A panel attending the 2023 AUPresses Meeting hosted a conversation about optimizing books metadata and measuring its impact on search experiences in the mainstream web.
Funder guidance is too vague when it comes to identifiers and metadata. It needs to get specific to be effective.
What do we really know about the linkages between good metadata and positive, productive user experiences with scholarly journals?
Whether or not you attended this year’s 24-hour online party for persistent identifiers, aka PIDapalooza 2021, here’s your chance to read all about it!
Persistent identifiers (PIDs) are an essential part of the open research infrastructure, but need widespread adoption to be effective. Learn about Jisc’s plans to increase adoption through a national PID consortium in this post by Alice Meadows.
On February 26th, Phill Jones gate-crashed the 2nd STM association research data workshop. Here’s what he learned about the progress being made and that challenges ahead in making data sharable, open, and maybe even FAIR.
What is the Research Organization Registry (ROR) and why do we need it? Learn more from the team behind it (CDL, Crossref, DataCite, and Digital Science) in this interview with Alice Meadows.
The third PIDapalooza took place in Dublin in late January. Alice Meadows shares some of her thoughts on this festival of open identifiers.
Last week’s STM news raises questions about whether scholarly publishers are prepared to radically improve content distribution. Is content syndication the end game?
Today sees the launch of Metadata 2020, a new initiative to improve research metadata by increasing our understanding of its value, and engaging with the community to ensure it’s fit for purpose. Led by Crossref and supported by individuals and organizations across all of scholarly communications, participation is open to all. Find out more, including how to get involved, in today’s post.
Think persistent identifiers are a bit boring? Think again! PIDapalooza, the first open festival of persistent identifiers, aims to challenge that view. Find out more, including how you can get involved.
While many of the traditional publishing tasks remain intact, new tasks that are much more technical in nature have changed the skill sets required to be scholarly publishers. As new and developing standards and services such as Funder Identification, ORCID, CHORUS, and more come online, publishers and their vendors must integrate when they would rather innovate. The trick is in realizing where integration allows more innovation.
A study shows that adherence to best practices for data citation is improving, but still has a long way to go.
Last week, the news broke about a new service called DOAI that is designed to support open access. It is not a publishing model or a repository but rather a type of infrastructure. When a user inputs a DOI, DOAI connects […]
As more funders look to adopt CHORUS for providing public access to works derived from federal funds, a review of the publisher requirements for participating in CHORUS seems timely. This post explores the current state of CHORUS agency adoption and some important new requirements.