von Juliane Waack (@Jules_McCloud) Nach einem willkommenen Weihnachtsgeschenk in Form eines Bandes zur Geschichte der Charles-Schulz-Comics (Chip Kidd et al. (2015): Only what’s necessary: Charles M. Schulz and the art of Peanuts . New York: Abrams Comic Arts)  und einer daraufhin ausgiebigen Reise in die zahlreichen Lebenswelten des Cartoon-Strips stolperte ich alsbald über die nicht unerhebliche Zahl an

Karsten Schuldt Zu: Cella, Bernhard ; Findeisen, Leo ; Blaha, Agnus (Hrsg.): N O -ISBN: on self-publishing . Wien: Salon für Kunstbuch ; Köln: Buchhandlung Walther König, 2015. ISBN: 978-3-86335-818-1

Eight publishers will move to require ORCIDs for corresponding authors as part of the submission requirements for submitting articles. It seems like a very long time ago that I got involved in the efforts to develop an ID system for contributors to research outputs.

Zur Tradition der LIBREAS. Library Ideas gehört, dass am Ende, bei der Veröffentlichung der Zeitschrift, alles noch ein wenig länger dauert als geplant. Insoweit ist es nur passend, dass die Jubiliäumsausgabe zum 10. Jahr LIBREAS erst jetzt, zwischen den Jahren, erscheint. Grundlage der Ausgabe ist das Symposium zu diesem Termin im September 2015 in Berlin zum Schwerpunkt “Die Bibliothek als Idee” stattfand.

Standard Analytics have released a very useful paper looking at platform costs for scholarly publishing. In the paper (which coincidentally demonstrates part of the platform system they are developing) they make some strong claims about the base cost of publishing scholarly articles.

This is an approximation of my talk at OpenCon Cambridge on Thursday 26 November 2015. Any inaccuracies entirely mine. There is also a video recording of the actual talk. The idea of OpenCon was borne out of the idea that the future belonged to young scholars and that helping them to be effective advocates for the world they want to work in was the best way to make progress.

This is an approximate rendering of my comments as part of the closing panel of “The End of Scientific Journal? Transformations in Publishing” held at the Royal Society, London on 27 November 2015. It should be read as a reconstruction of what I might have said rather than an accurate record. The day had focussed on historical accounts of “journals” as mediators of both professional and popular research communications.

This post wasn’t on the original slate for the Political Economics of Publishing series but it seems apposite as the arguments and consequences of the Editorial Board of Lingua resigning en masse to form a new journal published by Ubiquity Press continue to rumble on. The resignation of the editorial board of Lingua from the (Elsevier owned) journal to form a new journal, that is intended to really be “the same journal” raises interesting issues

Ausgangssituation Es scheint, als würdigte man die Praxis des Bibliographierens heute lange nicht mehr so wie noch vor einigen Jahrzehnten. Lange galten Bibliographien als eine wesentliche Informationsinfrastruktur der einzelnen Wissenschaftsfelder. Entsprechend groß war der Aufwand und Personaleinsatz für ihre Erstellung.

This is the approximate text of my talk at City University London on 21 October for Open Access Week 2015. If you prefer the “as live” video version then that its available at YouTube. Warning: Nearly 6000 words and I haven’t yet referenced it properly, put the pictures in or done a good edit… Eight years of Open Access Week, massive progress towards greater access to research, not to mention data and educational resources.