Scientific findings in a digital world: What is the genuine article? forum: topic
This is a public forum
post match chats?
David Papapostolou
Monday, 27 July 2009 09:06 UTC
Hello,
i was wondering what people thought of John W’s talk last wednesday.
Can people send me any pointers to online chats?
Thanks!
-
Replies
Jump to resultsResults
-
Of course that woul dbe great if John would drop by!
Just to correct one of the points i made yesterday. I might have sounded like i meant that John was in favour of a statuo quo for the scientific article format. His talk showed he clearly wasn’t. The underlying point was that once the “web works for science”, the model for scholarly publishing will have to adapt the new developpments, possibilities and people’s habits, hence the paper format will do so. And it is likely, or at least desirable, that the ideas we have about published material, the content of a scientific article, will open-up to other sources online, through the semantic web or other means, in order to integrate the published results into the larger context of the work.
Author ID is an important point and i think we shouldn’t separate it from the semantic web question mark: naming people and naming things, why would it be so different? I might be completly wrong by i see the two as part of the same challenge.The idea of a faculty of 1000 for blogs, wikis, and why not datasets is an appealing one. Still there is the question of the incentive/reward for taking part and do a good job at it. I think this has to be incorporated into funders policy. I think it has been said many times before, reliable author ID would certainly be the key to be able to give due credit for this things and make sure the good work is aknowledged by funders. Ha, i said good work, how would that be assessed? Post-review by users? faculty of 1000-dataset?
-
Hi all,
I posted a short blog on this today and am here to take any and all questions.
But yes, in general, I’m fascinated by the way the Web lets us rip apart content, and I want to see something like that happen in science. We used to consume music in “albums” – now we make our own playlists, despite my friends who assure me that listening to any songs off of Exile on Main Street out of context destroys the experience. The scientific article as a unitary, atomic element of knowledge is just an artifact of the old compression algorithm – writing on dead trees for physical mails.
What I’m primarily advocating for is the removal of enough control that many chances can be taken, many attempts made, to find the right way to pull apart the strands of communication into a form that we all see and immediately think “duh, that’s it!” – to me it’s not Google Wave. I don’t know what it is. But if we require tolls to make the attempt, basic economics tells us less attempts will be made.
Anyhow, fire away. I’ll try to answer promptly but beg forgiveness if it takes me a day or two. Too much travel eats up my ability to keep on the network properly.
-
Talking of f1000 for datasets…I talked to Richard Grant and they are apparently trying to develop this very thing.
Results
-
