Open Sesame (and other open movements)

  • 3,101 views
Uploaded on

For UW-Madison General Library System Liaison Forum, 16 June 2010.

For UW-Madison General Library System Liaison Forum, 16 June 2010.

More in: Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
3,101
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Open Sesame! (and other open movements) Dorothea Salo Photo: Reinante el Pintor de Fuego, Liaison Forum http://www.flickr.com/photos/reinante/4484083990/ June 2010
  • 2. Goals • Disambiguate jargon • ... there’s a lot of it, and it’s often used wrongly • (including by librarians, which makes us look uninformed) • Point out the plays and the players • especially here at UW-Madison, and in the Libraries • Explain what I do and why • “What do you do all day?” I get that a lot. • This is a problem for me, because I can’t do what I do effectively all by myself. I need help! • Suggest opportunities Photo: Daquella manera, http://www.flickr.com/photos/daquellamanera/355061741/
  • 3. Points to ponder • What opportunities do these movements present us? • ... to educate • ... to collect • ... to preserve • ... to help ourselves and our patrons? • What obligations do we have? • ... to educate • ... to support • ... to collect • ... to preserve • What actions should we be taking? Photo: striatic, http://www.flickr.com/photos/striatic/2144933705/
  • 4. For each “open” • What is being made open? • as opposed to what? • and why? • How? • What intellectual-property regimes are implicated? • What obstacles present themselves? • What different kinds of open are there in this space? • For you to decide: why do we care? Photo: indigoprime, http://www.flickr.com/photos/indigoprime/2425393185/
  • 5. Open source Image: Patrick Hoesly, http://www.zooboing.com/
  • 6. Open source SOFTWARE • “Source code” is the human-readable programs that humans write. • Computers can’t directly understand most source code. It is therefore “compiled” into “binary code,” which is computer-readable but not human-readable. • If all you have is binary code, you can’t tell what the programmer did. • Moreover, most software sales conditions forbid “reverse-engineering” binary code.
  • 7. How to open your source • License it (why? copyright!) • GNU General Public License (GPL): has a share-alike sting in its tail • BSD License: share-alike not required • Others: Mozilla license, Artistic License, more • Make the source available online • It’s polite to provide compiled binaries too, but you don’t have to. • That’s it! • ... sort of. Most serious open-source projects have organizations (and their overhead) behind them.
  • 8. Open source here • Desktop • Firefox/Thunderbird • Library-specific • Forward: built on Ruby, Solr, Lucene, Blacklight • MINDS@UW: runs on DSpace, Postgres • The new digital library: will run on Fedora Commons • Anybody use MarcEdit? • Infrastructure • Websites: Apache web server • Databases: MySQL, Postgres • Programming languages: Perl, Python, Ruby, PHP • There’s probably more. What did I miss?
  • 9. Open standards Photo: idealisms, http://www.flickr.com/photos/ponderer/4356051336/
  • 10. Specs, not source! • A STANDARD way of doing things, like... • ... cataloging books and journals • ... making web pages • ... making fasteners, railroads, electrical connections • An open standard, ideally: • can be read and implemented by all • does not fall afoul of patents or copyrights • is created by consensus of interested parties
  • 11. Library-related standards • MARC, of course, and RDA • ... but RDA is pay-to-read! • Dublin Core • Built on XML: MODS, METS, EAD, etc. • PDF, sort of • there is an ISO standard for PDF, but not all PDFs conform to it • EPUB: for ebooks • We also use other people’s standards • When feasible, using a standard is ALWAYS preferable to building one’s own. Why? Interoperability.
  • 12. Open access (this is what I do all day)
  • 13. Free the literature! • Authors aren’t paid to write journal articles. Peer reviewers aren’t paid to review them. Most editors aren’t paid to acquire them. • So why do they cost so much to read? • Maybe, now that we have the Internet, there are other ways to create, manage, and disseminate the journal literature without making everyone pay to read it. • This is the core of the Open Access idea.
  • 14. Green and gold • Green: Repositories • Discipline-based: arXiv, SSRN • Institutional/consortial: MINDS@UW • Gold: Open-access journals • Library examples: D-Lib, Ariadne, JEP, RUSQ, JoDI • (Interesting halfway-point: C&RL posting preprints) • Various ways libraries can support these! Memberships, help with author fees, in-house publishing platforms, including them in library catalogs, promoting them, etc.
  • 15. Gratis and libre • Gratis: You can read it for free. Anything else, you better ask permission. • Libre: With credit given, OK to text-mine, re-catalog, mirror for preservation, quote, remix, whatever. • Most OA is gratis. You get to “libre” via Creative Commons licensing, usually.
  • 16. Challenge: sustainability • Green OA • What faculty post to the web has a bad habit of disappearing. Or being illegal. They’re not preservationists or copyright lawyers. • In the last year or so, two disciplinary repositories folded: DList and Mana’o. Neither had contingency plans. • arXiv is looking for monetary support. • Some IRs (including MINDS@UW) have been threatened with defunding or closure. • Gold OA • Who pays? From which budgets? • Who gives in-kind support?
  • 17. Open access here • OA author-fee fund • OA memberships and other support • PLoS, BioMed Central, etc. • OA journal platform • Illuminations, Journal of Insect Science, Screen Dance • MINDS@UW • I would LOVE MINDS@UW to move past its current passive collection model. I can’t do that alone. • So, what digital materials are produced by your departments that we should collect and preserve? • This is not a question that I can or should answer for you. I am not a liaison librarian or collection developer!
  • 18. A challenge • What do we want? • How are we going to get it? • I am here to help answer the technical aspects of this question! That’s my job! • Be aware that I don’t have digitization capacity, however. I’m looking for the born-digital!
  • 19. Some similar “opens” • Open educational resources • e.g. MIT Open CourseWare, iTunes U • “Gratis” vs. “libre” very salient here; few want to reuse educational resources unchanged • Creative Commons cuts through the tangle! • Open textbooks • “Open content” generally • cf the “Free Culture” movement
  • 20. Open data Image: Juhan Sonin, http://www.flickr.com/photos/juhansonin/3047499844/
  • 21. Open research data • Some disciplines have always been data sharers: e.g. astronomy. • Others are coming to it: e.g. genomics. • Some journals and grant funders are starting to insist on open data. • Reproducibility, fraud avoidance • No more Climategates! • Faster, better, more collaborative science • Sustainability? Standards? Preservation? Good question.
  • 22. Open government data • Governments produce a LOT of data. • GIS • Demographic • Economic • They’re starting to release it into the wild. • Many levels, not just federal! • Mashups, mashups everywhere! • Tremendous research potential • ... if researchers know where to find it • ... and if reuse privileges are clear • ... and they know what to do once they’ve found it
  • 23. Techie bits • Intellectual-property situation • Data, as facts, are not copyrightable in the US... • ... but as compilations, they MIGHT be... • ... and images probably are... • ... and the situation is different overseas. ARGH. • Best recommendation: waive all applicable rights. • http://pantonprinciples.org/ • “Linked data” • In essence, publishing data in such a way as to make it easier for other people to work with. • For now, linked data = RDF
  • 24. Open data here • WisconsinView aerial/satellite photos: http://wisconsinview.org/ • Lakeshore Nature Preserve project • Oral histories • There’s probably more. What did I miss?
  • 25. Open notebook science Photo: mrbill, http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrbill/3483411540/
  • 26. Opening the process • Experiment records have been kept in notebooks on paper. Which is fine, but... • Where can you store them, and for how long? • How easy is it to find records from years back? • How auditable and complete are they? • How does this even WORK in collaborative science? • So even lab notebooks are moving online. • Yes, in the teeth of “scooping” fears. • Additional functionality and ease of collaboration are major drivers. • Extra attention doesn’t hurt either!
  • 27. The table! Notebook Open... Source Access Data Science Research and Scientific What? Software Journal literature government data process GPL-style vs. Green/Gold What kinds? BSD-style Gratis/Libre licensing Open-access License Waiving rights journals copyrights to all where applicable Web-based lab How? Open-access comers (GPL, Producing “linked notebooks repositories BSD, etc.) data” Licenses
  • 28. Thank you! This presentation is available under a Creative Commons 3.0 United States license. All photographs from Flickr, via CC-BY licenses. If you use these slides, please keep the photo credits!
  • 29. Points to ponder • What opportunities do these movements present us? • ... to educate • ... to collect • ... to preserve • ... to help ourselves and our patrons? • What obligations do we have? • ... to educate • ... to support • ... to collect • ... to preserve • What actions should we be taking? Photo: striatic, http://www.flickr.com/photos/striatic/2144933705/