-4927-2632</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>University of Turin (UniTo)</affiliation>
      <creatorName>Maciej Maryl</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0002-2639-041X</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>Institute of Literary Research of the Polish Academy of Sciences (IBL PAN)</affiliation>
      <creatorName>Tom Mowlam</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0003-2945-4535</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>Ubiquity Press</affiliation>
      <creatorName>Ghislain Sillaume</creatorName>
      <affiliation>Luxembourg Centre for Contemporary and Digital History (C²DH)</affiliation>
      <creatorName>Heather Staines</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0003-3876-1182</nameIdentifier>
      <creatorName>Sofie Wennström</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0003-1229-7019</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>Stockholm University Press</affiliation>
    <title>OPERAS Tools Research and Development White Paper</title>
    <subject>Open Access</subject>
    <subject>Open Science</subject>
    <subject>publishing tools</subject>
    <subject>sociel sciences and humanities</subject>
    <date dateType="Issued">2018-07-30</date>
  <resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Text">Other</resourceType>
    <alternateIdentifier alternateIdentifierType="url">https://zenodo.org/record/1324110</alternateIdentifier>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="DOI" relationType="IsVersionOf">10.5281/zenodo.1324109</relatedIdentifier>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="URL" relationType="IsPartOf">https://zenodo.org/communities/operaseu</relatedIdentifier>
    <rights rightsURI="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International</rights>
    <rights rightsURI="info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess">Open Access</rights>
    <description descriptionType="Abstract">&lt;p&gt;This white paper has been elaborated by the Tools (R&amp;amp;D) Working Group, one of the 7 Working Groups&lt;br&gt;
launched by the OPERAS research infrastructure. The Working Group goal was to set up a list of tools&lt;br&gt;
and development which need to be done, to improve their usability for the OPERAS partners.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The approach in OPERAS emphasizes the importance of building the open science scholarly&lt;br&gt;
communication infrastructure in Social Sciences and Humanities on community driven tools. In&lt;br&gt;
this perspective, the development of Open Source tools and the setup of a toolbox appear to be&lt;br&gt;
appropriate answers to the existing needs and evolutions in scholarly publishing.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Following a first discussion in the Working Group, participants discussed the partners&amp;rsquo; practices and&lt;br&gt;
needs to help focus the Working Group objectives on three functions:&lt;br&gt;
&amp;ndash;&amp;ndash; Peer review: interest in emerging practices such as open peer review, peer review tracking&lt;br&gt;
&amp;ndash;&amp;ndash; Authoring: interest in simple and all-in-one services, especially online and collaborative authoring&lt;br&gt;
&amp;ndash;&amp;ndash; Publishing: in particular, simple tools needed by small academic journals&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The main results of the Working Group are:&lt;br&gt;
&amp;ndash;&amp;ndash; Notes on observed trends&lt;br&gt;
&amp;ndash;&amp;ndash; A common approach and criteria for choosing tools&lt;br&gt;
&amp;ndash;&amp;ndash; A list of relevant tools, detailing features and functionalities&lt;br&gt;
&amp;ndash;&amp;ndash; An analysis of the current needs of the partners&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For Peer Review, the reviewing workflow is implemented in most Open Source software like Open&lt;br&gt;
Journal System (OJS) but developments are still needed to match the commercial software services.&lt;br&gt;
Similarly, the review tracking data available via services such as Publons is currently not open. The&lt;br&gt;
emerging trend for Open Peer Review represents an innovative area, both in terms of usage and tools.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For Authoring, we see a bloom of new online and collaborative tools. Promising Open Source software&lt;br&gt;
for editing structured scholarly content are being developed and are near to production, alongside&lt;br&gt;
commercial tools such as Authorea or Overleaf. One of the main challenges, in this case, is to obtain a&lt;br&gt;
continuous production environment through interoperability.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For Publishing, several Open Source software solutions are already used in production, but, as the&lt;br&gt;
level of service expected from a publication service is rising and includes a growing number of thirdparty&lt;br&gt;
services, the community is considering ways of working together to combine their effort to be&lt;br&gt;
comparable with the state of the art of the commercial solutions.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Operas partners are willing to go beyond this working group and consider engaging in follow-up&lt;br&gt;
projects, notably to help create a resource centre dedicated to providing the community with current&lt;br&gt;
information and support on scholarly communication software and tools, and to contribute to the&lt;br&gt;
effort in developing Open Source tools.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <description descriptionType="Other">{"references": ["Butchard, Dorothy, et al. \"Peer Review in Practice.\" UCL Press, 2017, doi:10.14324/111.978191130767 9.15.", "Eriksson, J\u00f6rgen, et al. \"Moving towards Open Science? Conference Report: The 9th Conference on Open Access Scholarly Publishing, Lisbon, September 20\u201321, 2017.\" Nordic Perspectives on Open Science, vol. 1, Jan. 2018, doi:10.7557/11.4307.", "Langlais, Pierre-Carl. Critical Study of the New Ways of \"editorialising\" Open Access Scientific Journals. Research Report, Biblioth\u00e8que Scientifique Num\u00e9rique, Nov. 2016, https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ hal-01399286.", "Neylon, Cameron. \"Principles for Open Scholarly Infrastructures.\" Science in the Open, 23 Feb. 2015, https://cameronneylon.net/blog/principles-for-open-scholarly-infrastructures/.", "Peters, Paul. \"A Radically Open Approach to Developing Infrastructure for Open Science.\" Hindawi Blog, 23 Oct. 2017, https://about.hindawi.com/opinion/a-radically-open-approach-to-developinginfrastructure- for-open-science/.", "Pooley, Jefferson. \"Scholarly Communications Shouldn't Just Be Open, but Non-Profit Too.\" LSE Impact Blog, 15 Aug. 2017, http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2017/08/15/ scholarly-communications-shouldnt-just-be-open-but-non-profit-too/.", "Ross-Hellauer, T. \"What Is Open Peer Review? A Systematic Review [Version 2; Referees: 4 Approved].\" F1000Research, vol. 6, no. 588, 2017, doi:10.12688/f1000research.11369.2.", "Ross-Hellauer, T., and Benedikt Fecher. \"Journal Flipping or a Public Open Access Infrastructure? What Kind of Open Access Future Do We Want?\" LSE Impact Blog, 26 Oct. 2017, http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/ impactofsocialsciences/2017/10/26/journal-flipping-or-a-public-open-access-infrastructure-what-kindof- open-access-future-do-we-want/.", "Scholastica, et al. \"Democratizing Academic Journals: Technology, Services, and Open Access.\" Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, Etc. ., no. 42, 2017, http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ scholcom/42.", "Schonfeld, Roger C. \"What Is Researcher Workflow?\" Ithaka SR, 13 Dec. 2017, http://www.sr.ithaka. org/blog/what-is-researcher-workflow/.", "Schonfeld, Roger C. \"Workflow Lock-in: A Taxonomy.\" Scholarly Kitchen, 1 Feb. 2018, https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet. org/2018/01/02/workflow-lock-taxonomy/.", "Tattersall, Andy. \"Comment, Discuss, Review: An Essential Guide to Post-Publication Review Sites.\" LSE Impact Blog, 11 Aug. 2014, http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/11/08/ comment-discuss-review-an-essential-guide/.", "Tennant, JP, et al. \"A Multi-Disciplinary Perspective on Emergent and Future Innovations in Peer Review [Version 3; Referees: 2 Approved].\" F1000Research, vol. 6, no. 1151, 2017, doi:10.12688/ f1000research.12037.3.", "\"What's next for Peer Review?\" Research Information, Mar. 2016, https://www.researchinformation. info/feature/whats-next-peer-review.", "\"Why Academic-Led Journal Publishing? Liberating Research Through Tools and Services.\" Scholastica Blog, 14 Mar. 2018, https://blog.scholasticahq.com/post/ academic-led-journal-publishing-liberating-research-tools-services/.", "Meadows, A. (2017, September 14). Peer Review at ORCID - An Update [Text]. Retrieved May 15, 2018, from https://orcid.org/blog/2017/09/14/peer-review-orcid-update"]}</description>
      <funderName>European Commission</funderName>
      <funderIdentifier funderIdentifierType="Crossref Funder ID">10.13039/501100000780</funderIdentifier>
      <awardNumber awardURI="info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/H2020/731031/">731031</awardNumber>
      <awardTitle>Design for Open access Publications in European Research Areas for Social Sciences and Humanities</awardTitle>
All versions This version
Views 969969
Downloads 680680
Data volume 781.5 MB781.5 MB
Unique views 881881
Unique downloads 611611


Cite as