[…] with people grappling with some of the same issues, especially around discovery of OA content that doesn’t fit into traditional workflows. Last but by no means least, it wouldn’t be a publishing conference if I didn’t learn how great the […]
[…] networks (SCNs) are enabling the sharing of research works at an unprecedented level — and they provide value-added features like workflow facilitation and author profiles. Academia.edu claims to have 25 million users; ResearchGate, 8 million; and Mendeley (bought by Elsevier […]
[…] cross-publisher services with more direct researcher value; in my last post, I looked at this trend of publishers investing in workflow tools. There is a sense that publishers are thinking more strategically about where being different is a good thing, […]
[…] has argued that “Any new funding model for publishing humanities monographs in open access must be paired with markedly different workflow and dissemination models,” making clear that costs should not be seen as fixed. Strategic issues on the supply side […]
[…] least attempt to retain my discipline as far as note-taking was concerned. Here then are my tweet-length highlights from APE: Workflow and infrastructure (or “research mechanics” in Daniel Hook’s phrase) seemed the topics to which speakers most commonly returned “We […]
[…] back-end for Lever, has been an innovator in publishing technology for a while now. Initially we’ll be using the same workflow and homegrown DLXS platform that lie behind imprints like Digital Culture Books. But Lever will also be one of […]
[…] number of papers accepted and the absence of a copyediting stage. Adding in a time-consuming additional step to the production workflow can be expensive, both in terms of paying for labor and in potential delays in publication. PLOS, however, seems […]
[…] the timing and precise implementation needed to be figured out, since we all use slightly different systems in our publishing workflow. What exactly are publishers who sign the open letter committing to? Publishers are really only signing up to indicate […]
[…] digital solutions, the obvious gap between the researcher and the publisher is even greater. How to create an end-to-end XML workflow? Should we develop our own software platform in house or work with one of the growing number of vendors? […]
[…] are all computationally complex and intensive. We are not talking about standard-issue content-management systems here or (yawn) building an XML workflow. This invites an obvious question: Is the sheer computational complexity beyond the ability of even the largest and most […]
[…] to the library, with the vision of re-empowering researchers to grab content and return back to a more comprehensive research workflow rather than stay on a publisher platform. They may see the investments that are being made in platforms as […]
[…] journal is a matter of record, and like it or not, journals form a part of the academic and recognition workflow that allows for career progress, grant making, more research and more articles to be published. Moreover, the form of […]
[…] outcome is that you can then see these societies upping their game as journals publishers. To focus on production and workflow, they make arrangements with companies like Allen Press and Cadmus. If they don’t think they have enough marketing clout, […]
[…] Libraries have a wide range of opportunities elsewhere–for example, in providing hosting services for journals or in managing digital production workflows. These are important functions, but they cannot be said to be competitive with the MMP model. It would appear […]
[…] – there’s still much work to be done. As facilitator Greg Tananbaum pointed out, SHARE is a mix of infrastructure, workflow, and policy issues, and the infrastructure part is the easiest. But developing a strong and open infrastructure that will […]