View
12
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
WALKOWSKI
SCHOLARLY
FLOW
BEYOND
THE
PUBLICATIONS
DIGITAL
Beyond the Flow
Beyond the Flow: Scholarly Publications During and After the DigitalNiels-Oliver Walkowski
Bibliographical Information of the German National LibraryThe German National Library lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie(GermanNationalBibliography);detailed bibliographicinformationisavailableonlineathttp://dnb.d-nb.de
Publishedin2019bymesonpress,Lüneburg.www.meson.press
Designconcept:TorstenKöchlin,SilkeKriegCoverimage:YuichiroHaga(www.flickr.com/photos/infinity-d/6781064978)TheprinteditionofthisbookisprintedbyBookson Demand,Norderstedt
ISBN(Print): 978-3-95796-160-0ISBN(PDF): 978-3-95796-161-7ISBN(EPUB): 978-3-95796-162-4DOI:10.14619/1600
Thedigitaleditionsofthispublicationcanbedownloadedfreelyat: www.meson.press
ThispublicationislicensedunterCCBY-SA4.0(CreativeCommonsAttribution-ShareAlike4.0International).Toviewacopyofthislicense, visit:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
Contents
Introduction 11
[ 1 ] Cyberpublishing 27TheACMPublishingPlan 27TheRoaring90s 29TheModularArticle 33PublicationFormatsAlongthePathofModularArticles 40
[ 2 ] World Wide Publishing 45PositionofPointsinInfrastructureandVirtual PublishingEnvironments 45ProgrammaticFramingandOrganisationalSelf-Awareness 48EarlyTheoreticalEvaluationsofDigitalPublications 49
[ 3 ] Publishing 3.0 53TheOpenLaboratoryBook 54Aggregations 62WorkflowPublications 65SemanticPublications 79LiquidPublications 95EnhancedPublications 103Nano-Publications 117AutomatedPublications 128UnboundBooks 130Single-ResourcePublications 138TransmediaPublications 143
[ 4 ] Publishing-Com Bubble 159HybridPublications 160ScalingDigitalPublicationConcepts 168DataPapers 180Self-ContainedPublications 191PuttingDigitalPublicationsIntoContext 204
[ 5 ] Post-Digital … 209ALessRandomDefinitionoftheDigital 209Topological,TypologicalandMathematicalKnowledge 216RepresentationStrategies,IntermedialityandTheir Relationships 224RepresentinginTimesofCalculatedCalculation 230TheThreeEpistemologicalEffectsofCalculatedCalculation 238PublicationsBeyondColdTechnologyandPureTheory 245
[ 6 ] … Publishing 251ConceptsofSocialAspectsinDigitalPublicationsandWhat TheyMiss 251TheAmbiguousIssueofHeterogeneity 267PublicationFormatsasDomainDrivenDiscourseObjects 274FundamentalTensionsbetweenPublicationand Communication 290PublicationsinTermsofCommunication 306
Conclusion 333
A P P E N D I X
Acronyms 349References 351
DIGITAL PUBLISHING
MODELING
MULTIMODAL ANALYSIS
POST-DIGITALITY
For the last twenty-five years, research on so-called digital publications was aimed at reconfiguring established modes of scholarly communication. Interest in the field is driven by the idea that the advent of digital technologies can solve a variety of past problems of scholarly publications, thereby constructing a conceptual space for negotiation of past and future. Issues at stake are epistemological commitments to strategies of production and representation of knowledge, as well as different understandings of the impacts of technology. The field thus shapes how we refer to scientific knowledge in the light of digital technologies. The present contribution examines how related research developed scenarios of the past and future of scholarly communications. Built on this enquiry, an alternative, more ecologically informed approach to understanding the changing landscape of scholarly publications is proposed. An attempt is thus made to put new light on a variety of conflicts that have dominated this research field throughout its existence.
IntroductionIntheyear2006,OwenpublishedThe Scientific Article in the Age of Digitization.Thegoalofthisworkwastofindanswerstothequestionof“howtheongoingprocessofdigitizationhasimpactedonthesubstanceofformalscientificcommunicationasreflectedinthescientificarticle”(15).Thereareseveralelementsinthisquotethatareworthdiscussing.Tobeginwith,itdrawsattentiontothefactthatanideaexistswhichpresumesthatthedigitalrepresentationofthemainmethodofcommunicationinscience—scholarlypublications—couldhaveagreaterimpactonsuchmethods,beyondjustrepresentingthem.Whilethetermdigitizationsuggeststhatarticlesaremerelydigitized,thewholeofthesentencerevealsapos-sibility for the representation to apply its own set of changes to the thing represented.Theprocessofdigitizationisnolongeraone-wayrelation-ship,andthedigitalformmorethanjustacontainer.Anotherinterestingaspectistheveryrelationshipbetweenthescientificarticleasanobjectandscientificcommunicationasapractice.Thequotecallstomindthattheobjecthappenstobenotjustanobjectwithinthispractice,butthatthe shape of the article is an expression of the regularities of scholarly communication,inthesamewayasthequalitiesofarticlesfacilitateandshapespecificformsofscholarlycommunication.Thisrelationshipmakesitpossibletorespondtothequestionofpotentialchangesinscholarlycommunication,byhavingalookatwhathappenedtothearticleformafterarticlesweredigitized.Thefinalfacettobehighlightedisanassumptionthatseemsreasonableundertheaforementionedcircumstances:ifdigitizationchangedthesubstanceofscientificcommunication,wouldsuchchangesreflectacertainsubstanceofthedigitalform?
IntheabovediscussionofthedimensionsofOwen’squote,thebasicshapeofaresearchfieldwasoutlinedthatformednearlytwenty-fiveyearsagounderthenotionofdigital scholarly publishing or digital scholarly pub-lications.Thereisalwaysalotofcontingencyintheattempttosetastartingpointforaslowtransition.However,thisstimulatesthedebate,andfortheabovementionedcontextthereareabunchofreasonstodefinetheyear1995asacrucialyearforsomethingthatcouldbecalledthetransitionfromElectronic Publications to Digital Publications.
ElectronicpublishingwasprimarilyaboutburningarticlesonCD-ROMsandputtingprintversionsofarticlesonline.Theformofthearticle,itsmainfeatures,hadnotbeenmodified.Neitherdidthosedigitalcopiesmakeuseofmoreadvancedpossibilitiesofdigitaltechnologies,ascom-prehensivelydiscussedbyHitchcock,Carr,andHall(1996),Alsop,Tompsett,
12 Beyond the Flow
andWisdom(1997),aswellasPeekandPomerantz(1998).Inthissense,Hitchcockdescribesthetimebefore1995as“thecalmbeforethestorm,”with the term storm referring to more serious attempts of completely rethinkingwhatapublicationmaybeinthelightofdigitaltechnology.Thus,theshiftbetweenElectronicPublishingandDigitalPublishingwastheshiftfromtryingtorepresentsomethingundernewconditionstoanattempttoletthesenewconditionschangethethingitself.Inotherwords,itreferspreciselytothephenomenonOwenintendedtoevaluateyearslater.
Besidesthislineofarguments,thereisalsoaquantitativemeasuresup-portingtheclaimofashiftinthisperiod.AlookattheGoogle Ngram1 resultsfortheuseoftheterms“electronicpublishing”and“digitalpub-lishing,”forinstance,showsadeclineforthefirsttermafter1995,whilethesecondtermreceivesinitialattentionbetween1994and1996.
Finally,thereisanincidentthatwellservesthepurposeofhavingsomethinglikeasymboliceventmarkingthisshift.1995wastheyearinwhichDenningandRouspublishedtheirwell-citedpaperon“TheACMElectronicPublishingPlan.”Besidesitsnumberofcitations,thispaperissignificantbecauseitcallsforaradicalrethinkingoftheextentuptowhichdigitaltechnologiesshouldrenewpublications.Itproclaimsthat“publishinghasreachedahistoricdivide”(69),demandingthatpublishersseriouslyconsiderthesechanges“ifthesystemistosurvive”(72).
DenningandRousmadesomeveryprecisesuggestionshowthestructureandformofpublicationsmaychangeifdigitalscholarlypublishingisunderstoodassomethingmorethanmovinghistoricalpublicationsintoanewtechnologicalenvironment.Oneofthemostconcisestatements,however,canbefoundinNentwich’s2003workCyberscience,inwhichhearguesthat“hypertextandhypermediawillgraduallybecomethestandardwaysofrepresentingacademicknowledge”(270).ThisgeneralclaimisaverygoodexamplefortheissueOwenwantedtoputtothetest.Itstresseskeyfeaturesofdigitaltechnologies,andassumesthatthesefeatureswillprovidethenewdominantstructureforscholarlypublications.
Theideathatthemaintopicofacademicpublishingshouldbethemod-ificationofthepublicationformatandstructure,sothattheyareinlinewiththedemandsandopportunitiesofdigitaltechnologies,startedamas-sivediscourseonforthcomingrevolutionarychanges.Intheintroductiontohisstudy,Owen(2006,5–7)offersanimpressivesummaryofnearlytwentystatementsfromalloverthefieldofscholarlypublishing,proclaiming
1 TheGoogle Ngram Viewercanbeaccessedat:books.google.com/ngrams.
Introduction 13
“theelectronicpublishingrevolution”(Hunter2001),“arevolutioninthecommunicationofresearch”(Friend1998,163).Treloar(1999,25)detected“revolutionized…attitudestowardscommunicationaswellasourabilitytocommunicateideasandresearchresults.”
FourteenyearshavegonebysinceOwen’sanalysisofthediscourseaccompanyingthe“digitization”ofpublications.Itdoesnotcomeasasur-prisethatduringthattimealotofnewdevelopmentstookplacearoundthenotionofdigitalscholarlypublications.Thesedevelopmentshave,nonetheless,notchangedanythingaboutthegeneralimpressioninthefieldthattheabovementionedrevolutionarychangesareyettocome.RemarkssuchasthosegatheredbyOwencontinuetoframeresearchanddevelopmentsuntiltoday.Accordingly,Shotton(2009)giveshisaccountofthetopicundertheheadlineofa“ComingRevolutioninScientificJournalPublishing.”Peroni(2014a,7)continuestoperceivein2014that“scholarlyauthoringandpublishingareundergoingarevolution.”Hall,Kuc,andZylinska(2015,3),infarmoregeneralterms,repeattheinsightthatthe“digitalrevolutionhasfacilitatedthedevelopmentofnewmodesofknowledgedissemination…aswellasnewformsofcommunication.”Still,afterdecadesofinvestment,research,anddebate,Assanteetal.(2015)feelthatthe“timeforaChangeinScholarlyCommunication”hascome,whileSofronijević(2012,252)seeshimself“onthevergeofarevolution…intheareaofcommunication.”BartlingandFriesike(2014)aim“TowardsAnotherScientificRevolution,”drivenmostlybyleavingbehindthetraditionalpub-licationmodel,andDeRoure(2014b,237)“callsforanovernightrevolution”thatshouldleadto“TheFutureofScholarlyCommunications.”Thecon-stellationofacomingrevolution,theoccurrenceofwhichmovesforwardasnewstepstowardsdigitalpublicationsaretaken,thuscanbeseenasaconstantfeatureofthefield.
Incontrasttothissituation,peoplesuchasEsposito(2013)statethatthe“TheDigitalPublishingRevolutionIsOver.”Withthefocusonaspecificsubtopicofdigitalscholarlypublishing,Herb(2017)writesin“OpenAccessBetweenRevolutionandCashCow”thatintheyear“2016itmustbenotedthatthehopesofopenaccessadvocatesforarevolutionwillbedisappointed.”Whatseemstobeamorerecentcriticalreactiontothephenomenondescribedinthelastparagraphisinfactasimilarcon-comitantofthehistoryofdigitalpublishing.AstudyoftheimpressionsandexpectationsofresearchersabouttheimpactofdigitaltechnologiesonscholarlypublicationsconductedbyEasonetal.summarizedin1997already:
Thegrowthinacademic,refereedjournalsmaywellremainmodest….Therealsoappearstobelittlereasontoexpectagrowthin
14 Beyond the Flow
multi-mediacontent.…Hypertextsarethepossibleexceptionbuttherehasbeenlittleenthusiasmsofarfordevelopingthese….(Easonetal.1997,81)
In1998,PeekandPomerantz(1998)publishedtheresultsofadetailedanalysisofchangesscholarlyjournalshadundergoneinthepreviousdecade.Inquiteastrongstatementtheyconcludethat“atafirstglance,itmayappearthatthehistoryofelectronicscholarlypublishing…islitteredwiththecorpsesoffailedefforts”(339).WithrespecttoOwen’sownover-viewoftherevolutionaryexpectationsinthefieldofdigitalpublications,heremarksmoregenerallyattheendofhissurvey:
The“revolution”inscientificcommunicationthatissupposedtobecausedbyinformationandcommunicationtechnologieshasoftenbeencomparedtotheso-called“Gutenbergrevolution.”Butaswehaveseen,thatrevolutionismoremyththanrealityasfarasscienceandthemediaofscientificcommunicationareconcerned.(Owen2006,210)
MostrecentlyKadenandKleineberg(2017,1)summarizedtheresultsofaresearchprojectinvestigatingFuture Publications in the Humanities by remarkingthat“[es]lässtsichdiegrundsätzlicheErkenntnisfesthalten,dasseinekonsequenteDigitalisierungdesgeisteswissenschaftlichenPub-lizierensbisherausbleibt.”2
Tomakeapoint,itcouldbeemphasizedthatinthehistoryofdigitalscholarlypublishing,anarrativethatalwaysseesarevolutioncominggoesalongwiththeproclamationofafailedrevolution,oronethatwillneverhappen.
The last three quotes all came from evaluations of certain states of scholarlypublicationsinthepast.Theauthorswerelessinvolvedinthedesignortheimplementationofnewpublicationformsthanthe“rev-olutionaries”werebefore.Thereare,however,plentyofstatementsinthisresearchfieldresemblingtheobservationsofPeekandPomerantz,EspositoorHerbintheirownpeculiarway.Throughoutthewholehistoryofdigitalscholarlypublications,stakeholders,tryingtointroducesub-stantialchangestowhatscholarlypublicationslooklike,complainthatdespitealltheseattempts,nostandardsfornewpublicationformatshaveemerged.Thisdoesnotmeanthattheydonotrecognizetheirowncontributions.Thesecontributions,however,haveproducedamessyand
2 “thegeneralfactcouldberecordedthataresolutedigitizationofpublishinginthehumanitiesfailstoappear”(author’stranslation)
Introduction 15
heterogeneouslandscapeinsteadofnewreliableformationsinscholarlypublishing,andtheonesthatappearmostfrustratedaboutthisfactarethesespecificstakeholdersthemselves.Castelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013)remarkthatinnovativeapproachestoscholarlypublicationsare“poorlyintegrated”(155)becausestakeholdersdonotwanttofocusoncommonsolutions(167).Itisnotsurprisingthatin2003,Kennedy(2003)regretsthatthereisnostandardizedwaytoproducedigitalpublications.Thesameregret,however,appearsagainandagain,uptothepresent.Hence,AdriaansenandHooft(2010)expresstheirunhappinesswiththefactthatnosupportingtoolsfordigitalpublicationsexist—becausethereisnocommonprocedurefortheircreation.Thissituationisconsideredaconsequenceofthefactthat,moregenerally,thereisnostandardfordigitalpublicationsinacademia(8).Inasimilarfashion,BardiandManghi(2015a)lamentthelackofanystandardizedframeworkfortheinstallationofnewpublicationformsinscholarlypublishing.BardiandManghi(2014,265)remarkthatdigitalpublicationsare“arichbutfoundationlessrealm”thatfinallyneeds“somekindofcommonunderstanding”(240).Infact,fiveyearsearlier,Sierman,Schmidt,andLudwig(2009)alreadyworkedonsuchanunderstanding.Theyevencalledfortheuseofaspecificstandardwhichwouldsupportallaspectsofthisunderstanding.Butastheyannouncethisstandard,theyundermineitinanalmostfatalisticremark,asking:“butwhoknowsifthisstandardisthewayofthefuture”(160).Candelaetal.(2015,1760)assertthat“journaleditorsdonotyethaveasharedandconsolidatedstrategy”regardingcoreelementsofdigitalpublicationsformats.“Asacon-sequenceofthisstateofaffairsandthelackofstandardsinthisarea,thereisgreatheterogeneity”(1752).
Alltheabovementionedauthors,andotherstoo,havetriedtointroduceorsupportthestandardizationprocessofdigitalpublicationsthatissupposedlythekeyfactorinbroaderadoption.Eachnewattempt,never-theless,referstothegeneralsituationofdigitalpublications.Thispatternhasbeenthereforaconsiderableamountoftime,suggestingthatitisaconstantofthehistoryofdigitalpublicationssofar.
Asmentionedabove,thereisnotjustregretbutalsofrustration.Thisfrus-tration might not come as a surprise in a situation where revolutionary eventsareexpectedbutdonotseemtooccur,atleastnotinthewaytheyareexpected.Itisarticulatedincomplaintsabouthowmuchcurrentscholarlypublicationsavailableindigitalenvironmentsareallegedlyacopyofpublicationsfromtheeraoftheprintingpress.In1998,Singhetal.(1998,sec. OnlineJournalsToday)writethat“mostofthem[digitalscholarlypub-lications]areessentiallyastaticvisualformoftheircounterparthard-copy
16 Beyond the Flow
journal”andpublishing“hasnotkeptpacewiththechangingresearchtechnology”(sec. TheNeed).Still,in2014,DeRoure(2014b,233)assertsthatnosignificantchangeshavebeenmadetotheformatofthejournalarticlesinceitsintroductionin1665.3In2009,Hogenaar(2009)launchesacritiquetowardsanewdigitalpublicationformat,sayingthat“itsend-productisstillapublicationratherthanacommunicationobject.”Twoyearslater,Bourne(2011)outlinestheprospectsofdigitalpublicationsandcontraststhemwiththesituationatthattime.Thebottomlineofthiscomparisonissum-marizedquiteconciselybythetitle“DigitalResearch/AnalogPublishing.”Xu(2011,i)createsthesamedichotomy.Consequently,“ahighlysemanticenrichedpublicationalwaysmakesitsinformationanddatamucheasiertosearch,navigate,disseminateandreuse,whereasmostonlinearticlestodayarestillelectronicfacsimilesoflinearstructuredpapers.”Marcondes,Malheiros,anddaCosta(2014)claimthat“despitenumerousadvancementsininformationtechnology,electronicpublishingisstillbasedontheprinttextmodel.”Theannouncementofapanelonpublishingin2017,organizedby the Institute of Network Cultures4reads:althoughdigitaltechnologiespromisedarenaissanceinthepublishingindustries,publishersstillstrugglewithdigitalinnovationsandtrytoholdontotraditionalworkflows,production,formandbusinessmodels”(InstituteofNetworkCultures2017).Consequently,thesecomplaintsshowthatwhatwaspresentedasthemaindistinctionbetweenelectronicpublicationsanddigitalpublicationsneverreallydeveloped.
ThemainobjectcriticizedisthePDFformat,widelyknowninsideandout-sideofacademiaasthemostcommonformatforthedistributionofdigitaldocuments.Owen(2006,146)hadremarkedalreadyin2006that“perhapsthemostconspicuousfindingisthefrequentuseofpdfasadistributionformat.”Accordingtohisanalysis,morethantwo-thirdsoftheinvestigateddigitalpublicationsprimarilyusedthisformatduringthatepoch.In2018Garciaetal.(2018,2/26)statethat“publishedpapersareprimarilyavailableasHTMLandPDF.”Owenfurtherfindsthisconspicuous,becausethePDF,“inspiteofitshypermediumandmultimediaproperties,ispredominantlyaprint-documentbasedformat.”ForOwen,thisconspicuousnessmainlyrepresentsagoodreasontoreflectmorebroadlyoncertainelementsinthediscourseofthefieldofdigitalpublications.Forthefielditself,observationssuchasthoseareafundamentalnuisance.In2010,advocatesfor new publication formats thus began planning a conference with the title
3 DeRourereferstothePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society launchedthatyear by The Royal Society of London.
4 http://networkcultures.org/
Introduction 17
“BeyondthePDF.”Acallforpreparations,launchedontheblogssectionofthenon-profitpublisherPLOS,reads:
PDFhasbecomethestandardwayweconsumescientificpapers,butinfactisnotagoodformatforthispurposeatall.…PDF is an insult to science. (Fenner2010)
Inthesamefashion,Lord,Cockell,andStevens(2012,1004)statethatdespitealltheadvantagesforfuturepublicationsthatgoalongwithdigitaltechnologies,digitalscholarlypublicationstodayinfact“culminateinalumpenPDF.”Pettiferetal.(2011,213)giveanoverviewofsomeofthecritiquesinwhichPDFsareseenas“antitheticaltothespiritoftheweb”andcomparedwiththeactofinventingatelephoneandusingitformorsecode.Andstill,theauthorsassertthatalthoughmuchbetterchoicesareavailable,eightypercentofdigitalpublicationsarepublishedinPDFformat.ItstandstoreasontoassumethatthePDFmightalsohavebeenextendedtomakeuseofcertaincapabilitiesofdigitaltechnologies,andinfactsuchdevelopmentstowardsinteractive PDFsandmultimediaPDFshavetakenplaceinthelastyears.TheseattemptstomodernizethePDF,nonetheless,donottonedownthecritique.Bourne(2010,1)oncecommentedwithmuchpolemic: “these pioneering publishers are now experimenting with inter-activePDFs,‘articlesofthefuture,’…butthenwhat?”
Itisindeedintheevaluationofthecomportmentofstakeholdersinvolvedinscholarlypublishingwherethefrustrationbehindresearchondigitalpublicationformatsismostrecognizable.Bourne,BuckinghamShumetal.remark:
Producersandconsumersremainweddedtoformatsdevelopedintheeraofprintpublication,andtherewardsystemsforresearchersremaintiedtothosedeliverymechanisms.(Bourne,BuckinghamShumetal.2012)
Oftmentionedreasonsincludethatresearchersbehaveselfishly(Markowetz2015;Nüstetal.2017),orthinkintermsoftheirself-interest(CribbandHartomo2010),orientedtowardsthecreationofcompetitiveadvantages(Borgman,Wallis,andEnyedy2007).Publishersaredis-tinguishedbytheiroccasionalreluctancetoevenpublishdigitalbooks(Humphreysetal.2017)orthinkaboutmakingallegedlybeneficialchangestowhatapublicationis.Fromtimetotime,frustrationalsoturnsintoopenaggression,ofwhichNeylongivesanilluminatingexample.Hewrites:
Someoneoncesaidtomethatthebestwaytogetresearcherstobeseriousabouttheissueofmodernizingscholarlycommunicationswas
18 Beyond the Flow
toletthescholarlymonographbusinessgotothewallasanobjectlessontoeveryoneelse.AfterthelastcoupleofweeksI’mbeginningtothinkthesamemightbesaidoftheUKHumanitiesandSocialSciencesliterature.…theproblemisthatpeoplearefocusingonthewrongproblemsandmissingthesignificantopportunitiestorejuvenateH&SSintheUK.(Neylon2012)
Ifuptothispointonethingisabsolutelyclear,thenitisthefactthatthetopicofdigitalpublicationsinacademiaisfullofemotions.Init,theparallelityoffascinationandresignation,betweenhopeandfrustration,formaweirdbutvibrantmixture.Ontheonehand,thismixturehasbeenveryproductiveinsofarasatremendouswealthofprojects,initiatives,technologies,andmodelscametolight.Ontheotherhand,ithasalsoshownitselftobeextremelydestructive,becauseresourcesandvigoroftenhavebeenspentfornothing,whileresearchers,publishers,andotherstakeholdersareconfrontedwithagrowingamountofuncertaintyaboutthepublishingenvironmentthatshouldsustaintheircareers.
AsHall(2013,497)putsit,today“allpublishingisdestinedtobecomevanitypublishing.”Thelastparagraphshaveshownthatthismightnotonlyapplytoconcretepublications,butsimilarlytonewformsormodelsofpublications.Ofthemorethantwentypublicationconceptsanalyzedinthestudyathand,manybecamerelativelyinsignificantafterfundinghadstopped.Othersonlysurviveinasmallnicheofexpertsandenthusiasts,ofwhichmanyweredirectlyinvolvedinitsdevelopment.WhileforHall,vanitypublishingconstitutesthenew,digitalconditionforpublishingassuch,itisnotsurprisingthatnoteveryoneembracesthisprospectasmuchashedoes.Thecomplaintsaboutmissingstandardizationandvastheterogeneityintheworldofdigitalpublicationsshowedthatthereismuchdesireformoresustainablesolutions,solutionsthatwouldbeacceptedbyabroadacademicaudienceandthatcouldbesustainedbybundlingeffortsandresources.
Theinsightthattheimminentrevolutionandtherevolution-postponed-until-further-noticearepartofthesameprocessandconfronteachotherinaconstantrelationshipwithinthisprocess,putsaparticularlyinter-estinglightonthequestionofwhatthereasonbehindallthismightbe.Inbrief,whydoesthisrelationshipappeartobeconstant,andwhyhavedigitalpublicationmodelsnotbeenmoresuccessfulovertheyears?Missingstandardsandtoomanynewpublicationformatsseemtobemoreasymptomofaproblemthatisnotimmediatelydefinable.Theissueofheterogeneity,togetherwiththenearlytwenty-fiveyearsofdevelopments,
Introduction 19
morethananyotherissueindicatethatreasonsexceedthescopeofmissingtechnologicaldevelopments,ortheneedtojustwaitlongerforstakeholderstofinallyadoptnewpublicationformats.Itwouldalsobemisleadingtoassumethatbroadfundingwouldchangethissituation.Infact,substantialfundinghastakenplaceformorethantenyears.IntheEuropeanUnionalone,ithasbroughttolightmultilateralresearchprojectssuch as DRIVER,workflow4ever,andOpenAIRE,fundedacrossseveraltermsonabroadscale.
InthecaseoftheUK,socialsciences,andhumanities,Neylonarguedthatpeople’swayofreflectingonthetopicofdigitalpublicationsisinap-propriate.Asastrongadvocateforinnovativepublications,hehasaclearopinionoftheactualproblemsandadvantagesofsuchpublications.Inthelightofthecurrentpattern,itseems,however,lessobviousifcertainproblemsare“wrongproblems”andifopportunitiesareopportunitieswithoutrestriction.Althoughtimehaspassed,technologicalandconcep-tualimplementationshavetakenplace,andresourceshavebeenspent,advocatesofdigitalpublicationsnonethelessremainratherunhappy.Itthusseemsplausibletolookfortheunderlyingprobleminacompletelydifferentplace.Thislineofthoughthasbecomeslightlyold-fashionedthesedays,butmaybetheproblemisnotsomemissingpiecerequiringasolutioninordertoturndigitalscholarlypublicationsintoreality.Maybetheproblemisinfacttheawarenessoftheproblem.Dostakeholdersagreeontheproblemdomainofdigitalpublications?Dostakeholdersevaluateproblemsinasimilarway?Obviously,thisisnotthecase.Doesawaytolookatthingsexistthatcouldhelpbalancethetensionbetweencertainexpectationsandtheobservationsofresearchersinvolvedinthefield?Isawayofengagementintoscholarlypublicationsanddigitaltechnologiesconceivablethatwouldmakethedistinctionbetweenrevolutionariesandskepticistslessparadigmatic?
Builtontheabovementionedparadoxes,shapingthehistoryoftheresearchfieldofdigitalscholarlypublications,itisindeedthehypothesisandthepointofdepartureofthestudyathandthatthemainobstacleformore sustainable publication formats is a problem of awareness about whatisgoingoninthefield,andwhattherelationshipsbetweendigitaltechnologiesandpublicationsencompass.Theauthoris,moreover,convincedthatconceptualworkandthediscussionofaproblemcanbeasmuchapartofproblemsolvingasimplementationandmodelling.Itappearsthatthisisnotnecessarilyself-evident,especiallyinanenviron-mentinwhich“BuildingaScholarlyDigitalObject”widelyfocusesontechnologicaltasks(Meeks2012).Owen(2006,15)hadalreadyobserved
20 Beyond the Flow
backin2006thatrelatedresearchhasa“deficiencyintermsoftheoreticalunderpinning”andthatthissituationsuggests“thattheproblemismorealackofacoherentdiscursiveformation.”Yearslater,Jankowskietal.(2012,19)stillnotethatthefieldisin“muchneedtoextendtheoreticalunder-standingofthetransformationsthatscholarlypublicationisundergoing.”Thisisnottosaythattheoreticalresearchondigitalscholarlypublishingdoesnotexist,buttoooftenitexistsonlyoutsideofandverymuchdetachedfromprojects,agents,andenvironmentstryingtobuilddigitalpublicationformatsaswell.
Itsometimesfeelsasifthereisanoppositionbetweenbuildersandtheorizers,similartotheoppositionbetweenrevolutionariesandskeptics.Itwouldprobablybemorepromisinginsteadtohavemorebuilderswithahealthydegreeofskepticismandtheorizerswithacertainamountofcapacitytobuildthings.Intherarecaseswheretheoreticaldiscussionsreallybecomeanintegralpartofthedesignprocessofnewpublicationformats,itmostlyhappensasameanstoanend.Thebyfarmostout-standingexampleforthisisthe“endoftheory”debate,initiatedbyAndersonin2008,andverymuchlinkedtothethemeofthe“fourthparadigm”(Hey,Tansley,andTolle2009).Inbothdebates,itisarguedthatcomputersarenotjustnewtoolstocarryoutresearch.Instead,theycouldchangethewholerelationshipbetweenresearchersandresearchobjects.Theybasicallyallowtojudgedifferentlywhatcountsasgoodresearch.Itisthennotsurprisingthatparticularlyresearchers,whowantpublicationstobettersupportcomputationalanalysis,intensivelyreferencethesedebates.Therealironyofthisexample,besidesdemonstratingtheverypragmaticuseoftheoryindigitalpublicationsenvironments,obviouslyistheperformativecontradictionitcarriesout.Itmakesatheoreticalclaimthatunderminesthefeasibilityoftheoreticalclaims.Accordingly,thediagnosesmadebyOwenandJankowskigowellwithobservationsaboutthe role theory often plays in environments where future publication formatsaredefined.
Iftheclaimthattheconflict-loadeddevelopmentofdigitalpublishingstemsfromalackof,oraparadoxical,conceptualframingiscorrect,thefirsttaskwouldbetoidentifyexplicitaswellashiddenmotifsdrivingthisfieldofresearch.HavinginmindtheremarksofOwenandlaterJankowski,itwouldnotbeenoughtojustanalyzethewrittennarrativeingreaterdetail.Thisstrategywouldprobablymisssignificantaspectsofthewholedevelopment.Instead,itwouldbenecessarytorelatethenarrativeondigitalpublishingtosomethingmoreconcretethatcanqualifyandshowitsimpact,aswellasrevealaspectsofthedevelopmentthatarenotpartofit.
Introduction 21
Astudyofconcreteformatsandmodelsforinnovative,digitalpublicationsseemstoofferexactlythistypeofaccesstothefieldofdigitalpublishing.Thereisatremendousamountofresearchliteratureevaluatingthepros-pectsofscholarlypublishingindigitalenvironmentsingeneral.Inmanycases,however,theauthorsarenotpartofdevelopmentsinwhichtheimplementationofnewtypesofobjectshappen,andwhichwillhavetocarryandsupporttheproposedideasinreallife.Researchthatissomehowtiedtothetaskofimplementingnewscholarlyobjects,whichinturnshouldservethepurposeofdigitalpublications,reflectsandreproducesthebroadernarrative.However,itsanalysisalsofacilitatesthediscoveryandcomparisonofthemesthatarenotopenlydiscussed.Itdoessobecausethesuggestedandactualfeaturesofthenewlydesignedpublicationformatsallowrevealingofsuchthemes.
Thestrategyofreproducingtheconceptualandmentalenvironmentaroundatopicoutofananalysisofhowthenarrative,therelevantobjects,artefacts,orinstallationsareorganizedandstructured,hasalongtraditioninhumanitiesandsocialsciencesresearch.NotleastbecauseofMichelFoucault’s“ArchaeologyofKnowledge”(Foucault1982),ithasbecomeawidelyusedmethodologythatdidnotremainwithoutimpactonthefieldofdigitalpublishing.Owen(2006,15)himselfmakesreferencestoFoucaultinordertoputthebackgroundofhisanalysisintocontext.Inmorerecentyears,theFrenchphilosopherBernardStiegler(2012,8)madeuseofFoucault’sconceptofthearchiveinordertooutlinesomeofthebuildingblockstowardsanewresearchfieldinvestigating“theemergenceofdigitaltechnologies,oftheinternetandtheweb…asanewsystemofpublicationconstitutinganewpublicthing.”
Theinclusionofconcretepublicationformatsintotheanalysisdoesnotonlyaddcontexttotheanalysisofthenarrative,italsoprovidescon-textintheformofthehistoricaldimensioninthedevelopmentofdigitalpublications.Itallowstoaskwhatthedifferentturnsinthishistorytellusabouttheissueofdigitalpublications.Historicalviewpoints,infact,appearthroughoutthewholeperioddefinedabove.Inmostcases,suchviewpointsconsistofcomparingthesituationofdigitalpublicationswiththemomentoftheinventionoftheprintingpressortheformalizationofthejournalarticle(Dewar2000;Kircz1998;BuckinghamShumandClark2010;Willinsky,Garnett,andPanWong2012;BartlingandFriesike2014;DeRoure2014b).Thesecomparisons,ashelpfulastheymightbeinsomecases,areextremelyambiguous.Itgoeswithoutsayingthattheymaygiveorientationinasituationinwhichnewconditionsappear,withwhichthereistriviallynolong-termexperienceyet.Itisthisorientation,however,that
22 Beyond the Flow
mightbecomeasourceofproblemsonitsown,because,sinceexperiencescouldnothavebeenaccumulatedyet,itisuncertainwhichelementscanlegitimatelybecomparedtoeachother.Thesecomparisonsposeariskofwithholdingdetailsthatdonotfitintothem,resultinginbiasedinter-pretation.Owen(2006,212)evengoessofarastospeakofa“distortedviewofhistory”whichservesthepurposetosupposeadirectandlinearrelationshipbetweentechnologicalinnovationsanddevelopingpractices.
Fortunately,todayitisactuallynolongernecessarytoreferbacktohis-toricalsituationswherepublicationformatswereintroducedthatpeoplearefamiliarwith.Morethantwentyyearsofdigitalscholarlypublishingconstitutesitsownhistoricalhorizon.Thishorizonissufficientlybroadtodrawconclusionsfromit,supportingfurtherengagement.
Itwillthereforebethetaskofthepresentstudytoanalyzeresearchonformatsandmodelsofso-calleddigitalpublications.Theanalysiswillincludeboththemodelsandformatsthemselvesaswellasthenarrative,arguments,andleitmotifssurroundingthem.Itwillattempttomaptheconceptualandmentalspaceinwhichdigitalpublicationsemerged,inordertoidentifyissues,inconsistencies,ortensionswhichmightbeabletoexplaintheparadoxicalsituationsummarizedatthebeginning.Withreferencetotheabovementionedtraditionofdiscourseanalysis,itneedstobeaddedthatthepartsbelongingtosuchastrategyarenotmeanttobeagoalinthemselves.Thegoalistousethisapproachasameanstofindwaystowardsalessemotionaldiscoursewithlessfrustratedagents.Con-sequently,thepresentstudywillnotstopatmakingadiscursiveformationexplicit,butwillinterveneandtrytoreconfigurethediscourse.Thegoalistountiesomeoftheelementsinresearchondigitalscholarlypublicationsthatappeartobeindeedknots.Forthistohappen,partsoftheanalyzeddiscoursemustbereconfigured.
Forreasonsofclarity,itmakessensetorecallthespecificationsofdigitalpublicationsthathavebeenmadesofar,beforebeginningwiththetaskdescribedabove.Adigitalscholarlypublicationisunderstoodasanewtypeofpublication.Itmightdifferfromhistoricalpublicationsincertainfeatures,byincludingelementsthathavenotappearedinhistoricalpub-lication,orbyhavingacompletelydifferent“formandstructure.”Adigitalscholarlypublication,furthermore,isapublicationthatislinkedtocertainunderstandingsofdigitaltechnology.Inotherwords,tocountasadigitalpublicationinthepresentanalysisithastofollowthatveryideathatthepossibilitiesofdigitaltechnologiesdefinewhatitshouldlooklike.Thisconvictionisafundamentalelementofthefield,which,asseenbefore,
Introduction 23
distinguishesdigitalpublicationsfromthenotionofelectronicpublicationsorothertypesofvariationsoftheformandstructureofpublicationsthatmightalsoexist.Digitalpublicationsareoftendescribedas“borndigital,”appreciatedby“newdigitallynativeresearchers,”asGoble,DeRoure,andBechhofer(2012,7)putit.Whereinthisstudythetermsdigitalpublicationformat,publicationconcept,orjustpublicationareusedwithoutfurtherspecification,theyrefertothisspecificnotionofpublicationsinacademia.
Theabovementionedspecificationdefinesconceptualboundariesaroundtheresearchobjectofinterest.Thereis,however,anotherchallengethatneedsattentionbeforedeeperanalysiscanbegin.Thecunningaspectofthisspecificationisthefactthatitdefinestheresearchfieldofdigitalpublicationsinoppositiontohistoricalpublications,butwithoutprovidinganydescriptionoftheconceptofscholarlypublicationsingeneral.Thisisintentional.Itisthereactiontoaconstitutiveproblemofthetopic.Inthefieldofdigitalpublications,thewholeconceptofpublicationsisques-tioned,aswillbecomeclearerlateron.Completely“newwaysofpublishingscholarship”(O’Hearnetal.2017,8)emerge,buttheseareveryoften“notrecognizedasascholarlycontribution”(Palmeretal.2009,33).Thissituationdemandsrestraintfromanynormativedefinitionsofscholarlypublicationsattheverybeginning.Instead,thepresentstudywillconsiderinitiativesthatplacethemselvesinthecontextofscholarlypublishing.Althoughitisnottheprimarygoalofthisstudytodefinepublicationsintimesofdigitaltechnologies,thetaskofreconfiguringtheconceptualspaceofdigitalpublishingcannotbeeffectivewithoutanotionofpublicationuptoacertainextent.Suchnotionwillthereforegraduallyemergeoutofthefinalpartofthisresearch.Asfarastheselectionofresearchliteratureisconcerned,literaturewillbeincludedthataffirmsmakingacontributiontothetopicofscholarlypublications,agreeingonandsupportingthepros-pectsofdigitalpublicationasoutlinedbefore,andwhoseauthorsareinsomewayinvolvedinconcreteactivitieswhichdefine,model,orimplementnewpublicationformats.
Thesixchaptersofthisstudycanbesplitupintothreedifferentsteps.Thefirststep,asindicatedalready,consistsofahistoricalanalysisofthediscourseandthedesignofdigitalpublications.Thisanalysistakesplaceinchaptersonetofour.Eachchapterincludesitsownhistoricalphasewithinthishistory.Theorganizationofthehistoryofdigitalpublicationsintobasicallyfourphasesisanoutcomeofthisstudyanddoesnotdrawonotherarrangements,ofwhichtherearehardlyany.Thefirstphaseextendsfromthemid-ninetiesofthelastmillenniumtothebeginningofthismillennium.Itincludesthefirstattemptsandideascompletelyrevising
24 Beyond the Flow
theconceptofscholarlypublication,albeitwithinatechnologicalenviron-mentthathadjustbeguntoappearonthehorizonandwhichwasrapidlychanging.Thesecondphaseextendedtoapproximately2007.Itsawadecreaseofactivitiesofthekinddescribedabove.Instead,therewerealotofchangesintechnologicalandorganizationinfrastructure,fromwhichthesubsequentphaseshouldbenefitextremely.Inthethirdphase,themostideasrevolvingarounddigitalpublicationformatsappeared,andmostactivitiesandimplementationstookplace.Itisadirectconsequenceoftheprecedingphasewhichleftthefieldwithnewpossibilitiestoexploreandtestthescopeofwhatitmightmeantocreateapublicationinacademia.Thefinalphase,whichisstillinanearlystage,doesnotsomuchintroducenewideasasittriestoorientitselfwithintheoutcomeofthevibrantperiodbefore.Thebeginningofthisphasecannotbedeterminedexactly,asitgraduallyemergesoutofthedecelerationofearlieractivities.Thistakesplaceatdifferenttimes,dependingontheareainwhichspecificactivitiestookplace.Inmostcases,thisisbetween2014and2016.
Thelasttwochapterscompletelychangetheperspectiveonthetopic.Asmentionedbefore,thehistoricalanalysisbringstolightcentralthemes,keyclaims,andkeyargumentsfromtheentireresearchfieldofdigitalscholarlypublications.Ultimately,theyareallfacetsofthreefundamentalques-tions:whataredigitaltechnologies,howdoesscienceworkandwhatistherelationshipbetweenthetwo?Thereferencetothedebatearound“theendoftheory”hasalreadyshownthatOwen’soriginalquestion,ofhowfartheemergenceofdigitaltechnologieshaschangedthescientificarticle,includesthequestionofhowithasanimpactonscienceandscientificmethodology.Itisthennotunexpectedthatcontributorstothefieldofdigitalpublicationsfrequentlynotethat“researchersareenvisagingalargevarietyofnewresearchpatternsthatrevolutionizinghowscienceisbeingconducted”(Candelaetal.2015,1747).Acknowledgingthecrucialimpactofdebatesaroundthesethreequestionsonthedevelopmentsofdigitalpub-licationsmeansthatforthegoalofreconfiguringthediscourseofthefield,itisindispensabletodiscussthemingreaterdetail.
Chapterfivedoesexactlythis.Itstartswithanevaluationoftheconceptofthedigitalandrelatesittothenotionofcomputationastheepitomeofwhatisreferredtoasdigitaltechnology.Afterwards,thewaysinwhichdigitaltechnologiescanchangetheproductionandrepresentationofknowledgeareanalyzedandcomparedwiththeargumentsfoundinthehistoryofdigitalpublications.Bothsectionsdrawontheconceptofthepost-digitalandtheresearchfieldofmultimodal analysis.Thisanalysisrevealsfirstinsightsintoreasonsfortheparadoxicalperceptionofdigital
Introduction 25
publications,aswellasforthefrustrationinthefield.Thefinalpartofthechapterdevelopsahypothesisabouthowtheemergenceofdigitaltechnologiesthemselvesmighthavecontributedtotheparadoxicaldebate.ItusestheconceptsofintermedialshiftsandepistemiceffectsproposedbySybilleKrämer,andappliesthemtotheappearanceofdigitaltechnologies.
Chaptersix,finally,laysthegroundworkforareconfigurationofthedis-courseondigitalscholarlypublications.Itintroducessomebasicideasinthisrespect,whichcontinuetouseconceptsofmultimodalanalysis.Atthebeginning,arevisionofpublicationformatswithregardtothewaytheseformatsconceptualizetheirsocialdimensionshowshowmuchsocialaspectsaresimplified.Thisinsightispresentedasaresultoftheprocessesdescribedinthechapterbefore.Afterwards,anempiricalanalysisofthesocialembeddednessofdigitalpublicationformatsdrawsamorecomplexpictureofthissocialdimension.Itisthendemonstratedhowtheissueofthesocialdimensionofdigitalpublicationformatscausesmoretension,namelybetweentheideaofcommunicationandthatofapublication.Itturnsoutthatintheresearchfieldofdigitalpublications,botharehardlydefinedordistinguished.Thechapter,andwithitthecurrentresearch,con-cludeswiththeapplicationofthreekeyconceptsofmultimodalanalysistothesituationofdigitalpublications.Theapplicationclarifieshowtheissues,conceivedofasproblemswithinthefield,arenotnecessarilyproblemsatall.Itfurthermoreofferssomeconceptualorientationforfuturecon-tributions,whichdrawontheviewpointofthisstudy.
[ 1 ]
Cyberpublishing
The ACM Publishing PlanAshasbeenarguedintheintroduction,theACM Electronic Publishing Plan byPeterDenningandBernardRous,publishedintheyear1995,isoneofthebestandmostoftenquotedreferencesforashiftthattookplaceinthewaycomputersandnetworkarchitecturesareperceivedfromapublishingpointofview.Thereareatleasttwointerestingaspectsaboutthismanifeststylepaper.First,italreadyaddressesmanytopicsthatwerepickedup,suggested,andpartlydevelopedlateronanduntiltoday.Second,itstatesthatdigitalpublishing,withoutreallygivingitthatname,wasalreadytakingplace at the time of writing:
Thesetransformationshavealreadybegun.Theclockcannotbeturnedback.ACMauthorsarealreadyplacingdocumentsindatabasesonthe“web”ofinformationservers.(DenningandRous1995,76)
ThisobservationissignificantbecauseithighlightsthattheauthorsareoneofthedrivingforcesofdigitalpublishingandthattheAssociation for Computing Machinery1(alsoreferredtoasACM)asapublisherneedstoreacttosuchdevelopments.Hence,itisnotthepublisherswhohavetheinitiative.
ThetransformationsDenningandRousrefertoaremainlysocialissueswhichthemselvesappearasaconsequenceofoptionspresentedbydigitaltechnologies.Theauthors(1995,72–74)observeamongotherthingsthat:
– scientistsarenotsatisfiedwiththeformatofpublicationsbecauseitallegedlygatherstoomuchinformationirrelevanttotheirinterests;
1 http://www.acm.org/
28 Beyond the Flow
– scientistsarefrustratedbytheamountoftimenecessaryforthetraditionalpublishingworkflow,especiallyinviewofthescientificinnovationcycletoday;
– thereisaninformationoverloadconsideredtobeaconsequenceoftheever-growingamountofpublicationsandresearchresults;
– librariesareincapableofholdingallpublicationsthathavebeenpublished;
– scientiststhereforequestiontheneedforpublishersaswellaslibraries;
– consequently,researchoutputandpublicationsarepublishedmoreandmorefrequentlyonprivateserversandscientificworkisperceivedofas“livingontheweb”;
– suchcontentisthereforelinkedacrossdocuments,collaborativelycreatedandcontinuouslychanging.
Basedonsuchobservations,DenningandRous(1995,75–77)outlineasetofpropositionsthatshouldbecapableofdealingwiththechallengesposedbytheaforementioneddevelopments.Infact,thesepropositionsaresimilartothemeswhichstillshapeagreatdealoftheresearchfieldofdigitalpublicationformatstoday.Theycanaccordinglybecalledpartofacollectionofleitmotifswithinthelandscapeofdigitalpublishing.Suchleitmotifsinclude:
– theneedtoincreasetheprecisionofinformationinpublications; – theneedtoacceleratetheproductionchainofpublications; – theneedtoautomatecertainprocesseswithinthelifecycleofpub-lications,inordertoreducepublicationtimeandtomanagetheinformationoverload;
– theneedtodecentralizetheorganizationofcontentofpublications; – theneedtoimposecollaborativeproductionworkflowsonpublications;
– theneedtoconceiveofpublicationsasobjectsthatarequicklyobsoleteandcreateacontinuousdemandforalteration.
RousandDenning’sworkisalsoagoodstartingpointforaninquiryintodigitalpublications,becausetheauthorsmakecomprehensivesuggestionsastohowdigitalpublicationsshouldbeimplementedinordertocomplywiththedemandsabove.Accordingly:
– journalsshouldbecome“streams”inwhichpublishingtakesplacesuccessivelyandwithoutanyinterruptionsimposedbyconceptssuchasvolumeoredition;
– the“identity”ofpublicationsshouldbeprovidedbymeansof“databasecategories”;
Cyberpublishing 29
– itshouldbepossibletopublishdifferentstatesofapaperthatcanthenbediscussedonline;
– technologyshouldenable“repackaging”ofthecontentofpublications;
– thepossibilitytopublishmultipleresourcesaswellasmulti-mediaresourceshastobeoffered;
– publishinghastoincludeso-called“networkedservices”; – publicationsmustberenderedinStandardGeneralizedMarkup
Language2(alsoreferredtoasSGML).Theymustprovideexplicitmarkupofimages,graphsandothercomponents.
Itgoeswithoutsayingthattheauthorsunderstandthesesuggestionsinawaythatstillisverymuchboundbythestateofpublishingatthattime.Manyoftheseideasareradicalizedinmorerecentprojects.Forinstance,thedatabaseapproachtoarticlesjustmeanstheadditionofmeta-datatothearticles.Thisshouldpermitagroupingofarticlesdifferentfromthegroupinginthejournalvolumeinwhichthesearticleswerepublishedfirst.Despitesuchqualifications,DenningandRous'workisoneofthemostcomprehensivecollectionofideasofitstimeandapioneeringcontribution.
Additionally,itisimportantforpresentpurposestonotethatbeyondthescaleofinnovativeimaginationRousandDenning(1995,82–83)alsoaddressavarietyofsocialissuesarisingfromtechnologicalchangesinpublishing.Challengesinthisrespectare:thesystemofcopyright,theroleofpublishersandlibraries,andthequestionoffinancialinvestmentandresponsibilitiesforlong-termarchivingofdigitalpublications.Asapub-lisher,albeitwithlimitedeconomicinterests,ACMneededtoconsidersuchissues by virtue of the very same reasons that were given in the quote at thebeginningofthissection.Fromtheirpointofviewtheirconsiderationwasinfactaquestionofsurvivalbecause“publishersthatlearntoprovidewell-structuredknowledgethroughdigitallibrariesandeasy-to-usetoolswillbethemainsurvivorsandsuccessfulentrepreneursinthenewmedium”(1995,82).
The Roaring 90sFewstudieshavetriedtoevaluatethestateofdigitalpublishinginthelate1990s.TheyshowverywellhowinnovativethescenariodescribedintheACMPublishingPlanmusthavelooked.In1997,Alsopetal.(1997)lookedatthreedifferentdigitaljournalsexaminingtheirstrategiesinengaging
2 https://www.iso.org/standard/16387.html
30 Beyond the Flow
withdigitaltechnologies.Oneofthesejournalsaddedfeaturestothepub-licationwhicharenotpossiblewithoutthesetechnologies.Thepre-printdatabaseFormationsimplementedanopen-reviewprocessbymakinguseofagroupwaresoftwaresysteminordertomanagethepublicationprocess.Theothertwojournalsrestrictthemselvestoputtingpublishedarticlesonweb-pagesorpublishthemseparatelyonCD-ROM.
In1998,PeekandPomerantz(1998)conductedasurveywhichwasmuchmorecomprehensiveintermsofquantityandtimeframeofanalyzedjournals.Theysummarizetheeffortsofjournalsasactivitiesthatlooktoprovide“alternativemethodsofaccesstoscholarly”publications(1998,331).SuchaccessmightbemediatedbytheWorld Wide WeborbyCD-ROM.CommonchallengesanddifferencesincludetheapplicationandqualityofOptical Character Recognition3(alsoreferredtoasOCR)fordigitizedarticlesortheinclusionofimagesandotherresourcesintextexclusivearchives.
Theseissueswerenotonlyevaluatedintermsoftechnologicalchallenges.Easonetal.(1997)studieddifferentacademicdisciplinesregardingtheirneedsandpreferencesforlinkingbetweendistinctinformationresourcesaswellasforalternativeaccessmodels.Inthefinalanalysisoftheirinquirytheauthorsobservethattheroleofonlinejournals,aswellastheneedforcapabilitiesliketheonesabove,variessignificantlybetweendisciplines.Consequently,threeyearsafterDenningandRous,PeekandPomerantzstillstressthat“thefutureoftheelectronicscholarlyjournalremainsunclear”(1998,344).
Otherauthorsjudgedthissituationquitedifferently.Singhetal.(1998,sec. Recommendations)aremoreconvincedthatthe“timeisrighttorev-olutionizethe‘ScientificJournalPublishingTechnology’.”Theyconcludethatthereasonwhythisrevolutionhadnotyettakenplaceatthetimeoftheirwritingisprimarilyrelatedtothe“reluctanceoftheseniorscientificcommunity”(1998,sec. Acceptance)andonlysecondlytoissuesofinfra-structureandfinancing.Forfurtheranalysis,itissignificanttohighlightthedifferentbackgroundsoftheauthorswhichcoincidewiththeirdistinctjudgements.Accordingly,Singhetal.writefromacomputerscienceandengineeringpointofviewwhileEasonetal.conductedtheirresearchina“departmentofhumansciences.”
Thisdistinctionbecomesevenmoresignificantwhenlookingatsomeoftherareexamplesofmoreinnovativejournalstestedatthattime.In
3 OpticalCharacterRecognitionparsesimagefilesinordertocomputationallyidentifycharacters,lettersandtextwhichmightbepresentontheimage.Suchsegmentsarethenturnedintotextrepresentationsintextfiles.
Cyberpublishing 31
1998,Whearyetal.(1998)presentedtheJournalLiving Reviewshostedata Max Planck Instituteandaimedatthefieldofgravitationphysics.Burgetal.(2000)presentedabi-annualpublicationcalledThe IMEJ of Computer Enhanced Learning(alsoreferredtoasIMEJ).IMEJ—sometimesalsocalledIMMJ—isanabbreviationforInteractive Multimedia Electronic Journals.Thistermisoneofthefirstpropositionsofasharedlabelforabunchofmoreexperimentaldigitaljournals.
TheseexamplesshowthatIMMJsarestronglylinkedtothefieldofcomputerscienceandtheapplicationofcomputationindaytodayresearchwork.Thesamelinkalsoappliestotheassessmentofthesitu-ationitself.Additionally,authorsconvincedofthebenefitsofdigitalpub-licationsareoftentheoneswhoalsodeveloptheunderlyingtechnologies.Someoftheauthorswhodesignednewpublicationobjectslateronwerefirstdeeplyinvolvedinthefieldsofhypermediaresearch,likeDavidDeRoure(Carretal.1995;Carretal.1998),technologicalinteroperability,likeJaneHunter(Lagoze,Hunter,andBrickley2000;HunterandLagoze2001),orinformationinfrastructureprojects,asinthecaseofHerbertvandeSompel(vandeSompel,Hochstenbach,andDePessemier1997).
ThemainconcernsofIMMJsarealreadytransparentinitsname.Ontheonehandthisincludesadeeperintegrationofimagesandvideointopub-licationsviaembeddingintohtmlorreferencingthroughlinks(Singhetal.1998;Burgetal.2000).Ontheotherhand,thereareattemptstoevaluatethepossibilitiesofinteractivityenabledbycomputation.Suchinteractivityincludespublishedsimulationsorinteractivevisualizations(Singhetal.1998),butalsoforthefirsttimesoftwarethatwouldbere-runnablewithinapublication(Burgetal.2000).Whearyetal.(1998)addtheideaofevolvingarticlestothesepoints.Moreprecisely,authorsareadvisedinthecor-respondingpublicationtocontinuouslychangetheirarticlesandtoadaptthemtotheprogressingstateofresearch.Thepublicationisthusnotastableentityanymore.Itconstantlychanges.
Anotherimportantifnotimmediatelyobvioustypeofinnovationisofferedbyprojectstryingtoexplorehowtorepresentbooksordocumentsinadigitalway.Suchprojectsdidnotdesignpublicationformatsdirectlybutgeneratedideasthathavesincebeenadoptedbypublishingprojects.Out-standingintermsofpublicperceptionistheHypermedia Research Archive of the Complete Writings and Pictures of Dante Gabriel Rosetti(McGann1994).Onegoalofthisprojectwas“tousetheRossettiArchiveasamodelforexploringthetheoreticalstructureoftextsingeneral”(96).Likewise,effortstorepresentancientJapanesebooksina“hypermediamodel”can
32 Beyond the Flow
benamedhere,wherebooksareperceivedasasetofmultiplecom-positionsofnetworkednodes(KitamuraandLeggett1996).PhelpsandWilensky(1996)wentonestepfurtherbyreflectingonthequestion,“Whatisadigitaldocument?”Intheirviewadigitaldocumentisjustanabstractentityaggregating“complexcontent”fromdifferentphysicalsources.Suchcontentcanbepresentedindifferentways,dependingontheuser’sinteraction.
Overall,itcouldbesaidthateffortsondigitalpublicationsintheninetiestookplaceundertheimpressionofthehypertextorhypermediatheme.Thisthemeisaddressedmostoftenastheideaofdifferentresourcesthatmaybeofdifferenttypesandcanbelinkedtoeachotherinvariousways.Therearedifferencesbetweentheapproachofquestioninghis-toricalpublicationformatsbywayofapplicationofthisidea,andtheapproachofquestioningthisthemeregardingitsrelevanceforpub-lishingformats.Anotherdifferenceistheonebetweenprojectsapplyingthisideatohistoricalpublicationformatsandthosewhouseittocreatepublicationformats.Inthefirstcasehypertextisusedasamodelfortherepresentationofsomethingthatexistsalready.Inthesecondcaseitisaparadigmforthedesignofsomethingnew.Lateron,Nentwich(2003)willgivethisdistinctionanamebycallingitthedistinctionbetween“weak”or“strong”hypertextstructures.
Ashasbeenoutlinedbeforetherewerefewinnovationswithabroaderimpactoronesthatlastedlonger.Mostcontributionstotheissueofdigitalpublicationsenteredthesceneonamorefundamentallevel,meaningbybuildinggeneraltechnologicalinfrastructure,orasabstractreflectionswithoutanyconnectionstoparticularpublicationformats(Kreitzberg1989;DavenportandCronin1990;Brüggemann-Klein,Cyranek,andEndres1995;Brüggemann-Klein1995;KarisiddappaandMoorthy1996;Thatcher1996).InthiscontexttheACMpublishingplanisworthmentioningbecauseithadauniqueapproach,notcompletelymovingintooneortheotheroftheafore-mentioneddirections.Itdiscussedchangesonametalevelbutalsodefinedconcretetechnicalandnon-technicalmeasures.
Publicationformatsimplementedintheearlystageofdigitalpub-licationswereaffectedsignificantlybytechnologicalproblemsstemmingfromgeneraltechnologicalinfrastructurethatitselfhadjustbeguntodevelop.Singhetal.(1998,sec. Issues)mainlylistinfrastructuralissueslikebandwidthofinternetconnection,storagespaceformulti-mediaresources,secureconnections,orevene-mailaccountsforscientists.Furthertechnicalchallengesconcernedpublicationinfrastructuresand
Cyberpublishing 33
softwareitself,namelythesupportofdigitalpublicationsthroughthedevelopmentoftoolstoproducethem.Inthemajorityofcasesthediscus-sionofauthoringtoolsreferredtotheconditionsofwordprocessorsnotwellsuitedforthecreationofmoreinnovativepublicationsformatsliketheIMMJ(SørgaardandSandahl1997).Anotherproblemimplicittothetopicofauthoringtoolswasthelackofformalizeddataandcontentmodelswhichtechnicallymodelthepublication.DenningandRousaswellasWhearyetal.(Whearyetal.1998)proposetheLaTeX4modelwhileotherjournalsandauthorspreferSGML(Ishizuka1997).Thisledtoaclashoftechnologicalbackgrounds.Furthermore,bothoptionswerealsonotwellsuitedforthecomplexdemandsofIMMJs,whichmightbethereasonwhySinghetal.donotspecificallymentionanytechnologicalmodel.Itwillbecomeclearlateronthatthereisagreaterchallengebehindthisissue.
ConsideringthestateoftheartofdigitalpublishingasdescribedbyEasonetal.(above),itisofsimilarimportancetoemphasizethatsuchdiscussionshadlimitedinfluenceonthebroaderlandscapeofscholarlypublishingassuch.Inthefinalanalysisboththeseproblems—immatureinfrastructureandthelackofformatsthatmatchupwiththeabstractideas—ledtothefactthatthosedigitalpublicationstryingtobeinnovativewereonlyrealizedbyapplyinghighlycontextdependentsolutionsandmakinguseofproprietarytechnologylikeJavaapplets.Inconsequence,correspondingpublicationsonlyexistedwithinconcreteprojectenvironmentsandasobjectsinthebrowser.
The Modular ArticleThe concept of the Modular Article(hereafterreferredtoasMA),proposedbyFrédériqueHarmsze,JoostKirczandMarteenvanderTolbetween1998and2000(HarmszeandKircz1998;Kircz1998;Harmsze2000;KirczandHarmsze2000),canbeinterpretedasamajormilestoneinthedevel-opmentofdigitalpublicationmodels.Itwasprobablythefirstconsistentlydesignedandformallyserializeddigitalpublicationmodel,developedonalargescaleandtestedforpublicationsindifferentresearchfields.Thismightbewhyitisstillusedtodayasapointofreferenceformodellingdigitalpublications(seeCastelli,Manghi,andThanos2013;BardiandManghi2014).Itdramaticallysharpenedsomeaspectsoftheprofilefordigitalpublicationsthattodayhavefoundpublishingformatsoftheirown,namely Semantic Publications (seechap.3).Furthermore,itisoneofthefew
4 https://www.latex-project.org/
34 Beyond the Flow
instanceswhereaprojectmodellingapublicationformatcombinesthiswithabroadertheoreticalcontext.
The Modularization of Content into Units of Information
OneofthecrucialachievementsoftheconceptofMAsisthedissociationof certain concepts both from its terminological as well as its technological contextwithinhypertextandhypermediaresearch(Harmsze,vanderTol,andKircz1999;Harmsze2000).Moreprecisely,MAsemphasizesthebenefitofdecomposingpublicationsintosmallerpieceswhicharethenrelatedtoeachotherbylinks.Thisstructurepermitstheindependentdisseminationandconsumptionorgroupingofpartsindifferentways.InMAssuchpartsarecalled“modules.”
Thehypertextparallelisobviousbuttheconceptofamoduleexceedsthenatureofstructuralunitsinhtmldocumentsoranytechnologicaldis-tinctionbetweenmedia-orfile-types.Asamodelexistingindependentlyfromspecificimplementations,butalsomoretechnologicallyformalizedthanmanyideasaboutpublishingfromthenineties,ModularArticlesareaimedatanentityofparticularimportanceforscience.Whatinhypertextisadocumentandinhypermediaisamedia-resourceiscalledinformation unitinModularArticles:
Amoduleisauniquelycharacterized,self-containedrepresentationofaconceptualinformationunit,whichisaimedatcommunicatingthatinformation.(Harmsze2000,39)
Kircz(1998,sec.2.3)arguesthateventheURL5 is “an attempt to maintain toacertainlevelthetraditionofalocalarchive,”thusemphasizingtheradicalismofhisapproach.Thefactthatbythisdefinitionamoduleisnotframedinanytechnologicalormaterialway,asinthecaseofhistoricalpublications,turnsdecomposabilityintoageneralprincipleinthefieldofdigitalpublishing(seealsoBishop1999).ForKirczthisstepisjusta“naturalconsequenceofthesplitbetweenstorageandpresentation”(Kircz1998,sec.2.5).Thissplitisallegedlysuggestedbythewebarchitecturewhichdeliverscontentfromaservertoanyplacewithinthewebarchitecture.Therenderingtakesplaceintheclienttowhichthecontentisdeliveredandcanhappeninmanyways.Likewise,itshouldbemandatorytodistinguishbetween Form and Content in the Electronic Age(HarmszeandKircz1998).
5 TheUniform Resource Locator isthetechnicaltermforlinksbetweenresourceslikewebsitesintheweb.
Cyberpublishing 35
Ashasbeenstatedbefore,thenoveltyoftheModularArticleapproachisthatitentanglestheoryandmodelling.Accordingly,KirczandHarmszetrytosupporttheirpublicationdesignbydevelopingsophisticatedclaims.Suchclaimstacklethehistoryaswellasthegoalofpublications,andthenatureofinformation.TheyconfigurethebackgroundforaclearlydefinedenvironmentofdigitalpublishinginwhichMAsarethekeycomponent.
The History of Publications Between Rigidity and Dissolution
In“Modularity:TheNextFormofScientificInformationPresentation?”Kircz(1998)paraphrasesthehistoryoftextasamonolithiclinearobject.Hearguesthatthedevelopmentoftextintoapublicationinmodernscienceisdrivenbytheideaofpersistenceasaconsequenceofthepersistenceofitsmaterialcarrier.WithregardtoMcLuhan’sGutenberg Galaxy(McLuhan2002)hedescribesthatfromoralculturetothemedievalscriptoriumuptotheeraoftheprintingpress,textbecameincreasinglystructuredandcontrolled,therebyfacilitatingacertainconceptofscientifictruth(Kircz1998,sec.2.1).Thedevelopmentofscientificjournalswithcertainnormsforthestructureofitsarticlesispresentedasanotherstepinthisprocess.HeattributesthegeneralnormforthisstructuretoFrancisBaconandhisideathatknowledgeisproducedwherethebehaviorallawsoftheworldmatchwiththeprocedureandthestrategybywhichthisworldisdescribed(Kircz1998,sec.2.2).InKircz’overviewbothdevelopmentswereonlypossibleduetothefacilitiesoftheprintingpress.
Fromtheendofthe18thcenturyonwardstheauthoridentifiesadesta-bilizationofthescientificpublishingsystem.Thisdestabilizationispresentedasanoverproductionofpublicationsandthusaninformationoverload.Curiously,forKirczthisprocessissociallyandnottechnicallymotivatedaswasthecasebefore.Forinstance,heidentifiestheentan-glementbetweenscienceontheonehandandeconomicaswellasmilitarycompetitionontheotherhandasafundamentaldriverforthisdevel-opment(Kircz1998,sec.2.3).
Followingtheauthor,thepresentationlayerofpublicationsisprimarilythelinearlystructurednarrative.Themainproblemofinformationoverloadisthereforetheconflictbetweenpublicationsadheringtothislinearandnarrative structure while on the level of archiving6suchstructureallegedlydoesnotexistanymore(sec. 2.4).Kirczrepeatstheargumentabout
6 WhenKirczusesthetermarchiveatthispointhemeanspublishinginfrastructurewhichisdeliveredbydigitaltechnologies.
36 Beyond the Flow
informationoverloadasadrivingforceandarequesttochangethefieldofpublishingalreadymadebyDenning.However,hesubstantiatesthisclaimbyaddingatechno-historicalargument.
Catching up on his evaluation of the role of the printing press for pub-lishing,HarmszeandKircz(1998,sec.3)concludethat“wearenowenteringanewphaseinwhichagainamediumwithsuperiorcapacitieswillchangetheformoftheknowledgerepresentations.”
Onceagain,thequotedistinguishesbetweenformandcontentandconstructsanotionofinformationandknowledgethatcanbeclearlyseparatedfromthechannelbywhichpeoplebecomeawareofit:“byadocumentwemeanasymbolicrepresentationofaquantityofinformation”(Harmsze2000,19).However,moreimportantisthetechno-historicalnecessityenforcingthisdistinctionuponnewpublicationformats.
The Hard Currency of Publications for the Communicative Endeavour of Science
IfintheworldviewofModularArticlesinformationexistsindependentlyofitsnarration,andpresentationhasnoinformationvalueofitsown,thequestionarises:“Whatisascientificpaper?”(Kircz2001b,266).Inordertorespondtothis,KirczreferstoWilliamGarvey’sCommunication: The Essence of Science(Garvey1979).Accordingly,thekeyaspectinscienceiscom-municationandtheroleofpublicationsisthatofbeinga“hardcurrency.”InordertoplaythisroleKirczstatesthatpublicationshavetobereliableandfulfillcertainfunctions.Moreprecisely,theyhavetoguaranteeregistration,certification,awarenessandarchivingofinformation(Kircz1998,sec3.2).Thesepropertiesthereforeconstitutesomethinghecallsthe“trans-his-toricalcore”ofpublications.Incontrast,theformofpublicationsisonlyimportantuptotheextenttowhichitseekstoachieveadesignthatbestsuitstheneedsofcommunicationundertheconditionsofapeculiarhis-toricalperiodandthetechnologyitdelivers.
Harmsze(2000,25)derivestheneedsofscientificcommunicationfromthegeneralideathatsuchcommunicationisprimarilygoaloriented.Definingthegoalsallowsthedefinitionofrequirementswhichinturnleadtofeaturesforpublications.Harmszeusesasender-receivermodelofcommunicationinwhichgoalsaredescribedbothforreadersandauthorsofpublications.Theevaluationtakesplaceonthebasisofananalysisofscientificcommunicationinthefieldofexperimentalsciences.Withintheframeofgoal-orientedcommunication,theoutcomeofsuchanalysisis
Cyberpublishing 37
thatpublicationshavetoassureefficientcommunication.Communicationisdefinedasefficientwhenitisclear,orderly,brief,andwhenitavoidsambiguity(Harmsze2000,22–24).Whilethetrans-historicalideaofpub-licationsistocommunicateknowledge,thepossibilitiesofrealizingthespecifictypeofscientificcommunicationshouldshapetheirformatanygivenpointoftime.FromanMApointofviewmodularityandexplicitnessintermsofformalizationmeettheserequirementsbest.
The Biology of Information
Atthispointmodularityisnonethelessstillanabstractidea.Itneedstobecomeapplicabletoassureitspotentialforefficientscientificcom-munication.Thecriterionfortheimplementationofmodulesistheidentityof an information unit.Aninformationunitisapieceofinformationoranaggregationofpiecesofinformationfocusingonasingleconcept(Harmsze2000,45).Furthermore,amoduleshouldbeself-contained.Thisisthecasewhenthemeaningofamodulemakessensewithoutnecessarilyhavingtorefertoothermodules.Anelementarymodulecontainingjustoneinfor-mationisdefinedasthesmallestpieceofinformationthatstillholdsthedependencyofbeingself-contained.
Theideaofconceptsassuresthatitispossibletodefinemodulesasself-containedinformationunits.Theyarestrategicalanchorsfromwhichitispossibletodecideifaninformationshouldbepartofaninformationunitornot.Withoutsuchanexternalviewpointitwouldnotbepossibletodefinecriteriatodecideifamoduleiscomplete,ismissinginformation,orincludesunnecessaryinformation.Ontheotherhand,theproblemwouldrecurifthestateofaconceptwastobenodifferentfromthestateofinformation.Ashasbeennoted,informationascontentdetachedfromitspresentationisanabstractentityaccordingtoKirczandHarmsze.ThedifferenceisthatforMAs,conceptsarenotabstractbutembedded.TheapproachusedbyHarmszereferstotheworkofPeterGärdenfors(Gärdenfors2000).Gärdenforsarguesthatthreehierarchicallevelsofrep-resentationexist:asymbolical,aconceptualandaneurologicallevel.Infor-mationisrenderedonthesymbolicallevel.Incontrast,theneurologicalleveldoesnotreallycommunicate.Itisjustareflectionoftheworldthatisfacilitatedthroughoursenses.TheconceptuallevelinMAsshouldplaytheroleofamediatorbetweentheneurologicalandthesymboliclayer.
Thepresentedtriptychallowsjudgementsaboutthenecessity,redundancy,orcompletenessofinformationandinformationunits.Itconfiguresconceptsinawaythatmakesthemindependentfromthe
38 Beyond the Flow
variationfoundintheapplicationofthematerialinthesymboliclayer.Indeed,commonsensegivesustheimpressionthatitispossibletosaythesamethingindifferentways.Ontheotherhand,theideathatconceptsarethemselvesanchoredonaneurologicallevelsuggeststhataconceptuallevelbeyondsymbolicheterogeneitymustexist.ByreferringtotheideaofconceptclassificationofmodulesHarmsze(2000,44)proposesthatinfor-mationissimilartoatomsandmoleculesinthephysicalworld.
Toputitdifferently,theconceptuallevelisserializedbytheideaofwhatHarmsze(2000,sec.3.2)followingGärdenforscallsa“conceptualspace.”Aconceptualspacecharacterizessomethingintermsofits“qualitydimensions.”Harmszeofferstheexampleoftheconcept“apple”whichischaracterizedbycolor-,form-andtaste-dimensions.Itispossibletorefertotheconceptbymakinguseofdifferentqualitydimensions.Eachreal-worldobjectthatistackledbytheconceptinstantiatesaqualitydimensiondifferently(someapplesaregreen,somered,somelighterandsomedarker).Nonetheless,thewayinwhichtheconceptualspacetakesthisheterogeneityintoaccountdoesnot,inHarmsze’sview,underminebutinsteadfostertheideaoftheexistenceofanunderlyinggeneralconcept.Inturn,informationunitsbecomedefinableandamodularapproachtopub-licationsseemsbothappropriateandefficient.
Kirczdescribesverywellwhatthegoalofsuchefficiencyis.Accordingly,themainideabehindmodulararticlesistopreventaproblemwhichintheeyesoftheauthoristhemostsignificantproblemofcommunication:
…ofteninformationisrepeated,whilstotherinformationismissing.Wetry,infact,toenvisiontheinformationcontainedintheauthor’smind.(Kircz1998,sec.4)
Withinthemetaphorofhardcurrency,redundancyequatestoinflationandmissinginformationisdeflation.Whatisimportantisthatbothaspectsdepreciatecommunication.Hence,thedigressionsabouttheconceptuallevelandthequalitydimensionsofinformationarenotonlyanattempttogiveevidencefortheexistenceofinformationunits,butalsotoofferapproachesforbetterinformationretrieval.Inordertoreallyassureefficientcommunication,theconceptuallevelmustbeincludedinsomewayintothepublication.Informationoverloaddemandsnotonlyabreakdownofpublicationsintounitswhichareeasilyconsumableandcorrespondtoitstruenature.Italsorequireseachmoduletobedescribedbycategoriesthatmaketheirtruemeaningprocessable.ModularArticlesimplementsuchcategoriesasdescriptivemetadataattachedtothemodules.Harmsze(2000,38–41)distinguishesbetweenfourtypesof
Cyberpublishing 39
categoriestoassurethatthegoalofefficientscientificcommunicationisreached:categoriesreferringtotheconceptualfunction,categoriesaddressingthetypeofscientificcontent,categoriesdefiningcertainrangeslikethetemporalrange,andfinallybibliographiccategories.
Semantic Links
Aconsequenceofthethemeofinformationefficiencyontheonehandandmodularityontheotherhandisthedesignofqualified links between models.Harmsze(Harmsze2000,79–80)criticizesthatinthewebarchitectureofthattimelinksonlyconnectdifferentresourcesbutdonotofferinformationonwhythelinkexists.Thegoalofefficientcom-municationhoweverdemandsthatauserhasinformationaboutwhythebodyandthetargetofalink—inthepresentcasetwomodules—arecon-nectedtoeachotherbeforeshedecidestofollowthelink.
Thatiswhyheproposestoaddmetadatanotonlytomodelsabutalsotolinks.Suchmetadatadocumentsthecreator,thetime,andthetypeofrelationshipofthelink.Thetypeofrelationshipdenotestheaspectbywhichtwomoduleslinktoeachother.RegardingscientificcommunicationHarmsze(2000,85)distinguishesbetweenstructuralanddiscursiverelationships.Structuralrelationshipsexpresswhichmodulecontainswhatothermodules,forinstanceintermsofthesequenceofmodulesinareadingpath,butalsowhatconceptamodulerepresents,whilediscursiverelationshipsdocumentrelationshipsintermsoflogicalreasoning.
ReflectingonHarmsze’sworkaboutMAs,Kircz(2002,31)emphasizesthat“relationswhichexpressthemselvesinhyperlinksbecomeinformationobjectsintheirownright.”Therebythemodulararticleborrowsheavilyfromthefieldofhypermediaresearchwhichhadworkedonthisissueatthesametimeandbefore(DeRoureandHall1997;Carretal.1998).Italso anticipates the success of the semantic web(seechap.3)introducedbyTimBerners-Leein2001(Berners-Lee,Hendler,andLassila2001)andwhichinfluencedthecourseofdigitalpublishingsignificantly.BydoingsotheModularArticledemonstratesitssignificanceasanexusbetweenapproachesintheninetiesanddevelopmentsthattookplaceafterthemillennium.Furthermore,itillustrateshowdigitalpublishingatitsverybeginningisaneffortthatappliescomputerandinformationsciencecon-ceptstothetopicofpublishing,incontrasttoaskingwhatpossibilitiesforpublishingexistbyvirtueofdigitaltechnologies.
40 Beyond the Flow
Relevance and Limitations
Althoughatthevergeofthenextstepofdigitalpublications,MAslikeIMMJsarestillconfrontedwithtechnologythatisrapidlydevelopingitself.Wherenoarchitectureforqualifiedlinksexists,thereisalsoalackofwhattodayiscalledweb taxonomies or semantic vocabularies,meaningformalvocabulariestoconsistentlycreateclassifiedlinks.Consequently,alotoftheworkofHarmszeandKirczconsistsofidentifyingappropriateviewpointsforclassificationsanddefiningterms.ItishencealsonotthegoalofthispresentresearchtoimplementMAsandtofurtherevaluateproblemsthatbecomerelevantafterimplementation.Nonetheless,thoseproblemsarelistedandincludeissuesofhowtorenderandpresentthemaswellashowtoauthorsuchcomplexobjects.InassociationwiththeworkofHarmsze,vanderTol(2001)developsanideaofhowabstractscanbeusedtoorganizeandcomprehensivelycommunicateMAsthemselves.ItcouldbesaidthatsuchanideapartiallyopposesthewholepointoftheMAsinsofarasitstressesthatatypeofcompositionisrequiredforcertainneedswhichisnotdealtwithbytheconceptofmodulesandlinks.
AnotheraspectisthatMAsstillfocusontextmodules.Kircz(2002,29)iscorrectinmentioningthatthisisanunnecessaryfocusandalsothatnon-textualresourcescanconstitutemodules.Nevertheless,thereisnoin-depthanalysisofthisviewpoint.ThediscussionofthequestionofhowapplicablethemodeloftheMAisacrossdisciplinesisalsoproblematic.ThedevelopmentofthemodelwasboundtotestcasesfromwhatHarmsze(2000,97)calls“experimentalsciences.”Nonetheless,sheclaimsthatthemodelisgenericandcanbeappliedtopublicationsfromotherdomains(Harmsze2000,391–98),includingthehumanities.Significantly,shetakesanexamplefromthetopicof“argumentationtheory”toillustratethis.ThefieldofapplicationisthusafieldthatsharessimilarprinciplesasthosewhichleadtothedefinitionofMAs.
Despitetheseremarks,MAsderiveitsmajorsignificancefromthefactthatitistheonepublicationformatthatmostconsistentlyrepresentstheideaofdecomposabilityofpublicationsatthattime.
Publication Formats Along the Path of Modular Articles
AlthoughMAsdevelopstheconceptofmodularityinitsmostradicalformpossible,bytheturnofthemillenniumotherprojectsexistedwhichmovedintoasimilardirection.Accordingly,McAdamsandBerger(2001)present
Cyberpublishing 41
analternativeversionofthistopic.Tracesofthediscourseonmodularitycanbefoundupuntil2008(seedeWaardandKircz2008).In2007,Thomas(2007,16)catchesuponsomepropositionsbyMcAdamsandBergerinordertothinkaboutarticlesintermsofcomponents.Hepresentshiscontribution to the American Historical Reviewina“multisequential,multi-threaded,flexible,modular”waythat“shouldbreakwiththenarrativestructures.”Theuniquecontributionofthispeculiarapplicationofmodularityisthefactthatitwasdesignedasanexperimentinordertojudgetheactualusefulnessoftheapproach.Alongreviewprocesswasassociatedwiththataspectofthedesignofthearticle,leadingtomultiplerevisionsandacriticalevaluationofmodularityassuch.Accordingly,Thomasaskstomoreclearlythinkonanddefinebenefitsanddrawbacksofdecomposingpublications.
Therearetwomorecontributionswhichcalltheirapproaches“layered”publications.Onehastheformofalayered article(LaMannaandYoung2002),theotherofalayered e-book(Darnton1999).TheconceptofaLayered Publication(hereafterreferredtoasLaP)isextremelysimilartoMAs.Again,ithighlightsthedecompositionofpublicationsintosmallerpiecesofinformationforthepurposeofcreatingmoreefficientpublications.Itlikewisedefinesefficiencyintermsofthespecificinterestsofgoal-orientedreadersandthepossibilitiesofdigitalpublicationstocomplywithsuchgoals.Finally,italsoreferstopublicationsmainlyinthelightofscholarlycommunication.
ThedifferencebetweenLaPsandMAsisthegreateremphasisthefirstputsonpreciselydefineduserroles.Accordingly,Darntonquotestheimageofapyramidinwhichthecontentisorganizedindifferentlayersofcomplexityandinformationdepths.Readerswithdifferentinformationalneedscanapproachthepublicationondifferentlayers.Darnton’slayeredbookismoretraditionalthanMAsinthewaythatdifferentinformationunitsarenotreallyorganizedinseparateforms.Insteadthedifferentlayersarepurposefullycomposedbytheauthorsputtingmuchmoreemphasisandeffortontheauthoringprocess.Nonetheless,thelayeredbookneedstobestressedasoneoffewexamplesofdigitalpublicationsthatexplicitlychoosestheformatofabookasapointofreferenceinsteadofarticles.
Weiten,Wozny,andGoers(2002)madeacontributionthatfocusedmuchmoreondeepertechnologicalissuesthanthosediscussedbyHarmszeandKircz.Theyrephrasedtheissueofefficientscholarlycommunication
42 Beyond the Flow
in terms of two problems: interoperability7andinformation retrieval8.BymakinguseoftheconceptualapproachofMAstheyemphasizetheimportance of technologies within the portfolio of the Extensible Markup Language9(alsoreferredtoasXML)inordertosolvethefirstproblem.Regardingthesecondproblem,theauthorshighlighttheneedtodefineformalvocabularies,howeverthistimeintheformofsophisticatedontologies(seechap.3).AmoregranulardecompositionofpublicationsthantheoneprovidedbyMAswasofferedbyCaracciolo(2003).Theauthordefinesanapproachinwhichapublicationisreorganizedaroundkeyconceptsconnectedbyrelationscomparabletothosethatcanbefoundinthesauri.
7 Interoperabilityisatechnicalterminthefieldofcomputersciencewhichtacklesissuesthatassurethatdatacanbeprocessedconsistentlybetweendifferentcomputers.Amoretechnicaldefinitionofinteroperabilityisgivenbytheinteroper-ability-definition project (see http://interoperability-definition.info/en/).
8 Informationretrievalisaresearchfieldincomputerandinformationsciencewhichdevelopsmeansandstrategiesinordertoprovidethemostrelevantinformationinrelationwithaspecificdemandforsuchinformation.ForfurtherdetailsseeJansenandRieh(2010).
9 http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11
[ 2 ]
World Wide Publishing
Projectsaimingatimplementingconcretedesignsfordigitalpublicationsdeclinedinthefirstyearsofthenewmillenium.Instead,researcherslikeLeonardoCandelaorHerbertVandeSompelandothers,wholaterengagedintheimplementationofsuchdesigns,initiatedprojectsthattriedtocreatebetterconditionsforthetechnologicalandsocialenvironmentofdigitalpublications.Suchprojectsbuildonsomeofthekeyideasofthediscourseondigitalpublications,tobediscussedmoreindepthlateron.Someoftheseideaswereactuallyforgedduringthisveryperiod,suchastheideaofopenaccessanddatascienceamongothers.Thisshiftofattentionfromconcretepublicationprojectstomoreglobalactivitiesmightinadditiontootherreasonsalsobecausedbyrestrictionsoftechnologyandorganizationthathavebeenpointedtomorethanonceinthelastchapter.
Position of Points in Infrastructure and Virtual Publishing Environments
Accordingly,Kennedy(2003)heavilyhighlightsthemeaningandpotentialof the Open Archive Initiative1(alsoreferredtoasOAI,seebelow)fortheprogressofthedigitalpublishingecosystem.Headditionallyargueswithgreatpassionthattheprojectofthesemanticwebthathadjustbeenpro-claimedbyBerners-Lee,Hendler,andLassila(2001)wouldbecrucialfornewdigitalpublications.Furthermore,Hammond,Hannay,andLund(2004)
1 https://www.openarchives.org/
46 Beyond the Flow
explore how the Really Simple Syndication2(alsoreferredtoasRSS)model,anotherrecentinitiativeatthattime,couldbeusedforinadigitalpub-licationcontext.
WhileMAsandsimilaractivitiesexploredhowpublicationscouldbedecomposed,anotherlineofresearchstartedtopreparethedesignofcompletelynewtypesofpublications.Theseinitiativesevaluatedanddefinedmodelsforthedesignofaggregations(VandeSompeletal.2010)ofdistributedresourcesandanymedia-typeswhichwouldbecomecompound information objects(LagozeandVandeSompel2007,seechap.3.2).Themainshiftbehindsuchinitiativeswastheintenttonotonlystructureandrenderapublicationinadifferentwaybuttoreallysetanewstartingpointforthinkingaboutpublications.
Thisestablishedsystemgenerallyfailstodealwithothertypesofresearchresultsinthesciencesandhumanities,includingdatasets,simulations,software,dynamicknowledgerepresentations,annotations,andaggregatesthereof,allofwhichshouldbeconsideredunitsofscholarlycommunication.(VandeSompelandLagoze2007,par.2)
Theseresourcesmaycomefromanypointwithinthesphereofresearch.Theydonotdependonafinalpaperthatsynthesizeseverything.
In2003,Bekaert,Hochstenbach,andVandeSompel(2003)alreadyevalu-atedthepotentialoftheMPEG-21 Digital Item Declaration Language3(alsoreferredtoasDIDL)formatinordertomodelsuchcompoundinformationobjects.AsimilaractivityledtothedefinitionoftheDocument Model for Digital Library(Candelaetal.2005,alsoreferredtoasDoMDL),meanttobuildthecoreschemaoftheOpenDLib Digital Library System(CastelliandPagano2002).ThismodelwouldfacilitatetheorganizationofHeterogeneous Information Spaces to Virtual Documents(Candelaetal.2005).Lourdi,Papatheodorou,andNikolaidou(2007)presentahierarchicalmodeltoaggregateresourcesoffolklorecollectionswhicharepartofonethemebutrepresentedindifferentmediaformats.
However,theseandsimilarattemptshadlimitations.Somefocusonthescopeofaconcreterepository,oftenforcertaintypesofresources,andtheuseofXMLasthefoundationforthemodel.ThelimitsofXMLasahierarchicaldatamodelfortherepresentationofaggregationsthatshouldholddifferenttypesofresourcesfromdifferentrepositoriesare
2 http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification3 https://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standards/mpeg-21/mpeg-21.htm
World Wide Publishing 47
summarizedbyBrookingetal.(2009).Consequently,in2006theMellon Foundationofferedatwo-yeargrantforthedevelopmentofanewdatamodelforcompoundinformationobjects.Thismodelwasdevelopedunderthe name of Object Reuse and Exchange4(alsoreferredtoasORE)model.Itwaspresentedin2007(LagozeandVandeSompel2007;VandeSompelandLagoze2007)andwasintendedtorealizethecreationofscholarlydigitalpublicationsasaggregationsfromtheverybeginning,evenifitsapplicationnowadaysexceedssuchpurpose.Alltheseactivitiescanbeunderstoodasinfrastructureandtechnologydevelopments.Thereasonforthisisthattheynotonlytrytoenabledigitalpublicationsintheafore-mentionedmannerbutalsothattheyconstituteasignificantextensiontothewebarchitectureinwayshypermediaresearchhasworkedonforalongtime(Ossenbruggen,Hardman,andRutledge2006).
AdifferentangleoninfrastructureisintroducedbyKennedy(2003).Theauthorregretsthat“untilnow,therehasbeennostandardizedframe-workfromwhichorganizationscanfreelyexploreanddevelopthisoption[electronicpublishing]”(2003,sec. abstract).Inthisrespecthedescribesandimplementsaservice-orientedsoftwarethatshouldmanagethewholeworkflowoftheproductionofdigitalpublications.AcomparableeffortispresentedbySanchez,Morales,andFlores(2004).Theservicedescribedaimsatso-calledDigital Publishing Organizations(alsoreferredtoasDPO).Ittriestosupportthecoordinationprocessofagentsinvolvedinthecreationofdigitalpublications.Theapproachesthattriedtoactonaglobalscalewerecomplementedbyinitiativessuchasthatpresentedin(Ghani,Suparjoh,andHamid2008),whichdidthesameonaninstitutionallevel.Allofthemhaveincommonthattheyfocusoninfrastructureinordertosup-portinteractionsandworkflowsbetweenstakeholdersandagentsinthechainofproductionofdigitalpublications,whiletheformeractivitiesareaimedatfacilitatingthecreationofpublicationdatamodelsaswellasnec-essarycomputationalinteractionsbetweenthem.InthesamefashionLiewandFoo(1999;2001)stressthatthemaininnovationindigitalpublishingisnotthepublication,butanincreasinglevelofpossibleinteractions,espe-ciallyforreaders.Accordingly,theysuggestinvestingmoreenergyintothedesignofcomputationalenvironmentsofferingeasyintegrationandusabilityofnewpublications.
4 https://www.openarchives.org/ore/
48 Beyond the Flow
Programmatic Framing and Organizational Self-Awareness
Theshiftofinterestregardingdigitalpublicationsalsoledtoabroaderanalysisofdigitalpublicationswithinacertainhistoricalandsocialcontext.In the Delphi Survey,forinstance,agentsfromthepublishing,library,andresearchdomaintriedtoevaluatethefutureofdigitalpublishingintermsofdesign,financing,usage,andarchiving,aswellastheeffectsforthestakeholders(Keller2001).Inallthesediscussionstheproblemoftheserial crisis—analternativewayofreferringtotheinformationoverload—wasamajortopicguidingthesereflections.Correspondingly,agentsfromtheareaofresearchlibrariesaswellasresearchersthemselvesarguedthatthedevelopmentofdigitalpublicationsinelectronicjournalsmaysolvethisserialcrisis(Agostietal.2013).Thedevelopmentofsuchpublicationswouldhelpresearchlibrariestogainautonomyfromprivatepublishersbyprovidingcostefficientwaystoproduce,manage,anddisseminatepub-lications(Kennedy2003).Thus,thedevelopmentofcomputationalservicesforthecreationandcurationofelectronicpublicationscanalsobeseeninapoliticallight.
ThispoliticalagendabehindthepromotionofdigitalpublicationsbegantotakeshapeintheformationoftheScholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition5(alsoreferredtoasSPARC)aroundtheturnofthemillennium.OneofthemaingoalsofSPARCwastoincreasethepos-sibilities of research libraries to strengthen their position in relation to publishers( Johnson2001).Inthisrespecttheyactivelypromotedanunre-strictedaccessmodelforpublicationscalledopen access from its very beginning with the Budapest Open Access Initiative6in2001.
Incontrast,publishersbegantoimaginenewbusinessmodelsbasedondigitalpublications.Suchactivitiesbuiltonthepremisethatpublisherswilltransformfromproductcenteredtoservice-orientedbusinesses(Owen2002).Hammond’sevaluationofRSSmentionedaboveisoneexampleofanearlyattempttorealizethisclaim.Followingthispremise,theimplementationofdigitalpublicationsshouldnotsomuchalterthepublicationasitshouldconnectpublicationswithalertsaboutrelatedactivities,jobnotificationsandotherthings.Inthismodelthepublicationisdeemedtobeaninterfacethatshouldfacilitatethecreationofprofilesinordertodeliverpotentiallyinterestingthingsforreaders.
5 https://sparcopen.org/6 http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/
World Wide Publishing 49
Thesameperiodsawanotherthemecometolightthatwilllateroninter-venewithopenaccessactivities.Uptothispointthere-designofdigitalpublicationswasnotcloselylinkedtoconsiderationsabouthowscienceitselfchangesduetocomputationaltechnologies.Incontrast,Borgman,Wallis,andEnyedy(2007,27)emphasizetheemergenceof“anewwayof’doingscience’.”Inthisnewresearchmodelcomputationistheessentialelement.Accordingtothemresearchneedsdataaspublications.Theessentialquestionishoweverwhatmakesthistypeofdatadifferentfromimages,videos,text,andothermediamentionedbefore.Whileamorecomprehensivediscussionofthisquestionhastobepostponed,ashortresponseisthattheargumentisnotsomuchaboutwhatthedataisbuthowtheinteractionbetweenresearchersanddataisconceivedof.Suchinteractionprivilegesspecificaspectsofdatapresentationoverothers.
Theideaofhowresearchshouldorwilltakeplacethenbegantoshapethedesignofpublications.Borgmanetal.continuedtoargueinfavorofdatalibrariesholdingpublisheddatainacertain“reusable”way.ThisproposalissupportedbyasurveyofAnderson,Tarczy-Hornoch,andBumgarner(2006)whodeterminedthatatthattimeatleastonefifthofthelinkeddatafromonlinepublicationswasnotavailableanymore.Fromabroaderperspectiveondigitalpublicationstheissueofdatapublicationequatestotheemergenceofpublicationsthatopenlyarguedforbuildingdigitalpub-licationsarounditskeycomponent,thatbeingdata.
Allofthetopicsoutlinedinthelastparagraphswillreappearinthenextchapter.Theperiodofdigitalpublicationssubsequenttotheoneinthischapterdiscussesanddevelopstheminmuchgreaterdetail.Nonetheless,theframeformuchthatisarguedlateronwassetatthebeginningofthemillennium.
Early Theoretical Evaluations of Digital Publications
Itissignificantthatinthisperiodearlyattemptsweremadetocom-prehensivelyevaluatethestateoftheartofalreadyimplementeddigitalscholarlypublications.InahighlytheoreticalperspectiveNentwich(2003,chaps.6.3–6.4)identifiesasetoffivedifferentconceptsofdigitalpub-lication which consist of:
– LayeredArticle – ModularArticle – Hyperdiscussion
50 Beyond the Flow
– Hyperbook – KnowledgeBase
Someapproachesalreadymentioned,suchasIMMJs,arenotcompletelycoveredbythesecategories.Incontrast,conceptssuchasHyperdis-cussionsandKnowledgeBasesarenotimmediatelyunderstandableaspublicationsinthefirstplace.AHyperdiscussionisanonlinediscussionthatiscuratedfromtimetotimetobere-usableasasharedresourceunderacademicterms.Itisregardedasapublicationbecausetheonlinespaceisconceivedofasapublicspaceandbecausepurposefulcurationexists.AKnowledgeBaseisaresourcewhichtriestocomprehensivelyrepresentthestateoftheartofadefinedfieldofinquiry.Itisupdatedandmodifiedconsecutivelytokeepupwiththisgoal.However,thecontentofaKnowledgeBasedoesnotnecessarilyfocusonarticles.AHyperbookissomethinginbetweenthesetwoapproachesandcanbecomparedwiththecontributionofWhearyetal.(1998)discussedabove.InthelongrunthedistinctionswerechosenbyNentwichtocommunicatetwoideasabouttheprospectofdigitalpublicationsatthattime:modularizationandliquefaction.Liquefactionisatermwhichinthestudyathandwillbeusedtorefertoapproachesthatseektounderminethedifferenttypesofclosuresofapublication.InNentwich’stermsthismeans:(a)thatthepublicationrefrainsfromsubtractingitselffromthecommunicativeflow(Hyperdiscussion),thatitrecordsitfromtheflowofcommunicationwithminormodifications;and(b)anongoingupdateprocess(KnowledgeBase).
NotlongaftertheworkofNentwichwaspublishedOwen(2006)developedanotherattempttoclassifydigitalpublications.Thetemporalscopeofhisinquirygoesfrom1987to2004.ThetypologyofdigitalpublicationscarriedoutbyOwendoesnotclassifynewpublicationsintoanytypeofmetacon-ceptsasNentwichdoes.Instead,theauthordefinesasetoffeatureswhichmayapplytospecificpublicationsindifferentways.Thus,electronicpub-lications in comparison to historical articles may:
– includedifferentmultimediaresources; – allownetworkaccess; – beconnectedtootherresources; – grant the original author more control over the publication after submissionhastakenplace;
– havedynamiccontent; – maybeadaptabletothecontextofuse;and – maythereforeexpose“quasi-intelligentbehavior”(Owen2006,130); – grantmorecontroltothereaderandherreadingneeds; – appearinmoreflexibleformats.
World Wide Publishing 51
Owen’sapproachtoevaluatingdigitalpublicationsreflectshisprimaryresearchgoal,whichdiffersfromNentwich’s.Hismainquestionishowmuchofanimpactdigitaltechnologiesreallyhadonpublicationsandnotwhatgeneralnewpublicationformatsexist.Theresultsfromhissurveyledhimtothefinalremarkthat“theexperiment,insofarasitreallywasaimedattransformingthescientificarticle,hasfailed”(Owen2006,223),mainlybecauseveryfewoftheelectronicpublicationsincorporatedthefeatureswhichhedescribes.Heexplainsthisbyclaimingthatmanyofthese features are incompatible with the abstract goal of publications to implementnormsforthemanifestationofthescientificideaofobjectivity,acriterionhederivesfromhistheoreticalthoughtsatthebeginningofhisbook.
Meadows(2006)takesamorecriticalstandaswell.HehighlightstheneedtolookfromaboveathowdigitalpublicationsareactuallyusedbyscholarsandtherebyextendsOwen’sargument.Hearguesthatforthestateofdigitalpublicationsatthattimetherehavebeentoofewanalysesofreaderpractices.Hisresearchshowsthatthetypeofinteractionofscholarswithdigitalpublicationsdifferssignificantlydependingondifferentinfor-mationalneedsindifferentdisciplines.Therefore,digitalpublishingwouldprobablyremainafieldofexperimentationforaperiodoftimeyet.
Theappearanceofhighlytheoreticalsurveysthatevaluatedigitalpub-licationsafteraninitialperiodoffivetotenyearsreallydemonstratesthatthephasefromthebeginninguptothemiddleofthefirstdecadeofthenewmillenniumisaphaseoftransitionandconsolidation.Ontheonehandresearchhadledtoasufficientamountofdigitalpublicationconceptscallingforfurtheranalysis;ontheotherhand,avarietyofshortcomingsbecameobvious,leadingtoactivitiessuchasthosedescribedinthischapter.Havingsaidallthis,itmightseemlikelythatthecriticalremarksonthesuccessandimpactofdigitalpublicationsmightalsohavebeenaconsequenceofsuchshortcomings.Itwillhavetobethetaskduringtheanalysisofthefollowingperiodstodeterminehowfardigitalpublicationsfromsuchperiodshavereflectedthepointsthatwereraised.
[ 3 ]
Publishing 3.0
Ifthebeginningofthemillenniumcanbeunderstoodasanepisodeinwhichmostrelevantdevelopmentsfordigitalpublishingformatstookplaceinfieldssuchasinfrastructuredevelopmentorcommunitybuilding,andiftheevaluationofsuchformatsoftenhappenedrathercritically,thentheyears2007and2008clearlymarktheshifttoanewphasefordigitalpublications.Fromthattimeon,thefieldisagaindominatedbynewexper-imentsandnewimplementationsofpublicationformats.Thefollowingyears brought such concepts to light as:
– ScientificPublicationPackages – OpenLaboratoryBooks – ResearchObjects – ScientificCompoundObjects – LiquidPublications – EnhancedPublications – SemanticPublications – Nano Publications – TransmediaPublications – Rich Internet Publications – LiquidPublications – UnboundBooks – LivingBooks – HybridPublications – Self-ContainedPublications – Single-ResourcePublications
Thislistisnotcomplete,butitsufficestoshowthattheyearsbetween2008and2013wereprobablythemostvibrantonesinthehistoryofdigitalpublishing.
54 Beyond the Flow
Asifitwasmeanttobeastartingsignal,thecommercialpublisherElsevier1 initiatedtheArticle 2.0contestbyasking:“Whatifyouwerethepublisher?”(Elsevier2008).Lateron,ElsevierannouncedasecondcontestinwhichtheylookedfortheArticle of the Future(Elsevier2011).Bothtimesthegoalwastoimagineandprototypeinnovationsforscientificarticles.Researchersandresearchprojectswereatthecenterofinnovationindigitalpublishingonceagain.Itcanbeseenthroughoutthischapterthatthisismuchmorethanashiningmarketingmessage.However,additionalinterdependenciesemergeaswell.Inbothcalls,Elsevieremphasizedpublicationissues,pertainingtoarticlesinsteadofapproachescompletelyrefrainingfromtheconceptofarticlesandtextpublications.ThisofcoursehighlightsElsevier’scorporateinterestofmaintainingtheirmarketpositionandidentifyingnewrevenueoptions.Bothinterestsarereflectedintheapproacheswhichwontheprizes.Theseapproachesfocusedontheenrichmentofarticlesthathoweverremaintheconstitutiveunitinpublishing(Elsevier2011).Additionally,theydemonstrateimplementationsofservicesthatmakeuseofsuchenhancement.SuchanapproachhasbeenrolledoutbyHammondbeforeandisalsoreiteratedbymorerecentcontributionsfromthisenvironment(Aalbersbergetal.2014).
The Open Laboratory BookThescopeoftheElseviercontestdirectlyaddressingresearchersgoestogetherwellwiththeso-calledOpen Laboratory Bookapproach(ClinioandAlbagli2017;Carter-ThomasandRowley-Jolivet2017).OpenLab-oratoryBooks(hereafterreferredtoasOLB),sometimesalsocalledOpen Notebooks,areaninitiativebyresearchersfromthedomainofchemistryandbiologywithastronginvolvementinexperimentation.Theconceptalludestothelaboratorynotebook,inwhichscientistsofcertainfieldstakenotesduringexperimentation.ThemainquestionbehindOLBsiswhatsuchlaboratorybookswouldlooklikeiftheyweretobeimaginedindigitalformfromthebeginning.
The Transformation of the Laboratory Notebook
Twomajoraspectsofthelaboratorynotebookarehighlightedinthedis-cussionofthisconcept(Neylon2009).Oneisthefactthatalaboratorynotebookisatoolusedintheresearchprocess.Itisnotwrittenattheendinareportingfashionbutfordocumentationpurposes,todocument
1 https://www.elsevier.de/
Publishing 3.0 55
theresearchprocessitself.Thesecondaspectfocusesonthefactthatduetothis,alaboratorynotebookholdsrecordsofeachstepandeachexperiment,evenoffailures.Bothoftheseaspectscontrastwithhistoricalpublicationswhichnarrativelyre-organizeresearchprocessesandrefertoexperimentsinasummarizingmanner,onlycherry-picking“’typical’results”(Bradleyetal.2010,260)fittingintothenarrative.Incontrast,theweaknessofthelaboratorybookliesinthefactthatitdoesnotfulfillpublicationneedsandcannotreallystagetheexperiment.Bradley(2007)arguesthatthisisnotnecessaryintimesofthewebandinanenvironmentofcomputeraidedresearch.Theauthoradvocatestheuseofonline-blogsand-wikistowritenotebookspublicly,asareplacementforconventionalpublications.Additionally,hearguesthattheincreasingdigitalnatureofexperimentsandthedatatheyproducefacilitatestheirinclusionintochannelslikethosementionedabove.TheOLBisstillconsideredtobeapublicationinsofar,asitisexplicitlydesignedagainsthistoricalpub-lications.Accordingly,Neylon(2009)seekstomakehistoricalpublicationsobsoleteandtosubstitutethemwithanongoingpublishingactivityforminganinterfacetothelivestreamofresearch.
Aspreviouslymentioned,theissueofauthoringcreatedcertainchallengesforthesuccessofdigitalpublicationsinearlierapproaches.Thecreationofdigitalpublicationswastimeconsuminganddemandedamasteryoftechnicalskills.Byrecommendingblogsandwikis,OLBsexplicitlyrespondstothisgeneralproblem.Thebasicapproachistheideaofstartingwithintheenvironmentimmediatelyaccessibletoresearchersinsteadofwaitingfortoolsandservicestobeimplemented.Accordingly,supportersoftheOLBconceptcriticizethedevelopmentofsuchtoolsbyarguingthattheyareinefficientandnotgenericintermsoffunctionality(Neylon2009,5).Themeaningofgeneric—presentedasacriterionofquality—isimportantinthiscontext.WithinthecritiqueofexistingtoolsinthefieldofOLBs,itmeansbuildingtoolsthatfocusononespecifictaskinsteadofcreatingasoftwareenvironmentcombiningfunctionalitiesinordertotacklemultiplepartsatonce.Inthisrespectitisinlinewithfamoussoftwaredevelopmentprinciplesaskingto“makeeachprogramdoonethingwell”(McIlroy,Pinson,andTague1978,1902).
Furthermore,NeyloncriticizestoolsastoocomplicatedtousewhichhadbeendevelopedinthecloselyrelatedfieldoftheSemanticWeb.Incorrespondencewiththeapproachofblogsandwikis,OLBsthereforerec-ommendstheuseofthird-partytoolslikeGoogle Spreadsheets2 or Google
2 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets
56 Beyond the Flow
Charts3.Althoughthereweresupportersstronglyadvocatingtheuseoftechnicalstandardsandstandardizedvocabulariesinawaycomparabletotheonethatwasindicatedinthelastchapter,OLBsdelegatedsuchissuestootherstakeholdersandtohigher-levelservices(Bradleyetal.2010).Thoseservicestookoverthenecessarytasksofidentifyingdataresourcesintheweb,convertingthemintostandardizedformats,andneutralizingotherdrawbackscausedbyusingproprietarytools.Later,Bourne(2010,2)moreclearlyaddressedtheproblemofresponsibility.Heinsistedthat“Iwantthepublisherofthefuture,orthepublisherincollaborationwithathirdparty,tobetheguardianoftheseworkflows.”ThedrawbackofsuchapproachesisemphasizedbyPoole(2015)inmorerecenttime.Accordingly,hediagnosesthattheOLBsfield“remaininchoate”(106).Thefollowingsectionsshowthatthequestionofhowtasksandeffortsshouldbedistrib-utedacrossstakeholderscausesongoingdebate.
Regardlessofwhocarriesresponsibilityfortheseembeddingprocesses,theyarethekeyaspectthroughwhichOLBsreallybecomepub-licationsbeyondjustonlinedocumentation.Inordertofacilitatethem,Neylon(2009)suggeststheuseoftheRSSfacilitiesofblogs,providingacomputationallyaccessiblewrapperaroundthetextanddatapostsoftheOLB.ThisisreminiscentofHammond’setal.considerationofRSSforthefieldofpublishing.However,inOLBsitisnotthepublicationprovidinganinterfacetorelatedresearchdeliveredbyRSS.TheRSSfeedisactuallythepublicationitself,insofarasitprovidesapublicinterfacetotheresearchprocess.Therefore,twocorecomponentsofthistypeofpublicationareitsongoingandpotentiallyinfiniteextensionsontheonehand,andtheavail-abilityofanonlinereferencetoongoingresearchpublishedinreal-timeontheother.Supposedly,everyresourceusedduringtheresearchprocessispublished.Anystepisaneventwhichalertstheconsumerofthefeed;thenarrativeoftheresearchprocessisthenarrativeofthepublication.
Neylonemphasizesthatespeciallythelastpointisaremarkableadvantageoverhistoricalpublications.OpenLaboratoryBooksattributethesum-marizationaspectofhistoricalpublicationstotheneedsofthepublicationformat,ashasbeenmentionedbefore.Byreferringtotheoften-quotedknowledge pyramid(Ackoff1989),Neylon(2009)arguesthatahistoricalpub-licationrepresentsknowledgeassystematizeddata,whileOLBsexpressesdataitself.Inhispointofviewthissignificantlylimitstheriskofinter-pretativefuzziness,manipulation,andotherproblems.Heassessesthe
3 https://developers.google.com/chart/
Publishing 3.0 57
open-endedcharacterofOLBsinthesameway,correspondingtothefactthatresearchneverreallyhasanending.
Instigating Open Science with Open Laboratory Notebooks
ThedesignofOLBsispartofabroadermovementtowardsawayofdoingscienceinanunrestricted,public,andcollaborativeway.Thismovementstartedasaninitiativedrivenbyresearchersandisstronglylinkedwiththeopenaccessinitiativepreviouslymentioned.AccordingtoSuber(2004),oneofthemostprominentadvocatesofopenaccess,thegoalofopenaccessistomakeresearchliterature“digital,online,freeofcharge,andfreeofmostcopyrightandlicensingrestrictions.”Suchprinciplescanbeeasilyextendedtocovermorethanjustresearchliteratureorotherresearchresults,ashighlightedbyNüstetal.:
Open access is not only a form of publishing such that research papers becomeavailabletothelargepublicfreeofcharge,italsoreferstoatrendinsciencethattheactofdoingresearchbecomesmoreopenandtransparent.(Nüstetal.2016,par.2)
OneofthefirstdriversofthismovementwastheScience Commons4 initiativeofthenon-profitorganizationCreative Commons5.Inordertoextendthescopeofopenaccess,CreativeCommons(2005)focusedonthefollowing three aspects:
1. Theevaluationoflicensingmodelswhichguaranteeaccessibilityforeveryone
2. Formaldescriptionmodelsforthelicensingofresearchresults3. Technological strategies to overcome heterogeneity in the ways
researchresultsarestoredandwhichpreventfromreusingthem
Ashasbeenhighlightedabove,theunderstandingofresearchresultscomprisesnotonlytextpublications,butmoreimportantlyresearchdataandothersupplementaryresources.ThecaseofresearchdataprovokedadebateoverthequestionofwhetherlicensesprovidedforthecreativeindustriesbyCreativeCommonsaresuitedforlicensingresearchdata.ScientificCommonswasdrivenbyinitiativesstemmingfromexperimentalsciences,claimingthatexperimentalresultsarefactsandaccordinglynotproductsofcreativework.Thus,itshouldnotbepossibletolegallytreatthemassucheither.Inconsequence,newactivitiesdevelopingwithintheframeworkofopen datatriedtoevaluatethelegalstateofdata
4 http://sciencecommons.org5 https://creativecommons.org/
58 Beyond the Flow
inthebroaderframeofopenscience.Oneofsuchactivitiesledtotherelease of the Panton Principles for Open Data6in2009.Theseprinciplesgivefourpracticalandlegalrecommendationsforthe“open”publicationofresearchdata.TheprocesswassupportedbytheOpen Knowledge Foundation7,whosedefinitionofopenness(OpenKnowledgeFoundation2015)isexplicitlymentionedintheprinciples.Correspondingly,contentisopenwhenit“canbefreelyused,modified,andsharedbyanyoneforanypurpose”(par.3).
CameronNeylon,anauthorwhoappearedasoneoftheleadingfiguresbehindOLBsinthelastsection,wasamemberofthecoreteamthatdevelopedtheseprinciples.Similarly,membersoftheteambehindthePantonPrinciplesparticipatedintheopenscienceworkinggroupoftheOpenKnowledgeFoundation.ThatiswhyOpenLaboratoryBooksdonotonlyborrowterminologyfromtheopensciencemovement,theyareinfactadrivingfractionofthemovementitself.Accordingly,Lyon(2009,39),inherstudyaboutopensciencereferstoOLBsasaradicalopenscienceapproach.InasimilarwayWhyteandPryor(2011)callOLBsanexceptionalexamplefor“OpenScienceinPractice.”
Ithashoweverbeenindicatedthatopenscienceisnotjustalegalextensiontoopenaccessfordataresources.InasummaryofdefinitionsofopenscienceterminologyFrankGibson(2007)indicatesthataboveallopenscienceisacombinationofotheropenpractices,suchasopenaccesspub-lishing,opensourceprogrammingandopendata.Otherauthorshighlightcertainadditionalaspects.David,denBesten,andSchroeder(2008,2),forinstancementiontheneedforamoredevelopeddigitalinfrastructureandastrongeradoptionofdigitalprinciplesintoscience.ScientificCommonsnotedatthebeginningthattechnologicalheterogeneityinpublishingpreventsopennessfrombeingrealizedevenwhereitislegallypossible.Likewise,Hunter(2006,sec.7)stressesthatdigitalinfrastructureatthetimeof2006“isinadequateforthetask”ofopenscience.Thus,opensciencecallsfortheimplementationofthisinfrastructure,fordoingscienceinaconsistentlydigitalenvironment(CreativeCommons2008;David,denBesten,andSchroeder2008),andforaradicalcommitmenttoopenstandardswhereeverresearchdataisproduced(Gibson2007).
Beyondchangesininfrastructureandstandards,advocatorsofopensciencestressesthevalueofcollaborationinscience(David,denBesten,andSchroeder2008,299–302;Lyon2009,12;DeRoureetal.2009,3).
6 http://pantonprinciples.org/7 https://okfn.org/
Publishing 3.0 59
Opennessisconceivedasasocialcommoditythatcreatesvaluewheneverresearchersinteractwitheachotherasmuchaspossible.Accordingly,Lyon(2009,8)coinstheterm“teamresearch.”BradleyandOwens(2008)takeanevenmoreradicalstand.Theyarguethattheideaofcollaborationinthecontextofopenscienceblurstheboundariesbetweenscientificandnon-scientificdomains,seekingtoputopenresearchinthecontextofcrowdsourcing8.
Thelegal,technological,andsocialchangesnecessaryinordertorealizeopensciencearesignificant.Itisthereforenotsurprisingthatthebenefitsareheavilypromoted.WhyteandPryor(2011,4)trytogroupthosebenefitsproclaimedbyadvocatesofopenscienceintofivecategories:
– Speedandefficiencyoftheresearchcycle – Capabilitiestoidentifynewresearchquestions – Researcheffectivenessandquality – Innovation,knowledgeexchange,andimpact – Researchgroupandcareerdevelopment
Itstandsoutthatallthesebenefitshaveatendencytofocusonnotionsofefficiencyandproductivity.SuchanimpressionissubstantiatedbythefollowinglistofbenefitsextractedfromLyon(2009,16).Itrenderstheabstractvaluesaboveinamoreconcreteform,oftenalludingtoaspectsofeconomy.Inordertoillustratetheuseoflanguage,thewholelistisquotedbelow(emphasisinoriginal)despiteitsverbosity.Itconsistsof:
Increased return on investment of public fundsallocatedtoscienceandresearch,bymakingdataoutputsopenlyavailableforre-use.
Faster dissemination of research outputsincludingmethodologies,data,models,andscientificoutcomes.
Greater academic rigor,robustness,andscholarlyintegrityfromtrans-parentdatapractices.
Higher potential for new discoveriesandnewknowledgearisingfromdatare-usecontributingtogrowthinUKeconomicandintellectualwealth.
8 Crowdsourcingwhichisanartificialtermconstructedbyusingthewordscrowdandoutsourcingreferstoastrategytousetheinternettotheendofacquiringinfor-mationandcontributionsfromthepublicwithinaprojectcontext(seealsoEstellés-ArolasandGonzález-Ladrón-de-Guevara2012).
60 Beyond the Flow
Accelerated ability to predict scientific outcomesandbehaviorsbasedonlarge-scaleopendataanalysis,sharedcomplexmodels,andsimulations.
Efficiency gainsfromopenresearchpracticeleadingtoreducedunnec-essaryrepetitionofresearchactivityandassociatedwastefulfundingallocations.
Enhanced opportunities for student learning from open sharing of exper-imentalmethodsandresultsdata.
Increased human capacity and capabilityfromprofessionals,amateurs,volunteers,andcitizenstoassistincollecting,curating,andpreservingthegrowingscientificrecord.
Enhanced public engagement and understanding of scienceprinciplesandpracticethroughraisedawareness,pro-activeparticipation,anddirectcontributiontoresearch.
Significant wider societal gainsthroughmoreinclusiveandparticipatoryapproacheswhichfacilitatepublicempowermentandownershipofglobalchallenges.(Lyon2009,16)
Bothsurveysarepartofmoregeneralresearchonopenscience.Lyon’sworkrelatestotheviewpointofpolicymakersandfunders.Differentagentgroupsthusemphasizedifferentpossibleadvantages.Similarly,itisworthmentioningthatthenotionofopensciencecirculatesamongdifferentsocialcontexts.Oneresultofthisisaprocesstranslatingacademicargumentsintoahighlymercantileterminology,ascanbeobservedfromLyon’slist.Theobservationofdifferentinterestsconflatinginthetopicofopennesscoincideswiththefactthatlateron,governmentsofcountriessuchasEnglandandtheUnitedStatescaughtuponsomeoftheargumentsoftheopennessmovementbypromotingtheirownopendataprograms.Correspondingly,data.gov9,aninitiativeforopengovernmentaldataintheUnitedStates,waslaunchedin2009.OneyearlaterEnglandfollowedsuitby opening up data.gov.uk10.ThereleaseoftheportalintheUSwaspartofabroaderOpen Government Initiative(TheWhiteHouse2013)launchedbytheObamaadministration.Theseinitiativeswentalongwiththebigdatainitiative,alsobyObamain2012(WeissandZgorski2012),andthemassivesupportofbigdatabytheresearchcouncilsintheUK(ResearchCouncilsUK2015).
9 https://www.data.gov/10 https://data.gov.uk/
Publishing 3.0 61
Beyondeconomy,politicsimplementsethics.Thisisnodifferentinthecaseofopenscience.Atthebeginningofthissectionacertainethosofdoingsciencewasmentioned.EthicalaspectsofopenscienceinapoliticalsensealreadyappearinthelastbulletpointofLyon’slistofbenefits.Infact,theywereacrucialpartofopensciencefromtheverybeginning.Thediscourseonethicsisnotseparablefromthepragmaticandscientificgoalsofopenscience.ThehomepageoftheScientificCommonsinitiativeshowsaquotebyAlanDove,inwhichhedenouncespatentingofpharmaceuticaldis-coveriesbyprivatecompanies.Hence,themessageofthearrangementisthattheideasofopensciencereducesocialinjustice.CribbandHartomoarguemorecommittedlyintheircomprehensiveandprogrammaticworkon open science:
Theneedtosharehumanknowledgehasneverbeenmoreurgent.Astheworldgrappleswiththeacutechallengesofresourcescarcity,climatechange,poverty,illhealth,pollution,rapidurbanizationandfoodinsecurity,ithasneverneededitsscienceandtechnologymore.However,ifanythingistosecurethefutureofcivilizationandhumanwellbeing,itwillnotbesciencealone,buttheknowledgeityieldsbeingsharedandemployedbothwidelyandwisely.Forscienceandtechnologytodeliverfullvaluetosociety,theymustbeaccessibletoasmanypeopleaspossibleandtheirmessagesmustbeeasilyunder-stood.(CribbandHartomo2010,1)
The message is clear: only science that follows open science principles is capableofmaintainingaworldandahumanraceexistingattheedgeofpossiblecatastrophes.Consequently,Goble,DeRoure,andBechhofer(2012,sec.4)frametheissueofopenscienceinaremarkablydecisivewaywhensayingthatitrepresentsthedecisionbetween“thecommongoodvs. self-interest.”
Related Activities
DespitethefactthatOLBsaredeeplyembeddedintoexperimentalsciencesShaw,Buckland,andGolden(2013)triedtotransfersomeoftheideasbehindOLBsintoaprojecttheycallOpen Notebook Humanities.InsteadofemphasizingdatapublicationactivitiestheOpenNotebookHumanitiesstressedtheroleofnotesasaprimaryresearchobjectinhumanitiesdisciplines.Notesareconsideredpiecesofthoughtthatgoalongwithresearchinhumanities,andwhicharethereforenevercom-pleteorfinished.Shawassertsthattheexposureofsuchnotesinanopenenvironmentandinastructuredformaccessibleforcomputationcan
62 Beyond the Flow
supportahumanitiesresearchprocess,ascanthepublicationofanykindofexperimentaldatainscientificdisciplines.
Untilnowtheareaofblogginghasnotbeendiscussedingreaterdetailinthecontextofpublishing.ItissignificantthatBradley(2007)hasputtheOLBinthecontextofblogs.Infact,theysharesomanyfeaturesthatitispossibletoarguethatOLBstrytogeneralizetheblogsinthecontextofscholarlypublishing,open-science,anddata-drivenscience.Thus,thetopicofblogsandbloggingwillnotbediscussedfurtherwithinthisinquiry.AninsightfulanalysisofblogsasanapproachbetweenformalandinformalscholarlypublishingispresentedbyPuschmannandMahrt(2013)andPuschmannandBastos(2015).
AggregationsMoreorlessatthesametimeasthedevelopmentofOLBs,thenotionofpublicationsasaggregations,sometimesalsoreferredtoasScientific Compound Object Publishing(Hunteretal.2008)orCompound Information Objects(LagozeandVandeSompel2007)startedtobecomeprominent.Acrucialbackdropforsuchpublicationconceptsissomeoftheinfrastructuredevelopmentsindicatedattheendofthelastchapter,describedingreaterdetailbelow.Althoughsuchdevelopmentstookplaceearlier,itisbetween2008and2010thattheyledtothecreationofrealpublications.
AggregationsinterpretthedecompositionofpublicationsinaslightlydifferentwaythanMAsorOLBs.Also,thedesignlogicofaggregationsstartsfromtheoppositedirection.Thequestionisnothowtodecomposepre-existingpublicationsintosmallerunitsbuttostressquiteliterallythattheideaofanaggregationinscienceisenoughbyitselfinordertospeakaboutascholarlypublication.AfavorablereasonforthisemphasisisthefactthataggregationsaredevelopedbyagentsinvolvedinactivitiesdifferentfromthoseofOLBsandMAs.Publicationslikethosediscussedinthissectionareassociatedwithcomputerandinformation-scientists,mostlyinvolvedinthefieldofdigitalinfrastructuredevelopment.
ThemainthemebehindsuchpublicationsisbestdescribedbycitingthetitleofVandeSompeletal.(2010):“FromArtefactstoAggregations.”Inordertoentirelydistinguishthisphrasefromideaslikemodularizationortheinclusionofadditionalresourcessuchasdataorvisualizationsintoblogs,itisimportanttostressthataggregationscompletelyabstractfromanyideaofqualitativeconnectivity.Intechnicalterms,thatmeanscon-nectivitygoingbeyondlinkingbetweentworesourcesordefiningwhat
Publishing 3.0 63
canbelinked.WhileMAsdecomposearticlesintosmallerunits,theystillverymuchrefertothearticleasaconceptualframeworkandtoapositivedescriptionofinformation.OpenLaboratoryBooksincluderesourceswhichcouldnotbeintegratedinpapernotebooks,butthisnotebookismuchmorethananaggregation.Resourcesarepackagedwithinasoftwareenvironment,thatbeingtheblog,andtherebyconnectedwithinanarrative,bytime,andbylayoutthroughthedesignofthepublicationenvironment.OpenLaboratoryBooksaredefinedfromaperspectivethatcomesoutoftheresearchprocess,becauseitismostlydevelopedbyresearchers.
Incontrast,aggregationsrepresentacurator’spointofview,whoislessinvestedinthevalueofspecificresourcesandthewaysuchresourcesaffecteachother,thanwiththefactthatinanycasesheneedstotakecareofacertainsetofresourcesthatareinsomewayentangledwitheachother.Lagozeetal.(2012,15)makethisshiftinperspectiveveryclearwhentheyprovidetheexampleofawebpagefromtheJSTOR11 archive that they decomposeintoamodelofresourcesandlinks,aswellasanotherexamplefromastronomy,inordertoshowcasethepossibilityofbuildingapub-licationfromresourcesofanydigitaltypethatcouldbeconnectedinanydefinableway.Assumingthispointofview,theimageoftheaggregationtacklesboththedecompositionofresourcesperceivedasartifactsintoaggregations,andtheaccumulationofartifactsintobiggeraggregations.
ThekeycomponentforpublicationsasaggregationsistheOAI-OREdatamodel,developedtogainmoreinteroperabilityincertaincontextsoftheweb(VandeSompelandLagoze2007;LagozeandVandeSompel2007).Thecapacitytogenerallyaggregatedigitalresourcesrequiresbothaconsistentwayofreferringtoresources,andofdescribingtheresultingaggregation.FlawsinexistingapproacheswithcomparablepurposewerethereasonsleadingtotheimplementationofOAI-ORE(VandeSompeletal.2010,3).ThemostimportantdesigndecisionbehindOAI-OREisbasedontheclaimthatthegoalsofsuchamodelcouldbebestaccomplishedbystickingtothemechanismsofthewebitself(Lagozeetal.2012).OneofthemainmechanismsofthewebistheURI(seesec.onLinkedOpenData).InOAI-OREsuchURIsarenotjustusedasaddressesofwebsites,buttoidentifyanything,evenabstractconcepts.Inthecontextofaggregations,URIidentify:(a)thecompletedescriptionofaggregationsinametadata-likewebdocument,(b)thetermsthatareusedtodescribetherelation-shipsbetweenresourcesand(c),theresourcesthatarelinkedtogether
11 https://www.jstor.org/
64 Beyond the Flow
themselves.Thisapproachhastwoconsequences.First,anythingthathasaURIisaresourceitself,whichmayserveasaresourceinotherresourcesthatdefineaggregations.Second,inconsequencetothewebapproachanaggregationdoesnotexistinanyotherwaythanasametadatadescriptioncalledresourcemap.Theresourcesremainsomewhereinthewebandareonlyreferencedinthesamewayaswebsites.Thus,aggregationsformpub-lications,thepartsofwhicharedistributedallovertheweb.
Collections
Theepitomeofascholarlyaggregation,especiallyinthecaseofthehumanities,canbeseenincollections.Thegatheringofmaterialforacollectionandtheselectionofitemsinthecontextofaspecificresearchtopicisanimportantcuratorialprocesssupposedtocontainalotofintellectualworkalready(Palmeretal.2009,11–13).Additionally,collectionsofacertaintypehavealwaysbeenpresented,forinstanceinlibrariesorarchives.Thus,itdoesnotsurprisethatcreatingcollectionsasaformofacademicpublishingbecameincreasinglyattractiveatthesametimeasOAI-OREcreatedbetterconditionstodoso.Abargues,Granell,andHuerta(2010,1)accordinglyputthepublicationofcollectionsintothecontextofanewparadigmofpublishing.
Publications as aggregations are collections if there are no further specificationsdescribingthetypeofrelationshipoftheaggregatedresources.Inotherwords,thedominantaspectlinkingtheresourcesinacollectionisthethemeofthecollectionitself.
AveryearlyapproachtightlyconnectedtothedevelopmentofOAI-OREitselfisoreChem(Lagoze2009).oreChempublishescollectionsofresourcesfrommolecularchemistry.Theresourcesarehostedindifferentrepositories.Abargues,Granell,andHuerta(2010)presentedthesameapproach,butforgeo-referencedplacesinsteadofmolecules.Anotherapproachfromthehumanities,especiallyscholarsfromtheliteraturedomain,ispresentedbyHunterandGerber(GerberandHunter2008;HunterandGerber2009;GerberandHunter2010;HunterandGerber2011).The Literature Object Reuse and Exchange(alsoreferredtoasLORE)projectenablestheformationandpublicationofcollectionsontopofAustralianrepositoryinfrastructureshostingresourcescriticalforphilologyandliteraturestudies.LOREprovidesasophisticatedauthoringcomponentimplementedasabrowserplugin,anideawhichresemblesthatofdistrib-utedresourcesandnetworkedresearch.
Publishing 3.0 65
Themainreasonforthepublicationofcollectionssharedbyallauthorsintheaforementionedexampleisthereductionoftechnologicalandsemanticheterogeneitybetweenpublishedresourceswithininacertaindomain.Themotivationbehindreducingheterogeneityisthecreationofbetterconditionsforinformationretrieval.TheexampleoforeChemandchemSpider12makesthisveryclear,asitwasalsoinitiatedasacomplementtoapproachessuchasOLBs(Clark,Williams,andEkins2015),whichhaveexcludedtheseproblemsinordertobeabletocreatepublicationstotheirliking(BradleyandOwens2008).
Workflow PublicationsScientific Publication Packages
Asmentionedabove,collectionsgatherresourcespertainingtoacertaintopic.Thewayinwhichtheseresourceslinktoeachotherisnotnecessarilyacrucialissue.Thisdistinguishesthemfromotherapproacheswhichdecisivelytrytoanswerthequestionhowresourcesarelinkedwithinthescholarlydomainingeneral.Inanattempttodefinetheappropriatepointoforientationforthemodellingofcollectionsinscience,anewtypeofpub-licationsemerged.ThispublicationconceptmakesuseoftheOAI-ORE
facilitiesandanonlinedata-publicationapproachcalledlinked open data (seenextsection),butaddsorganizingprinciplestothewayresourcesaregatheredwithintheOAI-OREaggregation.
ThekeyideaofcorrespondingformatslikeScientific Publication Packages (hereafterreferredtoasSPP)orResearch Objects(hereafterreferredtoasRO)istheclaimthatthemostsignificantthemeforthedesignofpub-licationsinscienceshouldbeaso-calledworkflow.Theconceptofwork-flowisderivedfromtheclaimthatscienceisorganizedinlifecycles(VandeSompeletal.2010).Inmoreconcreteterms,advocatesofcorrespondingpublicationsarguethatscienceanditsdynamicofinnovationisorganizedintothreephases:(a)theproductionofknowledgethatistheresearchprocessitself,(b)thecreationofpublications,i.e. thecommunicationofknowledge,and(c)theuseoftherepresentedknowledgebyresearcherswhothereforeneedtointeractwithpublications.Thissetupisconceivedofas“remarkablystable”(VandeSompeletal.2010,567)despitehistoricalchangesofthescientificfield.
12 http://www.chemspider.com/
66 Beyond the Flow
Thewaythislifecycleisdescribedpresentspublicationsprimarilyasanecessarymediatorbetweenthefirstandthethirdphase.Followingthisdescription,itispossibletoarguethatagoodmediatorbringsthetwoendsofthemediationprocesstogetherascloselyaspossible.Withthisargumentinmind,workflow-orientedpublicationsarguethatthewholeresearchprocessneedstobepublishedinsteadofjustasummary.Withintheresearchprocess,knowledgeisproducedandthusonlytheresearchprocesscangivetestimonyabouttheadequacyofscientificknowledge.Workflowsareintroducedasaformalmodelfortherepresentationofresearchprocesses,whichmakeitpossibletoturnresearchprocessesintoobjects.Theydescribea“seriesofstructuredactivitiesandcomputationsthatariseinscientificproblem-solving”(Bechhoferetal.2012,sec.1),whichinturn“supportreproducibilityandreuseinsciences”(DeRoureetal.2012).Thus,workflowpublicationstrytoletreadersbeobserversoftheresearchprocessitself.
Aworkflowpublicationmayembedallresourcesofaparticularresearchprocess,likeprimarydata,processedresources,software,text,andmediaamongotherthings.However,collectingsuchresourcesisnotenoughtoreallygainreproducibility(Yuanetal.2018).Workflowpublications,thus,attachdescriptivemetadatatoeachresource,representingtheirtemporalpositionandrolewithintheresearchprocess,itselfdefinedasagoalorientedconsecutiveprocess(Hunter2006,sec.1;Hunter2008,36).
ScientificPublicationPackageswerethefirstexampleofworkflowpub-lications.TheywerefirstpresentedasScientific Model Packages by Hunter (2006)in2006.Thetermmodelexplicitlyemphasizestheparamountthemeofthescientificworkflow.TheworkwaspartoftheFUSION13projectattheUniversity of Queenslandwhichevaluatedtheimpactofgridtechnologies14 incomputer-drivenresearchinthefieldsofbioengineeringandnano-technology.TheScientificPublicationPackagestwoyearslater(Hunter2008)wereaslightlymodifiedversion.TheapproachmakesuseofacomparableattemptbyColeman(2002),albeitbenefitingfromtheafore-mentionedtechnologicalenvironmentsandthecontextofinfrastructuredevelopment.
ItisobviousthatSPPsandOLBssharethesamefocusontheresearchprocessintermsofitsprocessuality.However,evenwiththatcommon
13 http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/eresearch/projects/fusion14 Incomputation,agridisanetworkoflinkedcomputersthatcouldbeusedtogether
inordertocarryoutonespecifictask.Itenablestouseresourcesfromallthecomputersinthegridwhichfacilitatescomputationsthatveryexpensive(seealsoMagoulesetal.2009).
Publishing 3.0 67
ground,SPPmakeaverydifferentchoiceregardingtheconsequencesofthispriority.Mostnotably,SPPsconfirmtheclosednatureofresearchprocesses,wherebyOLBsemphasizethatthoseendingsareartificiallysetupandthatresearchneverreallycomestoanend.ScientificPublicationPackagesareinconsequenceauthoredallatonce,whileOLBsemergeinadynamicandfluentway.Theideaofdefinedresearchprocessesthathaveastartingpointandanendpointdemandsmoredecisionsexplicitlyinthedesignprocessofthepublicationformatassuch.InthecaseofSPPs,thisleadstoamuchhigherdegreeofformalityintheSPPmodelcomparedtoOLBs.Forinstance,SPPsusetheso-calledABC(LagozeandHunter2006)modelinordertodefineformaltermsandentitiesthatbuildtheworkflowdescription(Hunter2008,38).Havingsaidthis,SPPsaremoreconcernedwiththenotionofpublicationsasobjectswhileOLBsareintentonpub-lishingasanactivity.
TheaforementioneddifferenceunderlyingthetwoformatsisdiscussedexplicitlyinthecontextofSPPs.Fromamethodologicalpointofview,Hunterhighlightsthedistinctionbetweenworkflowandlineage(Hunter2006,sec.3.1).Theworkflowdescribesstepstobecarriedoutinordertoreachagoal,beforesuchstepsareactuallytaken.Aworkflowislikeaworkschedule.Lineagedescribeswhatreallyhappenedaftertheworkflowhasbeenapplied.Tothisend,lineagemakesuseofinformationgatheredwithintheprocess,especiallyincomputer-drivensciencewhereitisliterallyrecordedandcalledprovenance.However,Hunteralsoemphasizesthatdataconversion,acquisition,andinferenceneedtobeappliedinordertogetaninformativepictureoflineage.Itisthenpossibletoalsocategoricallydistinguishbetweenprovenanceandlineage.Fromtheviewpointofthisdiscussion,OLBsfavortheprovenanceperspective.ProvenanceinOLBsisnonethelessmostlytoldratherthanrecorded.
ScientificPublicationPackagesweredevelopedmainlybycomputerscientistsandinfrastructureprojects,asnotedabove.Thissituationofferedmorepossibilitiesforamoresophisticatedpublicationformat,butmoreimportantlyitincludedthedevelopmentofsoftwarefacilitatingthecreationofandinteractionwithsuchpublications.AnexampleofthisistheSCOPE virtual research environment15 (Hunteretal.2008).InSCOPE,scientistshavetheabilitytoinvestigateandvisualizeworkflows,toautomaticallyinfernewworkflowsfromexistingworkflows,andtolinkwebresources
15 Avirtualresearchenvironmentisadesignconceptforthecreationofsoftwarethatseekstosupportresearchinspecificdomainsacrossdifferentstepsintheresearchprocessandincompletingdifferenttaskswithinoneconsistentproduct(seealsoJISC2013;Candela,Castelli,andPagano2013).
68 Beyond the Flow
withtheworkflow.Forthepurposeofpublishing,itoffersthepossibilitytoattachlicensesinamachine-readablewayandtodefinerulesthatrestrictaccess.
Research Objects
TheconceptofROsisaderivateoftheprojectmyExperiment16(DeRoureetal.2009;DeRoure,Bechhofer,andGoble2011).ThegoalofthisprojectwastocreateaninfrastructurearoundtheideaofsharingworkflowsasaprimaryresearchoutputcomparabletoSPPs.ThemyExperimentprojectcreatedaweb-portalaroundthenotionofROsinwhichscientistsareabletoretrieve,review,repeat,reuse,andre-purposepreviouslypublishedworkflows.Thisportalprovideddatafortheanalysisofuserbehavior(DeRoureetal.2009,sec.3;Bechhofer,DeRoure,etal.2010,sec.4),whereoneoftheoutcomeswastheinsightthatworkflowsalonearenotconsideredsufficientbyscientistswhowanttouseotherresearchers’workflows(DeRoure2014b).
MyExperimentdevelopedthepossibilityofcreatingapack in which test data,presentations,articles,andother“supplemental”materialwereputtogetherwiththeworkflowintoadownloadablezip(seebelow)file(DeRoure,Bechhofer,andGoble2011).ResearchObjectsaremoreelab-orateversionsofpackswhichrefertoopentechnologies(seebelow)andstandards.TheymakeuseoftheOAI-OREdatamodelandofasetofrelatedbestpracticesknownaslinkedopendata.However,theyalsoaddresssituationswheresuchbestpracticesdonotsuffice(Bechhofer,Ainsworth,etal.2010;Bechhofer,DeRoure,etal.2010).
ForthepurposeofadvancingROsasapublicationconcept,aninternationalinfrastructureprojectwithseveralpartners,fundedbytheEuropeanUnion,waslaunchedin2010.Theproject,whichlasteduntil2013,wascalledworkflow4ever(Gómez-Pérez2013).Attheendoftheproject,relatedactivitiesmovedintoaW3C17communitygroup(W3CResearchObjectforScholarlyCommunicationCommunityGroup2013)aswellasintoalooselyorganizedconsortium(Goble2015).Amongotherthings,suchinitiativesprovidedasetofformalsemanticsforthedescriptionofROs(Bechhoferetal.2014)aswellaslow-leveltoolsfortheircreationandmanagement(DeRoureetal.2012).ThesocialdimensionsofROsasapublicationformatwereevaluatedfurther.Thisledtoaschematicillustrationofthelifecycle
16 https://www.myexperiment.org/home17 W3CistheacronymoftheWorld Wide Web Consortiumwhichorganizesthestand-
ardizationoftechnologiesrelatedtotheworldwideweb(seehttps://www.w3.org/
Publishing 3.0 69
ofpublishedworkflows(Bechhoferetal.2012)andtoawayofautomaticallymodellingaccessrightsaswellaspersonalrelevanceofROs(GambleandGoble2010).
ResearchObjectsaremainlyusedinthedomainsofbiologyandchemistry(DeRoure,Belhajjame,etal.2011,3).However,therearesomeexamplesfromthefieldsofmusicology,(DeRoure,Page,etal.2011;DeRoure2011;DeRoure2014a;McGarryetal.2017),facilitiesscience(Matthewsetal.2013),andcomputerscience(Cricketal.2014)aswell.
TheoverviewofROsaboveshowsclearlythatmoreeffortwasputintothembymorepartnersoveralongertimeperiod.Clearly,ROscouldbedescribedasamoreelaborateandexplicitlydesignedversionofSPPs.InhisshortcomparisonwithSPPs,Bechhoferetal.(2014,5)breakdowntheconceptualdifferencebetweenSPPsandROsintotwopoints:(a)linksbetweentheresourcesoftheworkflowexistsasaresourceonitsownandindependentlyfromanyfinalformatsuchasthezipfileinmyExperiment;(b)emphasizestheuseofopenstandards,assuringthehighestdegreeofinteroperabilityforthedescriptionofthelogicalstructureofRO.BothpointsdirectlyrefertotheLODapproachwithoutmentioningthisexplicitlyasthepointofcomparison.
TheImpactofLinkedOpenData
Theterm“linkedopendata”wasfirstusedbyBerners-Lee(2009).Itdoesnotsomuchintroduceanewpieceoftechnology,itisratherarequesttomakeuseofexistingtechnologiesinordertobuildawebofmachine-readabledatasidebysidetothewebofHTML18documentswhichprimarilysuitstheneedsofhumans.Thus,itisaparadigmforthepublicationofdata(HeathandBizer2011,sec. Abstract)inaformthatcorrespondswithwebprinciples(Bizer,Cyganiak,andHeath2007).Themechanismsthatareusedarethesameasthoseusedtolinkwebsites.AdatasourceA,forinstance,assertsthatasymphonyiswrittenbyShostakovich.However,ShostakovichisnotjustwrittendowninplaintextbutrepresentedbyanURI19 which
18 HTMLisanacronymforHypertextMarkupLanguagewhichisasetofformalsemanticsusedtostructurethecontentofwebsites.
19 AnURIisamoregeneralformofanURLwhichisusedtodefinelinksbetweenwebsites.Notonlyentitiesareexpressedaslinksbutalsothelinksthemselves.ModularArticlesintroducedthenotionofmeaningfullinksaslinksthatspecifyinwhichwaythetworesourcesthatarelinkedtogetherrelatetoeachother.Inthesentence“ShostakovichcomposedtheLeningradSymphony”thepredicate“composed”linkstogetherthesubjectandtheobject.ItisatermwhichintheLODworldispartofaformalvocabulary,interpretablebycomputers.Itisrepresented
70 Beyond the Flow
linksdirectlytoadatasourceBthatcontainsbiographicaldataaboutDimitriShostakovich.Thisdatamayhavetheformofvaluessuchasdatesandstrings,butmayalsoconsistofanURIpointingtootherdatasources.Anotherassertionaboutarecordingofthissymphony,forexample,candirectlylinktoadatasourceC.
Inaworkflow,apieceofsoftwarehasalinktoadataresourceonwhichitisapplied.Onceagain,itisnotjustalinkbutalinkwithmeaning.Inthecaseofworkflowpublications,thismeaningcouldsaydatasetXwasgeneratedbysoftwareY.ThepredicatewasGeneratedBy is part of the W3C-PROV20 ontology,referencedbythefactthatthetermisrepresentedbyaURI.Thefactthatthelinkbetweenthepieceofsoftwareandthedatasourceismodelledasalinkitself,pointingtotheontology,assuresthattheformalmeaningofthistermcanbeevaluatedbyhumansorcomputerswithinthesametechnologicalframeworkinwhichtheworkflowismodelled.
ItisnotthecasethatSPPsdonotprovideproperstandardizedsemantics.TheyuseandextendtheABCmodelinordertomodelworkflows.Themaindifferenceisthewaythesesemanticsareserializedunderthesamecon-ditionsasthedatabyfollowingLODguidelines.ThisiswhatBechhoferetal.meantwiththeseconddistinctionbetweenSPPsandROs.
ResearchObjectswereintroducedslightlylaterthanSPPs.Thetimespanissignificant,however,becauseintheinterimthewebofdatahadgrown1700percent(Cyganiak2015).ResearchObjectswerethereforecapableofmakingfulluseofLOD.TheextenttowhichthisaspectiscrucialforthesuccessofaggregationsingeneralandROsinparticularcanonlybefullyappreciatedwhentakingintoaccounttheextenttowhichLODandOAI-OREimplementtheoreticalideasthathadbeenaroundindigitalpublishingforsometimeinaverypragmaticalway.
WhilethetechniquesbehindLODenableonlinedatapublishing,LODbeingjustatermtorefertotheworld-widedata-web,OAI-OREprovidesthe mechanisms to formally refer to a subset of these resources in ordertocreateaggregationssuchasworkflowpublications(Bechhofer,Ainsworth,etal.2010).ItenablesdescriptionsofaggregationsofLODresources.Accordingly,itsetsboundariesforagroupofresourcesthat
asaURIwhichitselflinkstothevocabularythatitispartof.Thus,thereisalinkbetweenShostakovichandtheLeningraderwhichisrealizedbythemeaningfullinkthatisthepredicateofthesentence,butinthesamestructurethreemorelinksrefertootherdatasourceswhichholddataaboutShostakovich,thesymphonyandtheactofcomposing.
20 https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-overview/
Publishing 3.0 71
belongtogetherinthecontextofanaggregation.Consequently,DeRoure,Bechhofer,andGoble(2011,4),Bechhofer,Ainsworth,etal.(2010,13),andBechhofer,Ainsworth,etal.(2010,1322)callROs“boundaryobjects.”Theonlythingwhichmakeresourcesapartofanaggregationisalink,andtheverysameresourcecanbepartofmanyotheraggregations.Suchlinkscanbegatheredinawebdocumentorstoredinadatabasewhichisacces-sibleontheweb.Theimportantaspectisthefactthattheaggregationisnomorethanaformaldescriptionof(data)resourcesontheweb.ItisnowclearwhytheLODmovementandtheOAI-OREmodelfundamentallybelongtogetherinthecontextofaggregations,andwhyROsbecameamoresuccessfulversionofworkflowpublicationsthanSPPs.
FromWorkflowstoPackstoResearchObjects
Ashasbeenpreviouslymentioned,thedesignofROswasaprocessstartingwiththedevelopmentofaninfrastructureinordertoshareworkflows.Similarly,toHunter,Bechhoferetal.(2012,sec.3)distinguishbetweenthreeworkflowlayers:thefirstdescribestheabstractideaofwhataworkflowis,theseconddefinestemplatesforworkflowsbeforetheyareapplied,thethirdlayercontainsthedatathatisrecordedinordertodocumenttheappliedworkflow.ThemainconcernatthebeginningofmyExperimentwasthesecondlayeraswellasthecreationofasocialspacearoundworkflows(DeRoure,Bechhofer,andGoble2011,sec.III).Thisspacefollowstheideathatbysharingone’sworkflowsotherscouldreusethemorputtogetherpartsofdifferentworkflowsintonewones.Inthebestcasesuchworkflowscanbeexecutedautomaticallyandtherebyenablescientiststoeasilytestworkflowsand“acceleratediscovery”(Goble,DeRoure,andBechhofer2012,sec2.2).
DeRoure,Bechhofer,andGoble(2011,3)mentionhowthepossibilitytoreuseotherpeople’sworkflowscreatedademandtohaveaccesstoresourcesthatareassociatedwiththeworkflowinabroaderperspective.Thisdoesnotonlymeandata.Itincludesarticles,presentations,andothersupplementalresourcesbundledintoaso-calledpack.Atitscoreapackisalistoflinkstotheseresourcesandtheworkflowdata,whichitselfremainsthekeycomponent(DeRoureetal.2013,304).Sometimes,apackispackagedwithitssupplementalresourcesintoaZIP21file(Roosetal.2010,
21 ZIPisafileandcontainerformatwhichenablestobundlemultiplefilesintoonefile.SinceZIPusesacompressionalgorithmtheresultingfileismostoftensmallerinsizethantheoriginalfilesaltogether.
72 Beyond the Flow
14).InthisscenarioitobviouslyrelinquishestheconceptualandtheoreticalapproachofLODandaggregations.
Bechhofer,DeRoure,etal.(2010,sec.4)distinguishbetweensevendifferenttypesofpacks.Packsforthepurposeofpublishingareonlyonepossiblescenario.Thus,ROsareaconceptbuildingonbasicpacks,forthespecifictasksofpublishing.TherelationbetweenpacksandROsisdescribedinaconciseformbyDeRoure,mentioningthatpacksare“prototypicalexamplesofResearchObjects”DeRoure(2010,3).
Bechhofer,DeRoure,etal.(2010,4)highlightseveraltaskscrucialfortheconversionofpackstoROs.Themostimportantissueisthedefinitionofaconsistentwaytoaddmetadata.Fourkindsofmetadataarementionedinthisrespect:(a)metadataregardingthelifecycleofROs,versioninfor-mationaboutROs,ownershipsandaccessrightsmetadata,andfinallymetadataabouttherelationshipbetweenROsasawholeanditparts.Bechhoferetal.(2014)outlinethesemanticswhichweredefinedintheworkflow4everprojectmentionedatthebeginningofsectiononROs.22Arepository with the name of ROHubhasbeensetupprovidingbasicaccesstoROsmeantforpublication.Inordertosupportthepublicationprocess,asmallpieceofsoftware,usablefromwithinaterminal23,wasprogrammed.
ThepathfrommyExperimenttoResearchObjectsisapathinwhichcertainobjects(workflows)inawell-definedenvironmentaredevelopedfurthertobecomepublications.InasimilarwayitgivestestimonyabouttheimpactofLODandOAI-OREonthediscourseaboutdigitalpublications.
TheE-ScienceNarrative
AcuriouscharacteristicofROsistheemphasistheyputonexper-imentationandresearchcultures,includingexperimentation,asacrucialaspect.ExperimentsarenotonlythenameoftheoriginalprojectofRO,theyarealsoveryclosetotheconceptofworkflows.Inprinciple,awork-flowfollowsthesamepatternasexperimentsdo.Anexperimenthastobesetup,itfollowsalineartemporallogicwhenit“runs,”andtheincidentsthathappenduringruntimearedocumentedtogetherwiththeresultsforfurtherinterpretation.Thesimilaritiesbetweentheexperimentalmodelofdoingscienceandthethemeofworkflowsisthereasonwhyworkflows
22 Machine-readableversionsofthesesemanticscanbefoundatGoble(2015sec. SpecsandTooling)
23 Aterminalisaninterfaceforthecontrolofcomputerswhichhasnographicalcomponentslikewindowsorbuttons.Itworksbywritingcommandswhichareconsecutivelyevaluated.
Publishing 3.0 73
arethecoremodelbehindROs.Inthecaseofcomputationalworkflows,researchprocessesaredescribedinthreesteps:(a)dataandalgorithmareselected,(b)thealgorithmsareappliedtothedata,and(c)theresultisviewed,interpreted,andpublished(2011,sec.3).Thestepsofanexper-imentandacomputationalworkflowareidentical.Evenmoreimportantthanthestepsthemselvesisthefactthatworkflowandexperimentsharethesametemporal-linearlogicinwhicheachstephasitstime.Thestrikingdetailaboutthedescriptionofthethreestepsofcomputationalwork-flowsisthatitwasderivedfromanarticleaboutresearchinmusicology,ormoreprecisely“computationalmusicology.”Hence,itdescribesaresearchprocessinthecontextofafieldwhichhistoricallyhasfewconnectionswithexperimentingsciences.Thus,ROstrytobringthenotionofexperimentsfarbeyondexperimentingsciences:
…weshouldsay“research”ratherthanscience,becausetheWebisagnosticaboutresearchdiscipline:itisasmuchahomefordigitalartsanddigitalhumanitiesasdigitalscienceandengineering.(DeRoure2010,90)
Suchageneralizationreferstoamuchbroaderdiscourseonthestateofresearch.ResearchObjectswerenotjustdevelopedbycomputerscientists,butbycomputerscientistswhobelongedtoapeculiarfieldofactivitycallede-Science.DeRouredefinese-Scienceas:
…characterizedbyglobalreuseoftools,dataandmethodsacrossanydiscipline….Researchissignificantlydatadrivenandweseeincreasingautomationanddecision-supportfortheresearcherastheenviron-ment.(DeRoure2011,10)
Thegeneralizationfromonespecificpracticedoingresearchtoaglobalmodelforresearchassuchisframedbyapoliticalandepistemologicaldiscourse,thekeyfeaturesofwhichwillbeoutlinedinthefollowingpara-graphs.ThesectionaboutOLBshasalreadyintroducedapeculiardis-courseframecalledopenscience.Indeed,openscienceande-Sciencearestronglylinkedtoeachother.Ontheonehand,ROswouldnotworkwellwithout an open web environment of accessible resources from which theyarise.Ontheotherhand,openscienceadvocatesagreethatthemostscientificbenefitofopensciencewillarisefromcomputationalprocessing.Theopensciencediscourseismorepoliticallyandethicallyloadedthane-Science,whichismoreconcernedwithmethodology.Duetothis,bothcomplementeachother.Thus,forDeRoure(2011,8)openscienceisjustthefinalstepintherealizationofe-Science.
74 Beyond the Flow
Theterminologyof“afinalstep”andits“realization”impliesahistoricalargumentaboutthedevelopmentofscience,societyandtechnology.E-Sciencenotonlymakesreferencestosuchasocio-historicalframe,itdecisivelyperceivesitselfasthemaindriverforapeculiarvisionofsocio-historicalprogress.Correspondingly,twoviewpointsemergewhenanalyzingthee-Sciencediscourse.Onecharacterizesitskeyfeatures,theotheranalysesthepastandthefutureitdescribes.
The omnipresence of arguments of progress in research literature about ROsande-Scienceingeneralisstriking.In“TheFutureofScholarlyCom-munication”DeRoure(2014b)writesaboutathoughtexperimentthatlooksbackonpublishingtodayanddescribeswhyithastodisappearinitscurrentform.Themainargumentispresentedintermsofalinearvectorwithinadiagramthatillustrateshowsocietyandsciencebecomecontinuouslymorecollaborativeandautomated.Inbetween,the“digitalresearchecosystem”willdevelopin“threegenerations”whichDeRoureoutlineslikethis:
…theearlyadoptersofnewtools,followedbyaphaseofembeddingandre-useandthen,buildinguponthisnewsociotechnicalplatform,aworldofopenscienceandradicalsharing.(DeRoure2011,1)
The fact that he refers to the article as an obsolete heritage of the historical publishingsystem(DeRoure2011,12),aswellastheclaimthatdisciplinesareatdifferentstagesoftheir“computationalturn”(DeRoure2011,12),clearlyshowthate-Scienceisnotmeanttobeonefieldofresearchamongothers.Instead,itisjustaseparateconceptforaslongasthereisaneedtomarktheavant-garde,whichintimewillbecomenormality.Similarly,thisviewpointisnotonlypresentedinthesciences,therearealsothee-Hu-manitiesaswell.
Beforeitispossibletogointothedetailsofthehistoricalprocessasillus-tratedbythee-Scienceagenda,certaincharacteristicsofthisagendaneedexplanation.Obviously,thecenterofe-Scienceisitsfocusoncomputationasthedominantmodeofscholarlyengagement.Inthissensetheriseofe-Sciencecorrespondswiththeterm“computationalturn”usedbyDeRourebefore.Thequestionwhatcomputationmeanscanbeansweredbyreferringtotheself-descriptionsofe-Science.DeRourestatesthat:
Thiscanbecharacterizedasthe“BigScience”viewofe-Science:scientistsworkingwithheroiccomputationalpowerandvolumesofdata,targetingbreakthroughsinthemodellingofeverythingfrom
Publishing 3.0 75
stormsandearthquakestoflybrainsandnanoscaletransistors.(DeRoure2010,1)
Thisquoteimplicitlycontainsmanyoftheimportantqualitiesofe-Science,butinaformthatcommunicateswellthemissionitrepresents.Keyissuesareaddressedbypower,volume,data,modelling,andthepluralformofthewordscientist.Thispluralreferstocollaborationasakeyelementofe-Science.DeRourepresentsanotherdescriptionofe-Sciencein“Machines,MethodsandMusic”(DeRoure2011,12).Thisdescriptionremainsabitfuzzyaswell.Itcanbereducedtothefollowingsixterms,termsthatwillbeusedinthepresentstudytocharacterizethee-Scienceapproach.Besidecollaboration,e-Sciencebuildsonthethemesofautomation,data,acceleration,connectivity,andpreservation.
Thegoalofautomationislinkedtoatopicwhichhasbeendenotedasaserialcrisisorinformationoverloadintheprevioussections.Ine-Sciencethisissueturnsintoasituationinwhichadvocatesproclaimthatthe“volumesofdata”cannotbeprocessedbyhumanminds.Thissituationdemandsautomationinordertopreventthedata deluge:
Thedatadelugeiscausedby,andneedstobehandledby,innovationinautomationandbythenewscaleofparticipationofscientistsinthedigitalworld.”(DeRoure2011,1)
However,ine-Scienceautomationdoesnotstopatautomatingtaskswithinresearchprocesses,whichcouldhardlybehandledotherwise.Automationbecomesanethos,andasanethose-Sciencetriestosignificantlyextentthescopewhereautomationisapplied.Automationine-Scienceaimsatautomationofresearchitself.Correspondingly,Neylon(2009,sec. Introduction)usestheterm“automatedexperimentation.”
ResearchObjectsarepublicationsdesignedtofacilitatethisverygoalandnotjustforreasonsoftransparencyandopenness.Theideaofworkflowsitselflinkscloselytotheethosofautomation,foritprovidesaviewpointonresearchthatisformalizable.Theredesignofpublicationsinthisfieldisstronglymotivatedbythegoalofpreparingpublicationsforthesakeofautomation(DeRoure2010,92–93)andtofacilitateautomatedprocessingofitscontents(Shotton2009).Itimpliesthatautomationisalwaysuseful,whereveritispossible.Thedatadelugeisoneofthekeyargumentsbehindthisclaim.
Thenextsteptoautomatedscienceafterautomatedexperimentationisautomatedknowledgediscovery(Pan2010).Inautomatedknowledgedis-covery,taskssuchasdataselection,aggregation,andmethodselection
76 Beyond the Flow
amongothersareautomatedwithinaself-learningcomputationseekingtoadequatelysolvedefinedproblems.Inanotherstep,scientificrobotsor“bots”(Kuhn2015)operateself-responsibly(Sofronijević2012),therebybecomingagentsoftheirown.These“socialmachines”(DeRoure2014a,237)arethefinalstageonthewaytowardsfullyautomatedscience.
Onceagainthoughtsofthefutureofpublishingaretightlycoupledwithadiscoursethatusestheargumentofscarceresourcesinordertomakea certain vision more convincing: “we can anticipate an increasingly automatedfuture—wewillrunoutofhumansandyetthetechnologyaxisgoeson”(DeRoure2014b,234).
Thetopicsofautomationanddatadelugealsoleadtoanotherissue:acceleration.BradleyandOwens(2008,2),likemostauthorsinthisresearchfield,emphasizethattheofgoalautomationistheaccelerationofthescientificprogress.NamesofrelatedsoftwaresuchasChemSpeed Technologies AG, Accelerator SLT100 Synthesizer(BradleyandOwens2008,4)giveampleevidenceofthisideal.
Therearefewexamplesinwhichtheidealofaccelerationisdiscussedexplicitly.Cribbexpressedoneofthereasonsimplicitlyinthephrasequotedinthesectiononopenscienceandtheopenlaboratorybook.Thenumberofurgentproblemsintheworldforcessciencetofindquickerwaysofdealingwiththeproblemsoutlinedbytheauthor.Ine-Science,accel-erationisunderstoodasareductionofthe“time-to-discovery”(DeRoure2013,1)in“scientist’sknowledgeturns”(Goble,DeRoure,andBechhofer2012).Aknowledge-turnisconceivedasthetimeneededforresultsofoneresearchprocesstobeprocessedintothenewresultsofsubsequentresearchprocesses.Marcondes(2005,119)callsthisshifttheembodimentofresearchresultswithinthescientificknowledgebase.
Anotherpointofreferenceine-Scienceregardstheconditionsnecessaryfore-Sciencetobecomethemainmodeofdoingresearch.Inotherwords,everythingthatisofvaluewithinane-Scienceresearchprocesshastobeavailableindigitalform,oratleasttobeeasilydigitizable.Acomputationalworkflowisnotcapableoftakingthingsintoaccountthathavenodigitalrepresentation.Thereisnomethodologicalconceptforhowtodealwithnon-digitalthingswithine-Researchanditspublications.Digitalrep-resentationisconceivedasthemostoutstandingaswellasdominantmodeofrepresentation.Thus,alreadyin2010Bourne(2010,1)stressesthat“computationhasimpactedsciencetothepointwhereeveryaspectofitistouchedbycomputation.”
Publishing 3.0 77
Afurtherrestrictionregardingrepresentationisthefactthatinmostcasesdigitalrepresentationreferstoanabstractnotionofdata.Executable Music Documents(DeRoure2014a)arethusnotpublicationsmeanttobelistenedto.Theycontainmusicdatainaformthatsuitsthealgorithmswithwhichthisdataispackaged.Theconcentrationondataasaformofappearanceandnotjustasameansofrepresentationledtoe-Scienceoftenbeingcalleddata-driven science(Hey,Tansley,andTolle2009;DeRoure2014b,234).
Complementarytothediscourseinopenscienceanditsethosofcollab-oration,e-Science,andhereespeciallytheresearchfieldofROs,developsthenotionof“socialinfrastructure”(DeRoureetal.2009,3).Drivenbytheclaimthat“themajorityofscientificadvancesinthepublicdomainresultfromcollectiveefforts”(Goble,DeRoure,andBechhofer2012,21)thisinfra-structureisaprimaryconcernincorrespondingdiscussions.DeRoure,Bechhofer,andGoble(2011,1)clearlyreferencesthiswhenheusestheterm“Science2.0.”Asthedevelopmentoftheweb2.0causedanewtypeofengagementofwebusersintheweb,theimplementationofsocialinfra-structurewillengenderanewtypeofscience.
TheconceptofROsbuildingonthemodelofdistributedwebresources,reproducibility,andreusedependsonanothergiven:theavailabilityoftheseresources.Suchavailabilityhasbeenpartiallyaddressedbytheethosofopennessanddigitization.However,opennessanddigitizationdonotassurethatresourcesareheretostay.Consequently,anotherethosbuildsuponthetopicofpreservation.
Majorplayersinthefieldofe-Scienceadvocatearadicalformofarchivingthattriestopreserveasmuchaspossiblefromwhatisproduceddigitally.Theargumentbehindthisapproachistheclaimthatthefuturevalueofresourcescannotbeanticipated(Bourne2010)atthetimewherearchivingdecisionsaremade.Accordingly,ubiquitouspreservationisdemanded.Thisdemandiswelladdressedbyremarksthatwithoutradicalarchiving,a“digitaldarkage”(Choudhuryetal.2008,20)willariseinwhich“knowledgeburying”(DeRoureetal.2009,10)isanomnipresentproblem.
Nowthatthecharacteristicsofthee-Scienceagendaareclearer,itiseasiertofollowtheargumentsofhistoryandprogressinwhiche-Sciencepositsitself.Theavant-gardestatus,whiche-Scienceclaimsforitself,isonlycon-vincingwhenthereisapastthatdirectlyleadstothee-Sciencemodeofresearchandafuturetowhichthisparticularavant-gardeleadsinthemostdirectway.Inbothviewpointse-Sciencehasstrongopinions.Thestateofaffairswhichpresentse-Scienceasanecessarystep,andwhichisthe
78 Beyond the Flow
resultofahistorythatfocusonthehistoryoftechnologicalinnovation,hasalreadybeendiscussedonseveraloccasions.Atitsendthereisthedatadeluge.Datadelugewasintroducedasanupdatedversionofinformationoverloadandtheserialcrisis.Whileinformationoverloadisindifferenttotheformoftheinformation,datadelugeismoreprecise.Itcompletelyadherestothemodeinwhiche-Scienceistryingtodoscience,amodewhichfocusesondataandcomputation.Amoreconcretedefinitionofthedatadelugespecifiesitintermsoftheso-called“threeVs”(Hendler2013).Accordingly,thevelocitywithwhichinformationisproduced,aswellasitsvolumeandvarietydominatescienceinsuchawaythatonlye-Scienceiscapableofdealingwithit.Thisissueislikewisenotpresentedasan issue in science but as theissueofsciencetoday.Fromtheviewpointofe-Science,this challenge is primarily a failure of the historical publishing system (Neylon2009,2),wheremodesofproductiondonotmatchmodesofcon-sumptionanylonger.Insofarase-ScienceappearstobethewayoutofthiscrisisROshavetobecomethenewpublicationformat.
AccordingtoBorgman,Wallis,andEnyedy(2007,7),thetopicofthedatadelugeisoneofthemaindriversbehindfundinginvestmentsintoe-Science.AttheotherendofthediscussionareadvocateslikeDavidDeRoure,affirmingthat“thisnewsociotechnicalsituationmeanswearebetterequippedtocopewiththedatadelugethatpredicatedthee-Scienceprogram”(2011,sec.4).ResearchObjectsandotherworkflow-orientedpub-licationsarethemeanswhich“deliversystematicpipelinestodealwiththedatadeluge”(Bechhofer,DeRoure,etal.2010,91).
Thediscourseaboutthefutureisdominatedbyargumentsabouttheepistemologicalenvironmentthisfuturewillbring.OnepartoftheseargumentswasprovidedbytheanthologyonThe Fourth Paradigm pub-lishedbyMicrosoftResearch(Hey,Tansley,andTolle2009).Theotherpointofreferenceisthearticle“TheEndofTheory:TheDataDelugeMakestheScientificMethodObsolete”published2008inThe Wire(Anderson2008).
IntheletterpublicationChrisAndersonarguesthattheamountofdataproduceddoesnotjustbringaquantitativebutalsoaqualitativechangetoscience.Heassertsthattheamountofdataalreadyavailableatthebeginningofresearchdoesnotallowthederivationofahypothesisfromitbeforeanystatisticalexplorationhastakenplace.Ontheotherhand,theresultsofdatadrivenresearchprocessesmakeitdifficulttoderiveanymodelthatismoreexpressivethanitsdescription.Inconsequence,hecon-cludesthathypothesisdrivenresearchandtheoriesasmodelsforworldexplanationdonotleadtopromisingresearchanymore.
Publishing 3.0 79
Contributionsintheformerpublicationalsoincludemorebalancedviewswhich,however,haveasimilardirection.Themainclaimbehindtheproclamationofafourthparadigmistheclaimthatcomputationwilleliminatetheepistemologicaldifferencebetweenempiricallyandtheoreticallydrivenresearch,makingeachoftheseapproachesavailablewithinthesameresearchprocess.
Thesediscussionsarenotreallytakingplacewithinthee-Sciencefieldbutarecitedhereinordertodescribetherelevanceandfuturesuccessofitsresearchprogram.ItpartiallyresemblesthediscourseabouttheessenceofinformationdiscussedinthesectionaboutMAs.However,whereMAstrytoconnecttheissueofmeaningwithneuroscienceinordertoempiricallyanchorinformation,ROsharnessepistemologyinordertogiveprimacytotheunitofthe(computational)experimentasawayoforganizingtheresearchprocess.Theconsequenceofthiswayofthinkingisalsowellexpressedwhenremarksaremadeabouttheroleoftextswithinthenewmethodologicalsetup.Inthiscontext,textisasocialassetthatprovidesnouniquetruthvalueonitsown(2011,3).Theworkflowisinfactmeanttobeareplacementforarticlesthatonlyremainduetohistoricalreasons.Incontrast,workflowswillbetheprimaryobjectbywhichscientistsgetcredit(Bourne2010,2).
Thee-ScienceprogramthatmaintainsastrongrelationshipwiththeprojectofopensciencewaspresentedinconnectionwithROs,becauseROsarethemostprominentpublicationformatinheritinge-Scienceprinciplesinanextremelyunfilteredway.Nevertheless,aroundthreequartersofthepublishingconceptsthatarepresentedinthisresearchopenlypositthemselveswithinthesameideologicalframeorsharekeyaspects,thatbeingmoreofajustificationfortheextendedspacegiventothetopichere.
Semantic PublicationsThenextapproachtodigitalpublishingtobediscussedhereareSemantic Publications(hereafterreferredtoasSPs).SPsarenotcompletelynew.Aswillbeshownlateron,theysharemanyideaswithModularArticles.Harmsze,forinstance,issometimesreferencedasapioneeringfigureinthisrespect(Giunchiglia,Xu,etal.2010,sec.1).Thedecreaseofresearchactivityregardingdigitalpublicationsandthedifferentkeyinterestsintheremainingactivities,however,ledtothedevelopmentfromMAstoSPsbeingnotwithoutinterruption.After2009,SPsbecameoneofthemostactiveresearchareasondigitalpublicationsaswellasaconceptwitha
80 Beyond the Flow
significantdegreeofimplementation.Additionally,itcouldbearguedthatinfacttheconceptofMAsentailsboththeideaofaggregationsandofSPs.
ThekeydifferenceleadingtothisoppositionbetweenaggregationsandSPshastodowiththeunderstandingoftheconceptofamodule.Aggregations,andROinparticular,radicalizedthemainideaintroducedwiththemetaphorofmodularity.Theyconceiveofmodulesinawaythatresem-blesphysicalseparation,andinfactthedistributednatureofaggregationsincludesserversthatarephysicallyquiteseparated.ThepaththatleadsfromMAstoSPs,however,leavestheunitoftheobject,firstknownasthephysicalobjectofanarticle,intact.Whilethesecondperspectivefocusesonthemodularstructurewithinthingsconceivedasgivenobjects,thefirstfocusesonhowsuchobjectsarealwayspartofamodularstructurethatprecedesthem.
ModularityinSPsisachievedbymarkup.Markupisawaytoexplicitlyidentifyanddenotefragmentsintextobjectsbyplacingitinsidethetext.Assuch,itdoesthesameaswasdonebyOAI-OREintheJSTORarticleexample.However,theidentificationanddescriptionintheOAI-OREexampleexistsindependentlyfromthearticle,ashasbeenmadeclear.ItstandsoutfromtheobjectandisthereforealsocalledstandoffmarkupwhilemarkupinSPsisputintotheobjectandaddressedasembeddedmarkup.Althoughbothcreateinformationunitsontheirown,whichinthelanguageoftheturnofthemillenniumcouldbecalledmodules,theytakedifferentstepsinrealizingmodularization.Consequently,Bechhofer,Ains-worth,etal.(2010,2)putalotofemphasisonthedistinctionbetweenROsandSPs.
From Modular Articles to Semantic Publications
InthetransitionprocessfromMAstoSPs,thethreecontributionsbyMar-condes(2005),Mons(2005),andSeringhausandGerstein(2007)standout.Buildingonthesameargumentssummarizedinthelastsections,Marcondeshighlightsthatscientificcommunicationisslowanddifficulttoverifyviatextpublications.Inordertoacceleratescience,heproposestomodelthe“deepstructure”(Marcondes2005,119)ofarticles.SimilartoHarmsze,deepstructuremeanstheformalizationofstructureandtopicsinarticles.TheseaspectsshouldbemadeexplicitbyusingXMLmarkupandstandardizedformalterms.InthisrespectMarcondesproposesthe
Publishing 3.0 81
Scholarly Ontology Project24(alsoreferredtoasScholOnto),whichoffersformaltermsinordertoreproducetherhetoricalstructureofanarticle.
Theissueofstandardizedsemantics,contrastedwiththecontingentformsofnaturallanguage,isthemainconcernofSeringhausandGerstein(2007).Onlyifthesemanticsusedaresharedbyallstakeholders,theformalizationofdeepstructuresinarticlescanreallyhelptointegrate“theever-growingbodyofinformation”(1).Accordingly,Seringhaushighlightsstandardizationasoneofthemostimportantgoalstoensureprogressindigitalpublishing.
Besidesstandardizationofsemanticsforpurposesofformalizingthestructureanddiscourseofarticles,Mons(2005)stressesthatthesameneedexistsforthethings(entities)articlesareabout.Hearguesthat“textisanightmareforcomputers”becausetherearealwaysmanywaystorefertothesametopicorthing.Hence,Monsaskstherhetoricalquestion:“WhichGeneDidYouMean?”(title).Inhisexample,markupisusedinordertolinkatextpassagethatrefersinanarrativewaytoacodifiedstand-ardizedrepresentationofthisentity.
ThetermSemanticPublicationswasfirstusedinthearticle“AdventuresinSemanticPublishing”(Shottonetal.2009).Inthisworktheauthoroffersanillustrativedefinitionoftheterm,aswellasasophisticatedexampleofaSemanticPublication.FollowingShotton’sownwords:
Wedefinethetermsemanticpublicationtoincludeanythingthatenhancesthemeaningofapublishedjournalarticle,facilitatesitsautomateddiscovery,enablesitslinkingtosemanticallyrelatedarticles,providesaccesstodatawithinthearticleinactionableform,orfacilitatesintegrationofdatabetweenarticles.(Shottonetal. 2009,1)
Thisdefinitionalsotakesfeaturesbeyondthosealreadydiscussedintoaccount.However,theimportantthingisthatallthesefeaturesareachievedbyrevealingthepossibilitiesofformallycodifiedmarkup,whichisattachedtotheoriginalarticleintheexample.Thefeaturesimplicitlyaddressedinthedefinitionshowupintheexampleintermsof:
– actionabledata,meaningdatasourcesthatarede-referenceableandwhichpossessapersistentlinkthatcanbeprocessedwhilethepublicationisread;
– datafusions,meaningautomatizedmergingofdatasourceswithinthepublicationwithdatasourcesoutsideofthepublication,butwhichareaboutthesamethings;
24 http://projects.kmi.open.ac.uk/scholonto/
82 Beyond the Flow
– highlightingoftermsrepresentingimportantconcepts,persons,andotherentitiesduringthereadingprocessforfasterreading;
– authoredorinferredlinkstoexternalinformationsources; – supporting claims tooltips on the basis of a functional analysis of citations;
– automaticallycreatedmachine-readablesummaryofthearticle; – tagcloudsandatagtreerepresentingthetopicofthearticle.Thetagtreeiscreatedonthebasisofformaltaxonomiesrepresentingtheknowledgedomainofthearticle;
– interactiveelementslikechangingdataviews,visualizationsandre-orderablereferencelists;
– citation-networksforthearticleandtheauthorscitedinthearticle; – deepstructuredmarkupofthearticlewhichexpressitscomposition.
Allthesefeaturesareenabledbyexplicitlyaddingmarkuptothearticle,facilitatingcomputationalprocessingofthecontent.Nonetheless,thesecomputationsstillhavetobeimplementedontheirownandbytheinstitutionswhichpresentthepublication.
The Primacy of Formality and Standardization
ThelastparagraphsdemonstratedhowideasfromMAscontinuedevenaftertheirdevelopmenthadstopped.Theuseofmarkupformakingaspectsofarticlesexplicit,theformalrepresentationoflogicalandrhetoricalstructureaswellasofmeaningarefundamentalpillarsforMAs.Shotton’scontributiongaveanideaofpossiblebenefitsofthisapproachthathasnotbeendescribedwithsuchlevelofdetailbefore.Theabilitytoachievethisderivesfromthedevelopmentsoftheso-calledSemantic Web (hereafterreferredtoasSW),discussedonseveraloccasionsabove.Inshort,theSemanticWebprovidesthetechnologicalmeansformakingdatainterchangeableovertheworldwideweb.Itisthetechnologicalfoundationforpreviouslydiscussedinitiatives,likethelinkedopendataandOAI-ORE,butalsofordevelopmentsresponsibleforSPs.TheSemanticWebalsoprovidesthemeansofembeddingmarkupintowebdocumentsbyvirtueofaverysophisticatedversionofembeddedmarkup,whichinturniscompletelycompliantwithSWprinciples.ThisapproachiscalledRDFa25.ItenableslinkingfromwithinHTMLelementsofwebpagestoSWdataandconceptsoutsideofthedocument.RDFawasapprovedasastandardbytheW3CatthesametimeOAI-OREwasfinalized,andisheavilyusedinSPs.
25 https://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-primer/
Publishing 3.0 83
However,incorrespondencewiththetwowaysofinterpretingmodularity,Hunteretal.(2008,15)classifyOAI-OREandRDFaintotwoprofoundlydis-tinctapproachesfordigitalpublications.
AnotheraspectoftheSemanticWebneedingfurtherspecificationinthecontextofthepresentstudyistheuseoftheadjectivesemantic.Inthecurrentcontext,thisterm,whichhasappearedseveraltimesalreadyintheprecedingsections,hasameaningveryspecifictothefieldofinfor-mationscience.Evidently,textassuchhasmeaningandusessemanticsinordertocreatemeaning.However,inthecontextoftheSemanticWebandSemanticPublications,thisadjectivedenotestheuseofformallystand-ardizedknowledgerepresentations,forinstancetaxonomies,thesauri,orontologies.Accordingly,apublicationbecomessemanticthemomentitaddsalayerofformalizedandstandardizedterms.
ThenameofSPsisadirectreferencetotheSemanticWeb.Theyaretheapplicationtothefieldofpublishingofidealsofformalizationandstand-ardizationintheSemanticWeb.BuckinghamShumandClark(2010,2)statethatSPsarearesponsetothequestion:“whatdoesthescientificarticlelooklikeontheSemanticWeb.”
However,inviewofthetwonotionsofmodularity,thequoteofBuckingham,Shum,andClarkneedsqualification:SemanticPub-lications are only one of two possible answers to the question of what articleslooklikeontheSemanticWeb.SemanticPublications,incon-trasttoaggregations,sticktotheformofthearticle.Thisiswhytheyuseembeddedmarkupinsteadofisolatedmetadatadescriptions,asinthecaseofaggregations.ThebackgroundforthisdecisionisgivenbyShottonetal.(2009,2).Hearguesthatarticlesanddatabasesrepresenttwoverydifferentgoalsinresearch.Anarticleisdefinedasarhetoricobjectrepresentingacertainstatewithinresearch,fromwhichtheunderlyinghypothesisshouldbearguedconvincingly.Adatabaseincontrastwouldcontainup-to-dateinformationandisanalyticalinnature.Consequently,Shottonassertsthatitisnotdesirabletoreplaceonewiththeother.Headdssocialvaluetothetwopossibilitiestoachievemodularityindifferentways.
Nevertheless,healsoverymucharguesinfavorof“frictionlessinteroper-ability”(Shottonetal.2009,2)betweenthetwo.Thisfrictionlessinteroper-abilityisachievedbyincludingtheaforementionedsemanticlayerontopofarticles,puttingthedataviewontherhetoricobject.InacertainwaySPstherebymakedatabasesoutofarticles.ThedifferencehighlightedbyShottonisthusnotasbigasitseems.Itisadifferenceofdeciding
84 Beyond the Flow
howtosociallyembedthedatabaseparadigmintopublishing,butnotadifferenceofobjects.AshasbeennotedbytheexampleoftheJSONarticle,adatabase-orientedfirstapproachcanlikewiseproduceobjectsthatareusedasarhetoricobject.
ThekeyeffectoftheSemanticWebforpublicationscanthereforebesum-marizedastheimplementationofadataset-orientedviewonresources,andtheattempttotreatdigitalscholarlyobjectsasdatabases.TheSemanticWebcouldachievethis,becauseincontrasttothesituationMAsexperienceditprovidedbettermeansforformalizationandstand-ardization.Themetaphorofadatabaseasamodelforthere-designofpublicationsisopenlyproposedbyBourne(2005)whenheasks:“WillaBiologicalDatabaseBeDifferentfromaBiologicalJournal?”(title),andhasbeenusedalloversince.WithinthedevelopmentsinstigatedbytheSemanticWeb,theresearchfieldofSPsistheonethatfocusesonthedevelopmentandpropagationofformallystandardizedsemanticsinthecontextofscholarlypublishing(Peroni2014b,121).Itdoessobecauseitleavestheformofthearticleintact.WhileinMAsandaggregationstheissueofsemanticsfollowstheissueofdecomposition,provokingadeeperdebateonformats,itistheprimaryconcernofSPs.ThecurrentstudythereforeincludesamongthepublicationformatstheconceptofSPs,whichdonotuseSemanticWebtechnologies,butdosharetheconcernforformalandstandardizedsemanticsforthepurposeofisolatingaspectsofscholarlytextpublications.
Models and Ontologies. The Many Forms of Semantic Publications
Inmostcasesformalsemanticsarerepresentedinontologies.Ontologiesarespecificformsofmulti-dimensionalknowledgerepresentations,whichuseaSemanticWeb-compliantformatsuchastheResource Description Format Scheme26(alsoreferredtoasRDFS)ortheWeb Ontology Language27 (alsoreferredtoasOWL).Apartfromofferingthepossibilityofdefiningterms,whichgivesharednamestocertainphenomena,ontologiespermitthedefinitionofhowthesephenomenarelatetoeachother.Thisaspectfacilitatesautomatedinferenceonlogicalrelationshipsbetweenthephenomena.Earlymodelsofthoseoutlinedbelowarenotalwaysimplementedwiththistechnology.However,neweronessometimesalsousedifferentimplementationtechnologies,becausetheyexplicitlyaimatdifferenttechnologicalenvironments.Decisionsagainsttheuse
26 https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/27 https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-primer-20121211/
Publishing 3.0 85
ofSemanticWebtechnologiesthereforearenotjustboundtohistoricalcircumstances.Still,SemanticWebcompliantontologiesareattheheartofSPs.
Oneofthefirstsemanticmodelsconsistentlyimplementedinthecontextofdigitalpublications,albeitbeforethedefinitionofRDFSorOWL,wasagainprovidedbyHarmsze.Herstruggletoidentifycoreinformationunitsresultedinaschemeofsplittingarticlesintomodulescalledmeta-infor-mation,positioning,methods,results,interpretation,andoutcome.Eachofthesedefinestheboundaryofaself-containedmodel.Evenifanarticleisnotcompletelysplitupintopieces,theseconceptsprovidethemeanstomarkuppartsofarticlesandtherebyexpresstheirgoal.
AlittlebitlaterthanHarmsze’smodel,ScholOntowasdevelopedasanattempttorepresentthediscursivestructureofresearcharticles(Lietal.2002).InScholOnto,thetermdiscoursehasaveryopenandflexiblemeaning.Itprovidesthreedifferenttypesofsemantics.Thefirstdis-tinguishesimportantfrominterpretativefromepistemologicallyorientedpartsinthetext.Theseconddefineslinksbetweenparts,whichcor-respondintermsofrhetoricstructure,logicstructure,similarity,orproblematization.Finally,thereisamechanismtoweightlinksinordertoexpresshowstrongtherelationshipis.Thereby,ScholOntoalsotriestoformalizesomequalitativeaspects.
Whenitcomestotheuseofstandardizedtermsinordertoannotatetopicsandentities,itwasHarmszeonceagainwhoarguedinfavor.ExamplesofearlyprojectsfollowingthisapproachinamoresystematicwayareprovidedbytheConcept Wiki of the Concept Web Alliance28(alsoreferredtoasCWA)andtheUnified Medical Language System29(alsoreferredtoasUMLS).Whiletheconceptwikiwasmostlyusedinbiosciences,UMLS,asthenamesuggests,includestermsfromthefieldofmedicine.TheproblemsaddressedbytheseandsimilarsubsequentprojectsaresimilartotheoneMonstriedtohighlightinthequestionaboutthecorrectgenecitedbefore,toprovideuniformnamesforthingsthataresupposedtobethesamething.
AlthoughUMLSstartedwiththedefinitionoftermsforentitiesandtopics,itwaslaterextendedbyanothervocabularycalledSemantic Network(alsoreferredtoasUMLS-SN),whichdefines54termsfortherepresentationofdiscoursearoundtheseentities(Marcondes,Malheiros,anddaCosta
28 https://conceptweblog.wordpress.com/29 https://semanticnetwork.nlm.nih.gov/
86 Beyond the Flow
2014).ThereasonbehindauniquedefinitionofdiscourserepresentationinUMLSwastheperceivedpeculiarityofdiscourseinmedicine.AnotherexamplefromthedomainofmedicineistheSemantic Web Applications in Neuromedicine ontology30(Gaoetal.2006;alsoreferredtoasSWAN).OriginallyrootedinresearchonAlzheimer,SWANisusedtomodelscientificdiscourseinarticlesonlifescienceandneuromedicine(Ciccarese,Ocana,andClark2012).SWANiscomprisedofseveralmoduleswhich,adheringtoSemanticWebprinciples,importotherontologiesforthedescriptionofbibliographyandcitations.TheuniquepartsofSWANprovidetopic-relatedtermsfordiscourseelements,researchstatements,researchquestions,aswellasso-calledstructuredcomments.Additionally,theydefinecanonicalentities from the life sciences as well as mechanisms for representing the lifecycleofarticlesandtheagentsinvolved.
TheTextEncodingInitiative(alsoreferredtoasTEI)isamodelnotspecificallydefinedtosemanticallyenrichresearchpublications,buttomodelaspectsofdigitaleditionsinthecontextofscholarlyediting.Itstillplaysanimportantrolefordigitalpublishinginthehumanitiesingeneral.ExamplesofjournalsthatuseTEIaretheZeitschrift für Digitale Geisteswis-senschaften31,theReview Journal for Digital Editions32andofcoursetheTEI Journal33.
Anotherimportantmodelthatseekstomarkuprhetoricalblocksinarticlesisinformedbytheso-calledIMRaDstyle.TheIMRaDstyleisthenameofaprominentconceptforthestructureofresearcharticlesinthesecondhalfofthe20thcentury,andagainoriginatesinthefieldsofmedicineandbiology(SollaciandPereira2004).Theacronymreferstothesectionsofaspecifictypeofaresearcharticle:introduction,methods,results,anddiscussion.TheABCDEmodelwasbuiltontheIMRaDapproach.Heretheacronymresolvestoannotation,background,contribution,discussion,andentities.deWaardandTel(2006)trytoadaptIMRaDtotheneedsofsemanticalannotationofresearcharticlesindigitalformassuch.
The Semantically Annotated LaTeXmodel(alsoreferredtoasSALT)standsoutbecauseitspecificallyaimsattheLaTeXcommunity.LaTeXisatextprocessingsoftwaresuitewhichprocesseselementsintexts,sim-ilartomarkup,inordertocreatewelllayouteddocuments.Itisusedinresearchdomainssuchascomputerscience,butisnotcompatiblewith
30 https://www.w3.org/TR/hcls-swan/31 http://www.zfdg.de/32 http://ride.i-d-e.de/33 https://journal.tei-c.org
Publishing 3.0 87
webtechnologies.ThegoalofSALTistobringSPideasintopublicationworkflowswithLaTeX.Itprovidesthreeontologiesaddressingdocumentcomponents,rhetoricalstructures,anddocumentmetadata.
The Scientific Knowledge Object Pattern(alsoreferredtoasSKO)isanotherattempttorepresentthelogicalstructureofarticles.Giunchiglia,Xu,etal.(2010)offerfurtherinsightsontheuseofarticlesthusannotated.Theydemonstratehowthismodelisusedtooutlineandautomaticallyprocessinductive,deductive,andabductiveargumentationpatterns.
BuckinghamShumandClark(2010)madeanattempttoclassifyallmodelsseekingtorepresentdiscourse,agoalthatmostofthemodelspresentedinthelastparagraphsalsotrytodo.Theydistinguishbetweenrhetoricalandargumentativeorlogicaldiscourse.Rhetoricaldiscourseisconcernedwithnarrativestrategyandstrategiesregardingthepresentationofresearch.
Finally,Peroni(2014b)describetheSemantic Publishing and Referencing Ontologies(alsoreferredtoasSPRO),themostdiversesetofontologiesinthislist.Itdescribesverydifferentaspectsofarticles.Eachontologycanbeusedonitsownortogetherwithothers.Someoftheseontologies,suchas the Citation Typing Ontology(ShottonandPeroni2012;alsoreferredtoasCiTO),werecreatedbyDavidShottonhimself.However,manyotherSPinitiatives,likeforinstancetheSWANontology,areinvolvedinSPRO,too.FurtherontologiesinSPROinclude:
– DoCotomarkupdocumentcomponentsofarticles(Shottonetal.2015);
– FaBioandFRBRtohighlightbibliographicinformation(ShottonandPeroni2012);
– BiROtomarkupbibliographicreferencelists; – C4Otomodelthecontextandnumberofcitationsinanarticle; – PROtoattachinformationaboutrolesofagentsinvolvedinthepub-lishingprocessofanarticle(Shotton,Peroni,andVitali2012);
– PSOtocommunicatethepublishingstatusofanarticlethatissemanticallyenriched;
– PWO,aworkflowontologyforpublishingworkflows(Shotton,Peroni,andVitali2012).
Thelistofmodelspresentedinthissectionwasextensive.ThepurposebehindsuchlevelofdetailwasthesubstantiationofarecentobservationbyRuiz-IñiestaandCorcho(2014).Theauthorsnoticed(1)thatthecon-ceptsofSPscausedasignificantincreaseinmodelsseekingtodescribestructuresandaspectsofpublications.Severalothersurveystrytogiveanoverviewofthelandscapeofthesepublicationontologiesthatwerenot
88 Beyond the Flow
evenmentionedbefore(BuckinghamShumandClark2010;Ruiz-IñiestaandCorcho2014;Xuetal.2014).Peroni(2014a)countssevenofthoseontologiesinthedomainoflawalone,and12thatfocusonbibliographicinformation.
TheexamplesofSPontologiesofferedsofarcanbesystematizedintoatleastsixgroups.Thesegroupsincludeontologiesconcerning:
– administrativeaspects – discourseaspects – structural aspects – biographical aspects – citation purposes – topicsandentities
Thisvarietyofaspectsalsoofferssomeexplanationforthequantityofexistingmodels.Thequesttodescribethedeepstructureofarticlesleadstoverydifferentprioritizationsandinterpretations.FollowingRuiz-Iñesta’sobservation,anironicalaspectofSPsisthefactthattheirfocusonstand-ardizationandinteroperabilityhastheoppositeeffectinsomeareas.Inthemajorityofcases,multipleontologiesexistforthesamecategory,duetospecificdomainneeds,differentrequirementsforinformationprecision,differenttechnologybackgrounds,andhistoricalreasons.Allofthesehaveincommonthattheyrespondtosocialdemandsandbackgrounds.Themeaningofthisphenomenonwillbeanalyzedinthesecondpartofthiswork.
The Burden of (Digital) Extra Work and its Distribution Across Human and Non-Human Agents
Obviously,theeffortittakestomanuallymarkupeveryresearcharticlewithinthepluralityofviewpointslistedabove,andwithsuchahighlevelofdetail,posesaproblemforthewholeapproachofSPs.ThischallengeisacrucialpointofdiscussionwithinthefieldofSPsfromthebeginninguntiltoday.Shotton(2009)determinesinhisintroductorypieceofworkthata“cost-effective”implementationofSPsrequiressignificantautomationinthecreationofmarkup.Inthesameway,Giunchiglia,Xu,etal.(2010sec2.7)highlightthehugeeffortinmetadatagenerationandmaintenancenecessarytodeduceandattachaformalrepresentationofthelineofargumenttoaresearcharticle.
AlthoughMons(2005)isoneoftheearliestagentswhoadvocatesSPs,heemphasizesanotheraspectbehindthisissue.BesidesthefactthathumanmarkupcreationonthescalerequiredbySPsdoesnotseemfeasiblefor
Publishing 3.0 89
theauthor,healsostressesthatitisnotdesirable.Thenormativeandstaticencodingschemeswouldleadtoakindofwritingandrestrictionofthe“creative”mindsofauthorsthatwouldsignificantlyreducethequalityofarticles.
Thereareseveralresponsestothischallenge.Onealreadymentionedistheattempttoletcomputersdotheworkofcreatingthemarkup.Otheranswersjuststressthattheresultingbenefitsareworththeeffort,orthattheseeffortsareinevitableandcanthereforenotbediscussedbecausethey are part of social changes in the publishing sector that are without alternative.
ItisworthmentioningthatinSPsthereisingeneralmorereflectiononissuesofstakeholdergroupsandthepublishingsystemtowhichtheybelongthaninmanyotherprojects.Mostoftentheroleofpublishersisbrieflycriticizedbutrarelyevaluatedingreaterdepth.Incontrast,bothShotton(2009)andthe“FORCE11Manifesto”(Bourne,BuckinghamShum,etal.2012),sustainedbytheprotagonistsofSPs,provideextensivedis-cussionsonnewrolesfordifferentstakeholderswithinadigitalpublishingsystemshapedbytheSPapproach.
Regardingthedistributionofnecessaryeffortsforthecreationofmarkupinarticles,Shotton(2009,91–92)referstothreeagentgroups:publishers,editors,andauthors.Thepublishershouldorganizeamachine-readableversionofthebibliography,aswellasastructuredversionofarticlecomponentssuchassections.Theeditorswiththeirdomainknowledgeshouldassumethetaskofresearchingandmarkupentities,context,andlogicalmeaning.Finally,theauthorsshouldprovidefunctionalclassificationoftheircitations,thatishighlightformallywhytheycitedaparticularsource,byusingsemanticsliketheonesprovidedbyCiTO.
Acomplementarystrategytothedistributionofeffortistograduallyscaletheeffort.ThisapproachissuggestedbyLord,Cockell,andStevens(2012).Theauthorscallita“measuredandevolutionary”(1013)semanticenrichment.Here,theextentuptowhichformalmarkupisappliedbytheauthorsdependsontechnicalandnon-technicalaspectsoftheauthoringprocess,andmayvaryfrompublicationtopublication.Thegoalistodefineastrategythatcanbeeasilyincludedinexistingresearchandpublishingworkflowsofauthors.Additionally,theeffortdemandedfromtheauthorsshouldreflecttheextentuptowhichthebenefitscanactuallybemadetransparenttotheauthors.Thegoalistoslowlymoveawayfromthe“lumpenpdf”(seeIntroduction)toSPs,sothattheeffortbecomesanatural
90 Beyond the Flow
partofthepublishingprocesswithoutdominatingthediscourseondigitalpublishing.
Regardlessofstrategiestominimizemarkup-effortsbysharingitbetweenpeopleorgraduallypostponingit,sucheffortremainsacriticalaspectofSPs.Abundantresearchontheautomationofthistaskgivesevidenceofthis.VerysimilartotheargumentofDeRoure,Shotton(2009)claimsthattechniquesofautomationwillmoreandmoresolveproblemsthatdigitaltechnologieshaveproducedinthefirstplace.Theimportanceoftheissueofeffort,sotheassertiongoes,willthereforedeclineovertime.Nonethelesstherearestillmoreexamplesforsemi-automatedenrich-mentofSPs(Pavlopoulosetal.2009;Finketal.2010;Marcondes,Malheiros,anddaCosta2014)thanoffullyautomatedenrichment.Furthermore,thelevelofautomationsignificantlydependsontheaspectsthatshouldberecognizedautomatically.Automaticallyidentifyingdocumentstructures(Shottonetal.2013)ismorereliablethanthediscursivefunctionsofcitations(Ciancarinietal.2013).Thedisambiguationoftermsforinstancerequirestheassistanceofauthorsandtheir“tacitknowledge”(Shotton2009,7).
Revisiting Progress, Data Deluge and Information
Ashasbeenmentioned,anotherwaytoapproachtheobstaclesofSPsistoshowthatthereisnoalternativetoSPsinthenearfuture.ThereisnobetterwaytogiveevidenceforthisargumentthantocitePenevetal.(2010,2),whoapplythe“adaptordie”principletothesituationofpublishersandSPs.TerminologythatstronglycommitstothethemeofprogressisusedalloverwithintheSPscommunity.Correspondingly,Shotton(2009)callsSPs“thecomingrevolutioninscientificjournalpublishing,”whilePeroni(2014a)shortensthisintojust“TheDigitalPublishingRevolution.”Moreover,innovationinpublishingisreducedtotheconceptofSPswhenhemakestheequation:“today’spublishingrevolution,akasemanticpublishing”(7).Incontrast,Bourne(2011)complainsaboutthegrowing“problemsofout-datedcommunication.”
Shotton(2009,93)observes“rawtextdecreasinginvalue,”aphenomenonthatmakesrelinquishingsemanticmarkupinpublicationsanactofdigitalcensorship(94).Havingsaidallthis,SPssharethesamecertaintyaboutthedevelopmentofdigitalpublications,albeitbasedonslightlydifferentvisions.
Publishing 3.0 91
ThesimilaritybetweenkeythemesinthediscourseonSPsandotherpub-licationformatsincludemorethanreflectionsonautomationandprogress.ThebeliefthatSPsarewithoutanyalternativecorrespondswiththeemphasisthatisagainputontheoften-citedthemeofdatadeluge.ThusShotton(2009)arguesthatdatadelugedoesnotpermitresearcherstoreallyreadallthearticlesthatarepublished.Similarly,RenearandPalmer(2009)statethattheoverloadofinformationrequiresamorestrategicformofreading.Theyclaimthatdigitaltechnologiesareexactlythekindoftechnologiesthatpermitreadingdifferently.SeringhausandGerstein(2007,1)statethattheamountofinformationalreadypublished,andcon-tinuingtogrow,isthemainchallengeofpublishing.Theonlysolutionheseesthatcanfacethischallengeisto“modernizeacademicpublishingtoexploitthepoweroftheInternet.”
ComparablewithMAs,SPsmaketheirargumentsinanexusbetweenthesocial-historicalissueofthequantityofinformation,apositivedefinitionofinformation,andapublishingenvironmentwhichhastointegrateboth.ThepeculiarityofSPs,comparedtoformerapplicationsofthesamesetup,istheextenduptowhichthelastpointinthissetupisdiscussed.WhiletheModularArticlesfocusontheapplicationoftheinformationparadigmtothepublicationformat,SPsextenditsapplicationintoavisionforthewholepublishingenvironment.Thisextensionderivesfromtheexperiencethatlibrariesstruggletoofferappropriateservicesfordealingadequatelywiththedigital“chaosinthelaboratory”(Bourne2011,120).
Accordingly,Sefton(2009)introduceshismodelofSPsasanelementwithinthebiggerpictureofan“integratedcontentenvironment.”Gradmann(2010)developstheideaofavast“knowledgespaceofdata,”enabledbySPsandturningpublicationsintoheuristicobjectsforthecreationofthisspace.Bourne,Shotton,etal.(2012)expressthesameideainaverycolorfulwaywhen they argue that:
Weseeafutureinwhichscientificinformationandscholarlycom-municationmoregenerallybecomepartofaglobal,universal,andexplicitnetworkofknowledge;whereeveryclaim,hypothesis,argument—everysignificantelementofthediscourse—canbeexplicitlyrepresented,alongwithsupportingdata,software,work-flows,multimedia,externalcommentary,andinformationaboutprovenance.(Bourne,Shotton,etal.2012,45)
Havingsaidthis,SPsareassociatedwithattemptstocreatebettercon-ditionsforinformationretrievalandforinformationinfrastructure:
92 Beyond the Flow
ThegoalistopavethewaytowardsaSemanticPublishingEcosystemthatwillalleviate,atleastpartly,theinformationoverloadproblem.(Groza2012,sec. Abstract)
Thecallforamorestrategicreadingasaconsequenceofthequantityofinformationextendstheevaluationsofthestatusofinformationgivensofar.RenearandPalmer(2009)addanotherformalizationtothis:oneofthemainpointsintheirarticleclaimsthatthistypeofreadingisnotonlynecessary,butthatitistheepitomeofreadinginscience.Consequently,theyarguethatscientistshavealwaysreadstrategically.Inthislight,SPsbecomethemostnaturalwaytodesignpublicationsandtheefforttomarkupinformationappearsasakeyscientificactivitydifficulttoquestion.AminorsurveywithresearchersinordertosupportthisclaimwascarriedoutbydeRibaupierreandFalquet(2014).Insummary,theystressthattheactoflookingoutforapublicationinsciencealwayscorrespondswithasearchforspecificinformation.
Additionally,thisargumentsupportsthepositivedefinitionofinformationasitwashighlightedonseveraloccasionsabove.Theequationbetweentheinformation-seekingpurposeofreadersandtheapplicationofstand-ardizedmarkupobscuresthepossibilityofanagencyofthereaderinthecreationoftheinformationcontent.ThislineofthoughtgoesbeyondtheunitofindividualinformationinthefieldofSPs,andincludesnarrativeaspectsofpublications.Accordingly,“suchdiscoursestructuresaretrappedwithinthecontentofthepublications”(Groza2012,sec. Abstract).
ThepositivenotiontowardsaformalunderstandingofinformationinthecontextofSPsislesstheoreticalandmorepragmaticthaninthecaseoftheMAs.Nevertheless,theoutcomeisthesame.ForMarcondes(2005),markupistherealinformationintext.Yetitisnecessarytoaddthismarkuptotextbecausethecharacteristicsofnarrativetransformitintoan“invisibleknowledgeunit”(Giunchiglia,Xu,etal.2010,sec.2.1).Inthisrespectmarkupreconfiguresthehierarchybetweentextandinformationinfavorofinformation,likeitadherestotheconceptofSPs.Marcondes(2005)correspondinglycontinuestoimagineaworldofpublishinginwhichpublicationsaredissolvedincommunication,similartothevisionofGrad-mann.Thisispossiblebecauseformalsemantics,likeontologies,woulddissolvethesemanticheterogeneityinherentintextpublications(Sierman,Schmidt,andLudwig2009,63).
Publishing 3.0 93
The Role of Domains and Stakeholder Groups
Thepreviousparagraphshavegivensomeindicationoftheclosecon-nectionofSPstoactivitiesinthefieldoflibraryandinformationscience.ManycontributionsinSPsaremadewithininfrastructureprojects,forinstanceinDigitalLibraries.ProminentadvocatesofSPs,likeAllenRenearandStefanGradmann,areinformationscientiststhemselves.InGermany,theworkinggroupondigitalpublishingthatwasfoundedbytheAssociation for Digital Humanities in German Speaking Countries34(DHd)mostlyequatesSPprinciples—“thecodifiedtext”(Stäckeretal.2016)—withdigitalpub-lishingingeneral.Thisobservationisimportantinsofarastheinitiatorandconvenerofthisworkinggroupisalibrarianbyprofession.
Ashasbeenindicatedintheintroductiontothischapter,publishersareanotherstakeholdergroupcloselylinkedtoSPs.AsuperficialphenomenondemonstratingthisentanglementfurtheristhequantityofreferencestotheArticleoftheFuturecontestmadebyauthorsinthefieldofSPs.Giunchiglia,Xu,etal.(2010)aswellasMarcondes,Malheiros,anddaCosta(2014)explicitlyincludetheseinitiativesinthelistofSP-likeactivities.Peroni(2014a,8)andShottonetal.(2009,2)discussElsevier’sGrand ChallengeinitiativeasanactiveattemptbyElseviertopropagateSPideastoabroadercommunity,andtocreatebetterconditionsforSPcompliantversionsofarticles.Ontheotherhand,Elseviersponsoredaprizeforthe best contributions at the SePublicaconference,asub-conferenceofthe European Semantic Web Conference35thatfocusesonSPs.ElsevieralsoparticipatedinthefirstFORCE11workshop,whichproducedtheafore-mentionedmanifesto.
TheexampleofElsevierisgivenherebecauseElsevierisoneofthebiggestcommercialpublishersinscience.Nonetheless,theconnectionbetweenSPsandpublishersincludeotherpublisherswithotherbusinessmodelsaswell.Thus,Shotton(2012)mentionsPensoft as another publisher who intensivelyimplementsSPprinciplesintoitspublications.Likewise,thepioneeringshowcaseforSPsprovidedbyShotton(2012)wasacooperationwith PLOS,anopenaccesspublishermostactiveinthefieldsofbiologyandmedicine.
Thereareseveralexplanationsforthisstrongentanglement.ThefirstisthestrongemphasisSPsputontheunitofarticles.IncontrasttootherapproacheslikeROs,thearticleremainsthecoreunit.Someof
34 https://dig-hum.de/35 https://eswc-conferences.org/
94 Beyond the Flow
thereasonsforthispreferencewerementionedatthebeginningofthissection.Withoutdoubt,thismakesiteasierforpublisherstoassociatewithinnovationsindigitalpublishing,becausetheydonotrequiresubstantialmodificationtothemainelementoftheirbusinessplans.Instead,SPsare“semanticoverlays”(Clark2014)ontopofwell-establishedobjectsofrevenue.ConsequentlyPellegrini(2017,9)assertsthat“semanticmetadata”suchasproducedinSPsbegintoshowupasthe“coreoftheir[thepub-lishingcompanies]innovationstrategyhavingaprofoundimpactonexistingbusinesspracticesandnewstrategiesofvaluecreation.”
Furthermore,SPsofferexceptionalpossibilitiesofimplementingthewaypublisherswilldevelopbusinessmodelsonthebasisofservicesratherthancontent.Sincemarkupsignificantlyfacilitatesprocessingofarticles,iteasestheimplementationoftheseservicessignificantly.Withtheongoingsuccessofopenaccess,publishersaremeanttobeforcedtodevelopthisoptionandexplicitlyadvertiseSPsinthisrespect(Shotton2009,86;Bourne,Shotton,etal.2012,49;Peroni2014a,8–9).
Essentially,newbusinessmodelsmayarisefromtheneedtocreate,derive,anddisseminate“semanticassertions”fromSPs(Peroni2014a,8–9).IntheFORCE11initiativesuchprospectsaretransformedintomoresubstantialproductdescriptions.Accordingly,toolsareneededtoproducesemanticpublicationsandenhancedproductsmaybeofferedtoresearchers.Theinformationprovidedbymarkupcanalsobeusedforadvanced“reputationmanagement”services,whichshouldbeofinteresttoinstitutionsandfundingbodies(Bourne,Shotton,etal.2012,54–56).AnothergoodexampleoffeaturesthatenhancedproductscanprovideisthelistofviewsandinferredinformationwhichShottonpresentsinhisinitialpaper.
TheabovesectiononSPsdemonstratedthattheintegrationofdigitaltechnologiesintopublishingingeneral,andofSemanticWebtechnologiesinparticular,doesnotrequiresubstantiallyinvalidatingpublishingcon-cepts.IncomparisonwithROs,SPsdonotquestioneithertheformorthecontentofpublications.WhileROspositionpublicationsontopofanetworked,multi-media,andmulti-resourceenvironment,inthevisionofSPsthisenvironmentisderivedfrompublicationsinasubsequentstep.Itcanbeachievedbyinformationinfrastructures,likeintheexamplesoflibraryandinformationscienceprojects,orthroughservicesprovidedbypublishers.Regardlessofthespecificvariant,inthefieldofSPsthearticlecomesfirst.Semanticmarkup,intheformofembeddedmarkup,providesthegatewaytowhatliesbeyond.
Publishing 3.0 95
Liquid PublicationsLiquidPublications(hereafterreferredtoasLP)areapublicationformatthatappearedmoreorlessatthesametimeasSPPs,slightlyearlierthanROsandSPs.LiquidPublicationsaretheoutcomeoftheLiquidPublishingprojectthatwasfundedwithinthe7thFrameworkProgramforresearchfundingintheEuropeanUnion.
ThebasicideaofLPsistheclaimthatthecurrentmodeofpublishinghasdeficits,causingmajorproblemsforanyagentgrouprelatedtopublishing,mostnotablyforresearchers,whoarethecreatorsandtheconsumersofpublications.Casati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese(2007)highlighttheproblemthatresearcherstakemoretimetowritepublicationsthantodoresearchbecausereputationisbasedonpublications.Theydescribesituationsinwhichissuesarecreatedonlyforthepurposeofwritingapublicationthatsolvestheproblem,apracticetheauthorscall“sudokuresearch”(Casati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese2007,8).Furthermore,theystressthatthecurrentpublicationmodeldoesnotsupportreuseofpub-lications or publications really representing the continuous evolvement ofknowledge.Insteadforeverynewfindinganewpublicationiscreated.Additionally,thehistoricalmodeofpublishingwoulddelaythedissemi-nationofnewfindingsandisinsufficientingivinggranularcredittospecifictypesofcontributionsinpublicationswithmultipleauthors.
BeyondtheaforementionedissuesLPsareverymuchconcernedwiththetopicofpeerreview.Casati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese(2007)harshlycriticizethemodelofclosed,expert-basedpeerreviewforqualitycon-trol.Theystatethatit“killsgoodpapersandisinherentlyflawed”(7).Theviewpointispresentedonapersonalbasisandnotsupportedbyactualresearch.Yetargumentsaregivenwhichinclude:(a)thattheresultsofreviewsarecontingentanddonotalwaysmatchthequalityofthepaper,(b)thatreviewersarebiasedandthattherearegroupsofreviewerswhoaregenerallymorepositiveornegative.
Thecritiqueofthehistoricalmodeofpublishingispresentedtogetherwithajudgmentaboutresearchers’motivationwhenpublishing.Thesemotivationsare:(a)thewishtocommunicateresearchtothepublic,(b)thewishtogetsymboliccapitalback,andinthecaseofconferencepaperstoestablishandmaintainrelevantresearchcontacts.Inthiscontexttheauthorsassertthatdigitaltechnologieshavecreatedcompletelynewwaysofknowledgeproductionand,incorrespondencewiththejudgmentsinthelastsections,invalidatehistoricalmodesofpublishing(7).Theyparticularly
96 Beyond the Flow
highlightthemeaningofnetworktechnologiesandstorage.Onlythesetworesourcescreatewaysofmakingresearchoutputavailableandofinter-actwithwithoutlimits.Theauthorsexpressirritationaboutthefactthatinsufficientandoutdatedpresentmodesofpublishingremainconceptuallyandoftenalsophysicallypaperbased,thus“laggingbehind.”InthislightCasati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese(2007,8)introduceLPsasapublishingmodeldesignedasif“academicresearchwasbornaftertheWeb.”
Architecture: Analogies of Hard- and Software
ThekeytopicguidingthedesignofLPsisapresupposedanalogybetweensoftwareandknowledge.Casati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese(2007)stressthatboththecreationofsoftwareandofknowledgeisaneffortbymanypeopleandanendeavorthatwillneverbefinished.Publicationsshouldaccordinglyenablecollaborativeworkandpermitpermanentmodification.Thisanalogyisalsoprovidedforthepurposeofshowingthatinsoftwareengineering,mechanismsarealreadyinusethatresemblebothideas.Itisextendedtothechangingrelationshipbetweenwhatisconceivedashardwareresp.software.Likethelogicalstructureofsoftwarebecomingincreasinglyindependentfromtheunderlyinghardware,publicationwillseeadecouplingbetweenthestructureofapublication(software)andtheformerhardware(thepaper).Themostsuccessfulstrategyinordertoachievedigitalpublicationsistotransferthesesoftwaredevelopmentmechanismstotheworldofpublishing.Concretereferencesaremadeto the principles of agile project management36andopen source software development(Casati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese2007,3).LiquidPublicationresearch literature consequently applies a bunch of further concepts in computerscienceinordertodesigntheshapeofdigitalpublications.Pub-lications become data warehousesandthepublishingprocessisdefinedandrenderedincorrespondencewithpushing,pulling,andbranching processes as they appear in the context of version control systems37.
36 Agileprojectmanagementorsoftwaredevelopmentisadynamicandhighlyflexiblestrategyforprojectmanagementthattriestoreducebureaucraticoverheadasmuchaspossibleinordertobeabletoquicklyadapttounforeseenissuesduringtherealizationphaseofaproject(seealsoLarman2004).
37 VersionControlSystems(alsoreferredtoasVCS)arespecializedareaspe-cializedsoftwarethatisabletotrackchangesinfiles—mostlytextbasedfileslikeprogramingcode—,torecoverthestateofthesefilesforacertainpointoftimeandtoorganizecontributions(commits)frommultiplecontributorsworkingwithdifferentcopiesoftherepositorycontainingthefiles(seealsoHinsen,Läufer,andThiruvathukal2009).
Publishing 3.0 97
Entities: Persons, Processes and Objects
AnothersignificantaspectofthebackgroundofLPsisitspartialcritiqueofallegedviewpointsintheopenaccessmovement.AlthoughprinciplesofopenaccessarewelcomedandacknowledgedasafundamentaldependencyfortherealizationofLPs,Casati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese(2007,22)claimthattheseprinciplesfocustoomuchontheaccessibilityandtheusabilityofknowledge,butdonotreflectthedynamicandmulti-facetedwaysinwhichpublicationsfloatbetweendifferentstakeholders.LPsincontrastaddressthisissuesystematically.Publishingisaccordinglydefinedasanexusofthreeentities: agents,processes,andknowledge objects.AspecificconstellationbetweenthesethreeelementsformsaLiquidPublication.ThreedifferentexamplesforLPsaregivenintheproject:LiquidBooks(Casatietal.2011),LiquidJournals(Baezetal.2009;BaezandCasati2010),andLiquidConferences(Xu2011).ThethreeversionsofLPswillbedescribedingreaterdetailbelow.
InordertobeabletoimplementanddescribeLPsastheproductofcollab-orativework,itisnecessarytoindexallthedifferentrolesinwhichagentscancontributetoapublication.Casati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese(2007,13)notethatintimesofdigitaltechnologiesagentsappearinchangingrolesmorefrequentlyandthatmanycontributionsaresubtle,likeforinstanceaggregation,classification,orblogging,amongothers.Incontrasttoearlierformats,LPssustainacertainnotionofamonolithicobjectatthecenterofpublications,whichtheycallScientific Knowledge Object(hereafterreferredtoasSKO).ScientificKnowledgeObjectsarealsoreferredtoas“theITaspectoftheknowledgecreationanddisseminationproblem”Casati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese(2007,13).ScientificKnowledgeObjectsarethewaybywhichthecomplexitydemandedbythefeaturessummarizedaboveandthecomplexityofprocessesandactorsindicatedinthelastparagraphshouldbecomemanageable.OnaverybasiclevelSKOsaredefinedasrepositories38which—beyondcontentofanytyp—containadescriptionofthesocialnetworkofagentsandprocessesinvolvedintheircreationandmodification.Theconceptofarepositoryisagainderivedfromsoftwaredevelopment.Hereitistechnologicalinfrastructurethatisabletostoresoftwareandorganizetheinteractionsofmultipledeveloperswithinthedevelopmentprocess.
38 Arepositoryisasoftwareinfrastructurethatfacilitatesthestorageandman-agementofdigitalresources.
98 Beyond the Flow
Functional Requirements
Lookingattheresearchliterature,itishardtograspwhatLPsareprecisely.InvaryinglevelsofabstractionCasati,Giunchiglia,andMarchese(2007)refertothemaspapers,publications,orjustorganizedscientificknowledge.Likewise,nocleardistinctionexistsbetweenthetermLiquidPublicationandthetermScientificKnowledgeObject.Incorrespondencewiththelastparagraph,however,theinteractionpatternsaswellasthefunctionalrequirementsenablingthesepatternswillbediscussedingreaterdetail.FourfunctionalrequirementsguidedthedesignprocessofSKOsarelisted.First,SKOsneedtopermitnon-restrictedmodificationof any aspect for the time people in a collaborative setting are willing to contribute.ThisincludesthepossibilityofseveralversionsofanSKOrep-resentingdifferentstatesofresearchandwork.Thenotionofsnapshotsisusedforthispurpose(Baezetal.2009,sec.3).Secondly,SKOsmustpermittheorganizationandreflectionofdifferenttypesofworkbetweendifferentcontributorstoanSKO.ThismeansthatdifferentcontributorsmighthavedifferentcontroloverelementsintheSKOandthattheircontributionsareindividuallytrackedandcategorized.Third,everycontributorshouldbeabletomaintainandworkonherownversionofanSKO.Thisoptioniscomparedwiththeconceptofbranches39indecentralizedversioncontrolsystemslikeGit40.Finally,SKOsshouldnotjustresembletheprinciplesofsoftwarerepositories,butindeedbetechnicallyimplementedassoftwarerepositoriesforthecreationofpublicationsfromthestart.Thus,theyarealsocalled“contentrepositories,”or,fortheexampleofLiquidBooks,“LiquidBookRepositories”(Giunchiglia,Chenu,etal.2010,49).
Stack: Layers of Liquid Publications
Thepossibilitytohavedifferentpeopleadministeringdifferentcontentindifferentversionsiscalledalow-levelcapacityofsoftwarerepositories.ItoffersbasictechnicalandsemanticmeansofreferringtoelementsinSKOs,theircreationhistoryandtheircontributors.AdvocatesofSKOsare
39 Branchesinsoftwarerepositoriespermittodevelopcertainfeaturesindependentlyfromeachotherandfromthemainstateofdevelopment.Itenableschangestosoftwarethatonlyexistforthepeopleworkingonaspecificbranch.Whenthedevel-opmentsinabranchhavereachedmaturitythewholesetofchangesofthebranchcanbemergedbackintothemaindevelopmentline.Branchesareusedinsoftwarerepositorieswheremanypeopleworkonmanydifferentthingsatthesametime.Duetobranchestheintegrityofthecoreofthesoftwareisnotjeopardizedbutstilloffersthehighestdegreeofflexibilityforsoftwaredevelopers.
40 https://git-scm.com/
Publishing 3.0 99
awarethatpublicationshavemorespecificinteractionmodels.ScientificKnowledgeObjectsaddressthisissuebydefiningmoregranularcategoriesinordertodescribetheelementsofSKOsandtheirrelationship.Fur-thermore,thesecategoriesshouldmakeitpossibletorepresenttypesofinteractionsbetweencontributorsandthepublication.ThisisanimportantaspectforSKOsbecausethegoalofimprovingthereviewprocessispartiallybuiltaroundtheideathatdifferentcontributionstopublicationsshouldbeidentifiableontheirown.
Formally,fourdifferentsemanticlevelsaredefined,thisisanimportantaspect,eachgeneratingspecifictypesofmetadata(Giunchiglia,Chenu,etal.2010,10–13).Theselevelsare:
1. Thefilelevel2. The semantic level3. Theserializationlevel4. The presentation level
Theelementsdescribedwithintheselevelsarecallednodes.Thefilelevelholdsthecontentitself.ThecontentinturnisrepresentedintermsofURLs.TheseURLscanlinkbetweennodes,fragmentsofnodes,orgroupsofnodes.41Asmentionedabove,thefilenodemaycontaincontentofanyfiletype.ThesemanticlayerholdsanytypeofmetadatawhichdescribeswhatanoderepresentsscientificallyaswellasinwhichcontextitwasincludedintotheLP.
TheserializationlevelismeanttoarrangethecontentorfilterfilenodesandsemanticnodestocreatespecificLPsversions.IthasbeennotedbeforethataSKOmayleadtodifferentpublications,forinstanceablogpostoraposter.Theblogposthasalinearstructurewhilethepostermightarrangecontentincolumnsorasagraph.Likewise,theposterprobablyuseslessofthetextcontentoftheSKO.Theserializationleveldescribesthisordering.ThepresentationlayerfinalizestheimplementationofspecificLPsoutofSKOs.Ingeneral,itappliesstylestopublications.Thisreferstothingslikethefontusedfortextorthesizeofavideo.Additionally,itdefinestheoutputfileformat.
Thefourlevelsdonotonlyintroducecertaindistinctionsbetweenaspectsofpublications,theyalsoreproducethesoftwareengineeringviewonpub-lications.Therelationshipbetweentheselayersishierarchical.Thereare
41 ConsideringthedefinitionofURLsthathasbeengivenbeforeitisimportanttorepeatthatthecontentofLPs,differentfromROs,isnotdistributedontheweb,butstoredinarepository.Here,theURLonlydefinesacertainmechanismofmakingdigitalresourcestechnicallyidentifiable.
100 Beyond the Flow
aspectswhichareconsideredcrucialandaspectsthataremadecontingent.Accordingly,Giunchiglia,Xu,etal.(2010,10)calltheadditionofserializationmetadatatoLPsan“execution”ofaSKOandthepresentationofmetadatathe“rendering”ofthecontent.Theterminologyresemblesthedistinctionbetweenprogrammingandrunningsoftwareaswellasprogrammingandcompiling.Furthermore,itupdatesthedistinctionbetweenformandcon-tentthatwasmadeinotherpublicationconcepts.Inanycase,LPssuggestaspecificwayofjudgingessentialandcontingentaspectsofpublications.
State: Versions and Continuous Modification
Giunchiglia,Chenu,etal.(2010,19–21)trytoadvancetheconceptofliquidity.First,thebasicideaofcontinuouslyevolvingpublicationsisseparatedintothreedifferenttypesofdynamics.Byreferringtophysicalstates,suchtypesarecalledthegaseous,theliquid,andthesolidstate.Thesestatesareanalyzedintermsofpropertiesandtechnicalrequirements.Propertiesmainlyaddressthemodificationrateandthelevelofmaturitythatcanbeexpectedfromapublicationineachofthesestates.Incontrast,requirementsdefinedifferentlevelsofeffortapplicabletothetaskofassuringthepersistenceofSKOs.LPsthuscallforthedef-initionofdifferentlevelsofsustainability,anapproachwhichisreminiscentofHunter’sdecayfactor.
InthelongrunthethreestatesofliquidityinLPsequatetotraditionalnotionsofaworkbeingaworkinprogress(gaseousstate),adraft(liquidstate),orthefinalversion(solidstate).However,themainpointofthewholeargumentaboutliquidityisthatpublicationsarealreadypublishableinallstates.Theliquidstateisalsoconsideredtobethecrucialstateoffuturepublishing.Accordingly,publishingceasestorefertoacertainstateinknowledgeproduction.Giunchiglia,Chenu,etal.(2010,22–23)outlinethetypeofpracticesthatapublicationintheliquidstateattracts.Mostofthesepracticesconcerncollaboration,feedback,andreview.Thefactthatapublicationcanbereviewedinitsliquidstatealready,togetherwiththeelementarystructureofnodes,isperceivedasamajorcontributiontoamoreopenandmorespecificreviewprocess.
Model
ItissignificantthattheLPprojectactuallyfailstoelaboratespecificationsforthedifferentmetadatalevelsofLPsdescribedabove.Thefinalprojectreportdoesnotcomprehensivelydefinemorefine-grainedelementsthan
Publishing 3.0 101
thosethathavebeendiscussedalready.Thevocabularyreferringtothefile-layer,forinstance,proposesonlyafile_node element that may have an attributecontainingtheURL.TherearefewthingsintheformalSKOmodelthatsubstantiatetheperspectivesdescribedinproseabove,meaning:(a)thefactthattherearefoursemanticlevels,(b)thatwithintheselevelsapublicationisagroupofelements(nodes)that(c)refertoeachotherinacertainways(relations).
Nodefinitionsofconcreterelationshipsdefiningspecificstructuresaremade,likeinthecaseofworkflowsinROs.Thesameholdstrueforelementsintheserializationandpresentationlevel.WhatisofferedisarandomintegrationofsomevocabulariesalreadymentionedintheSPssection,morepreciselytheABCDandtheSALTvocabularies(Giunchiglia,Chenu,etal.2010,56).Additionally,anunsystematicselectionofstylefeatureslikefontandparagraph_styleismentioned.However,thesefeatureshardlyserveanyotherpurposethantoillustratethemechanism.
Indeed,themoreconcreteresearchonLPsgets,themoretheapproachturnsawayfromitsoriginalcomplexityandradicalnessandthusfromtheneedtodefineusablevocabularies.Thelaststepintheaforementionedreport is again an illustration of a set of three SKO patterns.PatternsarecommonimplementationstructuresoftheSKOmodel.Thethreepatternspresentedare:inductively,deductively,andabductivelyorganizedjournalarticles.Intheseexamples,ascanbeexpected,theserializationofthecon-tentissequential,andthesemanticlevelincludeslogicalrelationships.
LaterworkbyXu(2011)confirmsthetendencyofLPresearchtogivepreferencetothejournalarticleforminordertodiscussissuesofpub-lishingandLPs.WhilethisfactisespeciallyprominentforLPs,duetothetensionbetweenthelevelofcritiqueandtheLPshowcases,thisobservationcanbemadeformanycontributionstothefieldofdigitalpub-licationformats.Accordingly,Xu(2011,67–70)continuestoinvestigatethethreeSKOpatternsthatwerementionedaboveandtransposestherathertechnicalconceptsintheLPprojecttoconceptsthataremorefamiliartothepublishingdomain.Lifecycle,forinstance,isafarmorerestrictedvari-ationofthethemeofgeneral“liquidity”structuredbysnapshotswithinarepository(Xu2010,425–27).Correspondingly,therichandopenspaceofoptionsforthedesignofpublicationsthatwaschasedbyCandela,Casati,andothersatthebeginningisreducedtoasetofcommonsfeatureslateron.Whatwereoncethelevelsofserialization,semantics,andpresentationaswellasthefeatureofliquidityturnsintobasicstructuresoftext
102 Beyond the Flow
documents,rhetoricalrelationships,andsubsequentannotations(Xu2010,428).
Reference Implementations
Furtherexamplestrytodeepentheanalysisofdependenciesbetweenagents,practices,andSKOs.ThethreeshowcasesareLiquidBooks(Casatietal.2011),LiquidJournals(Baezetal.2009;BaezandCasati2010)andLiquidConferences(Xu2011,chap.6).Thegoaloftheseexamplesistoinvestigatehowtheconceptofliquiditymightchangehistoricalpublishingsetupsunderstoodasaconflationofaforementionedentities.AlthoughtheseexamplesoffermoreconcreteinsightsintoLPs,theseinsightssub-stantiatethenotionofliquidity,notthemodeloftheLPformat.
Forinstance,LiquidJournalsaredefinedasthematicstreamswhichcontinuouslyincludeandexcludelinkstoscientificcontributions.Theimportantaspectofthesejournalsisnolongerprovidingfinalversionsofresearchpapers,butofferinganinterfacetocurrentlyrelevantresearchateverystateofmaturity.LiquidPublicationsinthegaseousstatecouldbelinkedinthesamewayassolidones.Likewise,linkscouldbeincludedandexcludedatanytime.Issuesofjournalsaretransformedtojournalsnapshotsthatrepresent“collectionsoflinks”(BaezandCasati2010,sec.4.2).Thispropositionalsomakesclearthatholdingcontentisnolongertheprimaryfunctionofjournals.
There-specificationofhistoricalformatskeepsthehistoricalagentsassociatedwithaspecificconceptintact.However,itasksforthetypesofactivitysuchagentsmightengageinwithinacontinuumofdifferentlevelsof“liquidity.”Forexample,therearestilleditorsinLiquidJournals,buttheynowcuratethelistoflinksinLiquidJournalsinsteadofacceptingandeditingcontent.
LiquidPublicationsareinmanyaspectsinbetweenMAs,SPs,andROs,enrichedwiththeuniqueideaofliquidity.FromMAstheyinheritthestrongemphasisonfragmentationandmodularization.TheuseofURIsinordertotechnicallyrepresentelementsandentitiesinapublicationaswellastheintenttoformallyclassifyeachofitsentitiescomesclosetoSPs.However,itisworthmentioningthatdespitecomparabletechnologicalapproachesandgoalsthereisrarelyanyreferencetoSPs.ThemanagementofLPsinrepositories,finally,resemblessomeofthecharacteristicsoftheearlyROsinthemyExperimentenvironment.
Publishing 3.0 103
Thetermliquidityisametaphor.Byputtingtogetherallaspectsapparentinitspresenceitispossibletosaythatmostoftenitdefinesahigherrateofinteractionbetweenagentsandpublications.Interactionsthatareoutlinedfortheliquidstateincludegivingfeedback,reviewing,andmodification.Themodificationofcontentasaninstantreactiontothefeedbackresem-blestheideaofdirectcommunication.Accordingly,theLiquidJournalwascharacterizedasachannelthatnolongerholdscontentbutcontrolstheflowofinformation.Thefocusshiftsfromtheobjecttothephenomenatheobjectissupposedtomediate.Suchcommunicativeturnisalsosup-portedbytheaforementionedanalogybetweenthehistoryofpublishingandthedecouplingofsoftwarefromhardware.OnecouldthereforeclaimthatLPsaimatthehighestdegreeatwhichpublishingcanbegraspedascommunication.
Enhanced PublicationsNext in line is the concept of Enhanced Publications(hereafterreferredtoasEPs).ThetermEnhancedPublicationisusedintwodifferentways.Ontheonehanditrepresentsanefforttodefineanintegrativeconcepttodigitalpublications.Sierman,Schmidt,andLudwig(2009),Castelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013),BardiandManghi(2014),andSimukovic(2012)evenuseitasanumbrellatermfordigitalpublicationsassuch.Ontheotherhand,itisusedbyprojectsorjournalstryingtoadvertiseinnovativecomponentsoftheirdigitalpublications.Thetermintegrativeconcepthighlightsthatsomeoftherelatedworkconsistsincomparingandsystematizingdifferentapproaches,identifyingcommonproblems,andinundertakingthefirstattempttodefineatechnicalandformalmodelthatincludesalltheothers.ThisisasignificantdifferencetoformerevaluationsbyNentwichandOwen.Furthermore,EPsseektocreatebetterconditionsforinfrastructurethatsupportstheircreation.
Thereasonforthissignificantdifferenceistheprofessionalbackgroundoftheconcept’smaincontributors.EnhancedPublicationsaroseoutofthedigitallibraryanddigitalresearchrepositorydomain,andfirstappearedinthe DRIVER42project(DigitalRepositoryInfrastructureVisionforEuropeanResearch).TheywereusedinavarietyofreportswhichwerecombinedinapublicationfundedbytheDutchSURF43Foundation(Sierman,Schmidt,andLudwig2009).Thedefinitionofthistermaswellasthecontentofthereportsbuiltuponearlierworkonresearchrepositorieswhichalso
42 https://web.archive.org/web/20120113023439/http://www.driver-repository.eu/43 https://www.surf.nl
104 Beyond the Flow
tookplaceintheNetherlands.Correspondingly,PetersandLossau(2009,250–51)highlighttheimpactoftheDARE(DigitalAcademicRepository,seeKoninklijkeBibliotheek2006)fortherealizationoftheDRIVERprojectas well as for the COAR44(ConfederationofOpenAccessRepositories).Hogenaar(2009,2–3)likewiserelatestheactivitiestotheDutchprojectESCAPE45(EnhancedScientificCommunicationbyAggregatedPublicationEnvironments).MostoftheauthorsofDRIVER’sreportshadworkedinoneoftheseprojectsbefore.
ThepeculiarviewpointofthesedomainsnotonlyshapedthespecificationofEPs,italsoledtoactivitiesofatypethatwerenewinthecontextofdigitalpublications.DespitethesepeculiaritiesEPsareobviouslypartofthesamediscourseondigitalpublicationsastheconceptsdiscussedearlierinthiswork.Theyrepeatlargepartsofthemajorthemesthathavebeenoutlinedalready,amongthemtheinformationoverload(Woutersen-Wind-houwerandBrandsma2009),theaccelerationofscience(Verhaar2009,38),andopenaccess(PetersandLossau2009).Nonetheless,researchonEPsfocusesmorethanothersontheevaluationanddiscussionofenviron-mentalandinfrastructuralproblemsofdigitalpublications.ThisaspectisverywelldocumentedbyWoutersen-Windhouwer’sandBrandsma’s(2009,81)intent“tohelptostructuretheenvironmentofscholarlypublishing.”
ThealternativeusageofthetermEnhancedPublicationsbuildsontheattemptoftheDRIVERprojecttoestablishagenericperspective.Accordingly,peopleandprojectsuseittogiveanametotheinnovativepotentialofpublicationsassuch,regardlessoftheirtype.SomeoftheseprojectswereintentionallyinitiatedbythesameSURFfoundationthatwasinvolvedintheDRIVERproject( Jankowskietal.2012,2).Otherinitiativeslikethe Information Bulletin for Variable Starsappropriatedthetermindepen-dently(Holl2012).
The W3C Incubator Group on Library Linked Data(W3CLibraryLinkedDataIncubatorGroup2011)providesarandomlistofEPprojectsrelatingtotheengagementofSURFmentionedabove.Italsodescribestheirentan-glementwithinthestrategicframeofinfrastructuredevelopmentintheNetherlands.
44 https://www.coar-repositories.org/45 https://escapesurf.wordpress.com/
Publishing 3.0 105
Specifications and Features
Asmentionedabove,anydescriptionofEPsispragmaticallymotivated.Theprimarygoalofsuchdescriptionsisfindingastartingpointfromwhichtoanswerthequestionofwhetherresearchrepositoriesneedtoinvestinfurtherdevelopmentoftheirtechnologiesornot(Woutersen-Wind-houwerandBrandsma2009).HogenaarandHoogerwerf(2009)statethattheexamplesofwhattheyconsidertobeanEParesonewthattheylackanoverarchingmodelinordertorefertothem.Infact,themostimportantaspectofthisargumentistheunderlyingclaimthatdifferentapproachestonewpublicationobjectsdobelongtoaunifiableidea.
Judgingbythequantityofpublicationconceptsavailableatthattime,thenumberofconceptsconsideredintheevaluationsisrelativelylow.Basically,twoconceptsarerepeatedlymentionedanddiscussedingreaterdetail.ThesearetheModularArticleandScientificPublicationPackages(HogenaarandHoogerwerf2009;Woutersen-WindhouwerandBrandsma2009;Hogenaar2009).Woutersen-WindhouwerandBrandsma(2009)alsodiscussMarcondes“webpublishedscientificarticles”whileVerhaar(2009)positsSeringhausasareferencepointforEPs.BothcontributionswerediscussedasearlyexamplesofSPsinthepresentstudy.Infact,Woutersen-WindhouwerandBrandsma(2009)usethesectiontitle“SemanticPub-lishing”intheirpresentationofMarcondesbutthenincludeSPPsunderthesametitle.Incontrast,theydifferentiatebetweenMAsandSPseventhoughbothcanbedescribedasreferringtosimilarkeyconcepts.
Thereasonforthisfuzzinessdependsonwhichaspectsaregivenpriorityintheanalysis.Thekeypointbehindtheresultsofeachoftheseanalysesistheclaimthatpublicationsneedtobeconceivedofasaggregationsofcomponents,similartoapproachesinthesectiononaggregations.Thisalsopreparesthefieldforanotherclaim,thatofsayingthatthemaininnovationofdigitalpublicationconceptsistheinclusionofcomponentsthathavenotorcouldnothavebeenincludedbefore.Hogenaarwrites:
…theinformationobjectwillplayacentralrole.Itmaybeanykindofobject:atraditionalpublication,acommentonthatpublication;adataset;animage;anaudiofragment,andsoon.(Hogenaar2009,1)
Accordingly,Verhaar(2009)arguesthatEPsappearedinconsequencetotheincapacityofhistoricalpublicationstoincludesupplementaryresearchmaterials.Thefunctionofthesenewlyincludedmaterialsindifferentpublication concepts as well as the evaluation of concrete information unitsandresourcesisofsecondaryimportance.VanderPoel(2007)
106 Beyond the Flow
andWoutersen-WindhouwerandBrandsma(2009)distinguishbetweencomponentsofthreedifferent“informationtypes”:dataasevidence,extramaterialsasillustration,andpostpublicationdata.ThelevelofabstractionbehindthisclassificationisoneofthereasonswhyHogenaarandHoogerwerf(2009)concludethatSPPsandMAsarebasicallythesameapproach,despitethedifferencesdescribedinthecurrentstudy.Inanevenmoreconcisedefinition,theauthors(136)writethatEPshavean“object-basedstructurewithexplicitlinksbetweenobjects.”
AsignificantsubstantiationofthetypesofinformationobjectsthatbecameaconstitutivecomponentofEPsisgiveninVerhaarsummarization:
Inconclusion,EnhancedPublicationscanbedefinedascompounddigitalobjects,whichcombineePrintswithoneormoremetadatarecords,oneormoredataresources,oranycombinationofthese.(Verhaar2009,101)
The Question of Text
Incomparisonwiththeearlierspecifications,theabovequotehighlightsthecentralityoftext,referringtoitasePrints.Indeed,laterspecificationsofEPspromotethisideamoreoften.HogenaarandHoogerwerf(2009,136)accordinglystate:“weassumeEnhancedPublicationshaveatleastonetextualresource.”Thisissignificantbecausebothauthorsaddthatpublications are conceivable in which there is no central textual resource (HogenaarandHoogerwerf2009,154),anideaforwhichexampleshavebeendescribedinthecurrentstudyalready.TheyarguethatthisscenarioisoutofthescopeofEPs.Thisargumentisstrikinginsofarasthecon-ceptofSPPs,whichdoesnotmaketextmandatory,isoneofthemoreprominentobjectsofstudyinEPresearch.InthelightofthispointtheEPapproachthereforecannotfulfillitsambitiontobegeneric.
DespiteHogenaar’sandHoogerwerf’spragmaticdecision,theroleoftextremainsanissue.Withinthearticlethatintroducedtheconceptofinfor-mationobjectsandwhichwaspublishedinthesameyear,Hogenaar(2009)doesexplicitlynotdistinguishbetweenarticlesandotherinformationobjects.Jankowskietal.(2012)tonedownthedefinitiongivenbyHogenaarandHoogerwerfbysayingthatanEPconsistsofacentralpublicationwhichonlymostoftenisatextualresource.Diender(2010)insteadnotonlystatesthatEPsareprimarilytextualresourcestowhichotherresourcesareadded,butthattextisalsoitsprimaryinterface.
Publishing 3.0 107
Despitethisinconsistencythequestionoftheroleoftextisaddressedmoreoftenthaninotherpublicationdesigns.SemanticPublicationsareanexception.However,SPsareabletomakeadecisionabouttheroleoftextbyvirtueofaveryspecificapproachtodigitalpublications.EnhancedPub-licationsarenotabletodothesame,becausetheirconceptisgroundedinanevaluationofthestateoftheart.Inthelightoftheissueoftext,thisstateoftheartthereforeappearstobelessconsistentthanEPsassume.
TheQuestionofMethodologicalDifferencesandtheHumanities
EnhancedPublicationsalsoofferminorattemptstoevaluatedependenciesbetweenspecificneedsofdisciplines,especiallythehumanitiesandEPs.Infact,theclusterofEPprojectscreatedmoreexamplepublicationsinthedomainofthehumanitiesthaninotherprojectsnotoriginatinginthehumanities.Around2011severalprojectswerefundedwiththegoaltoevaluatethepotentialofEPsforpublishinginthehumanities.Amongthem are the Veteran Tapesproject,whichpublishesresearchonthesecondworldwar(vandenHeuveletal.2010),andtheEnhancing Scholarly Pub-lishing in the Humanities and Social Sciencesproject( Jankowskietal.2012).
Inthelatterproject,severalbooksfrommediaandculturalsciencesthatwerealreadypublishedinpaperformweretransformedintoEPs.Jankowskietal.(2012)proposethattheselectionofaddedfeaturesintheprojectshouldresembletheparticularneedsofthehumanities.However,nodeeperanalysisofthesemethodologicalneedsandthewayinwhichtheyrelatetothesefeaturesisprovided.ThepaperfocusesondescriptiveandtechnicalaspectsofEPsandontheimplementationprocessoftheuse-cases.However,itdocumentssomeoftheexperiencesthedesignersmadetogetherwiththehumanitiesresearcherswithintheimplementationprocess.
Incontrasttotheoriginalgoaloftheseprojects,theVeteransTapesprojectalsolacksasubstantialevaluationoftheexperiencesofhumanitiesresearchersinvolvedinthistypeofproject.Itwasinsteadmeanttofunctionasalighthouseproject,toattractabroaderhumanitiesaudience.MorepreciselyvandenHeuveletal.(2010,2688)state:“Weconsiderthisprojectasexemplaryfortheparadigmshiftthatistakingplaceinthefieldofhumanities.”Theparadigmshiftitself,however,isonlyproclaimed.
HogenaarandHoogerwerf(2009,137–39)discussconcernsaboutthefactthattheDRIVERprojectchosetoonlyimplementoneEP“demonstrator”thatshouldrepresentallscientificdomains.Onceagain,thediscussion
108 Beyond the Flow
indicatesthepossibilityofdifferentneedsbetweendifferentdisciplineswhenitcomestothedesignofnewpublicationformats.Theauthorsrespondnegativelytothisquestionintwoways.First,theyrelativizetheseneedsbyarguingthatmethodologicaldifferencesbetweendisciplineswillbecomeincreasinglyunimportantduetothegrowingphenomenonofinterdisciplinaryresearch.Thus,likeinotherpublicationconcepts,thedesignprocessisledbycertainclaimsabouthowtechnologicalinnovationwillchangescientificpractice.Second,theyreducethequestionofmethodologicaldifferencesanobservethatonlydifferentresourcesareimportantindifferentdisciplines.Moreprecisely,theylinkdifferentdis-ciplinestodifferentresourcetypessuchastextcorporaforthehumanitiesandmeasureddatatoscience.Duetothissimplification,theauthorscanarguethatEPsareabletohandleanyresourcetypeandarethereforecapableofrepresentingresearchinanydiscipline.
AnothercontributioninwhichJankowskiandJones(2013)isinvolveddoesindeedapproachthetopicofmethodologicaldifferencesandEPsmoreseriously.TheauthorspresenttheresearchofMeyeretal.(2011).Thisstudytriedtoinvestigatedifferentuptakesofdigitaltools,especiallyso-calledweb2.0tools,bydisciplinesinthehumanitiesandthesciences.Jankowskietal.deducesfromthatworkthattheHumanitiestendtoworklesscollaborativelyanduse“computationallylesscomplex”toolsthantheSciencesdo.AlthoughJankowskietal.highlighttheimportanceofthisandcomparablestudiesforEPs,theyintentionallyleavetheinterpretationtothereaders:again,thistopicisintroducedbutleftbehindwithoutfurtherclarification.
Functional Requirements
EnhancedPublicationsarenotonlydefinedbyextractingfeaturesfromexistingdigitalpublicationformats.FurtherstrategiestogaininsightsintorequirementsforasustainablemetamodelofEPsareconsideredaswell.Woutersen-WindhouwerandBrandsma(2009)substantiatespecificationofEPsbyputtingtheabstractideaofEPsinthecontextofresearchlit-eratureonpublishingassuchfromtherepositoriesdomain.TheyfollowVandeSompelandLagoze(2007),mentionedalready,byclaimingthatscholarlycommunicationconsistsoftheareasofregistration,certification,awareness,archiving,andrewarding.Theseareasaretranslatedintotechnicalspecifications46,callsmadetostakeholdersinthepublishing
46 Anexampleofsuchaspecificationistheuseofso-calledpersistentidentifiers(PIDs).PersistentidentifiersareURIsthatarenotsupposedtochangeinthefuture.While
Publishing 3.0 109
field47,butalsorecommendationsforchangingrelatedpractices,suchasthereviewprocessandthemeasurementoftheimpactofpublications.
Hogenaar(2009)definessixfurtherrequirementsforEPsbasedonaques-tionnaireof“users”whichaddressdifferentfacetsofpublishing.Followingthequestionnaire,anEPmust(a)becitable,(b)havemetadataforitselfanditscomponents,(c)mustcontainexplicitrelationsbetweencomponents,(d)becapableofbeingstoredinanetworkenvironment,Iabletobeversionedandcontinuouslymodified,(f)bemachine-readable,andfinally,(g)bestoredinanenvironmentthatprovidesanApplication Programming Inter-face48(alsoreferredtoasAPI).Thesepropertiesarestronglyreminiscentofthediscussiononaggregations,andindeedseveralreferencestothiscom-munityhavealreadybeenhighlighted.However,thelistofrequirementsprovokesthequestionwhichuserbasewasselectedinthequestionnaire.Unfortunately,nofurtherinformationisgiven.
In“IdentifyingPropertiesforEnhancedPublications”GielkensandHulman(2011)alsobuildtheirresearchonthebasisofanevaluationofusers.However,theareaofinterestinwhichthesepropertiesaredefinedissignificantlydifferentfromthestudiesdescribedabove.GielkensandHulmananalyzereaders’commentsaboutacontributiontoElsevier’sArticleoftheFuturecontest.Inthesecomments,readersjudgethedifferentpropertiesofthearticleandtherebyofferanopportunitytodrawinferencesandtoguidefurtherresearch.Consequently,theauthorsderivepropertiesfortheareasofusability,layout,contentquality,andreadability.Theselectionofpropertiesshowsthathere,EPsaredefinedfromtheangleoftheirpresentation.ThekeyclaimbehindanyfurtherspecificationisthatEPsturnintointeractivewebsitesandarepublishedasHTML,adevel-opmentthattakesplaceafterthemainphaseoftheDRIVERproject.
AdriaansenandHooft(2010)takeasimilarapproachtoGielkensandHulman.TheyselectfivedifferentjournalwebsitesandcallthemEPswithoutfurtherexplanationoftherelationshipbetweenformerdef-initions(seeabove),themeta-model(seebelow),andtheapplicationof
domainURIsmightchangeduetoavarietyofreasons,aPIDshouldalwayslinktothesameplaceandremain“stable”.
47 TheDRIVERprojectcallsforthecreationofsocalled“trustworthyrepositories”,meaningrepositorieswhichforvariousreasonsaresustainable,respected,andintegratedintothepublishinglandscape.
48 AnAPIisatechnicalmechanismbywhichsoftwarecanbeaccessedfromothersoftware.InthiscontextitmeansthatsoftwareandsoftwareservicescanobtainmetadataandcontentoutofrepositorieshostingEPs.
110 Beyond the Flow
thisconceptintheirstudy.RecommendedfeaturesofEPsinthisstudyareinteractivenavigationortheoptiontohavedownloadablePDFversions.
ItwasmentionedintheintroductiontoEPsthatthetermEPsissometimesalsousedbycertainjournalstryingtoexpressthattheyformpartofadevelopmenttowardsnewpublicationtypes.Inthiscontextthespecificsetoffeaturesthesejournalsprovideisofminorimportance:thetermisappropriatedasapoliticalconcept.Holl(2012)isagoodexampleforthistypeofusage.HepresentstheastronomyjournalInformation Bulletin of Variable StarsandcallsitanEP.Hetriestobackupthisclassificationbyjustsummarizingfeaturesofthejournalwebsiteinanon-systematicmanner.Theseincludelinkstodatabasesanddatasources,interactivevisu-alizations,andasearchfacilityonspecificentitiesusingnormalizingnameresolution.
Model
OneofthemostimportantcontributionstoEPsistheattempttoprovideahigh-levelformalmodelfordigitalpublications.CorrespondingtotheoriginalintentiontoestablishEPsasanumbrellaconcept,thismodelintendstorepresenttheminimalintersectionofalldigitalpublicationcon-ceptsinvestigatedbytheDRIVERproject.Assuch,thismodelismeanttobeareferencemodelthatshouldfacilitatetheimplementationofEPsandofsupportingrepositoryinfrastructures.
HogenaarandHoogerwerf(2009)definewhatapublicationmodelisinthecontextoftheDRIVERproject.Apublicationmodeldefinesthecomponentsofapublicationandthewaytheyarearrangedinit.Moretechnically,itdescribesrelevantentitiesandtheirrelationships.Consequently,Verhaar(2009)transformstheapproachintoaso-calledentity-relationship model (seefigure3.1),acommonmodellingapproachincomputerscience,especiallyinthecontextofdatabases.InthismodelVerhaardefinesfiveentities:e-prints,dataobjects,metadata,compounddatasets,andEPsthemselves.Thedifferencebetweendataobjectsandcompounddatasetsismainlytechnical.Itaddressesthepossibilitythatresourcesbelongingtogetheronthelevelofmeaningmightbesplitintodifferentphysicalresources.ItisalsoworthmentioningthatEPsmaycontainotherEPs.
ItisalsosignificantthatthemodelforEPsdoesnotprovideanyotherrelationship between components than consistsOf.Likewise,therearenofurthersemanticsincludedinthefurtherdiscussionofthismodel.Evalu-ationsofrelationshiptypesexistoutsideofthehigh-levelpublication
Publishing 3.0 111
model(Verhaar2009,sec.10.6;Woutersen-WindhouwerandBrandsma2009,sec.5).Nevertheless,theseevaluationsarehardlysystematizedandservethepurposeofmerelyillustratingtheusage.TheaforementioneddemonstratorintroducedbyHogenaarandHoogerwerf(2009,154)alsoonlymentionstheneedtomodelsequentialrelationships,theydonotimplementthisinformationinthecoredescriptionofthedemonstratoritself.TheimplementationofthedemonstratorisbuiltupontheOAI-OREstandard.Infact,thelastparagraphshowedthatthesemanticsoftheEPmodelandthoseinOAI-OREarenearlyidentical,afactthatisconfirmedbyVerhaar(2009)aswell.
[Figure3.1]Basicentity-relationshipdiagramofEPstakenfromVerhaar(2009)
112 Beyond the Flow
ItwasmentionedbeforethattheconceptofEPswasdefinedamongotherthingsinordertobeabletoevaluatethedigitalrepositoryland-scapeatthattime.ThistaskiscarriedoutbyWoutersen-WindhouwerandBrandsma(2009).Intheevaluationtheauthors(79)makeaninterestingobservation:“Themainconclusionisthatpublishersandrepositorieshavethebuildingblocksandthetools,butingeneraldonotusethemtocreateanEnhancedPublication.”
From Enhanced Publications to Rich-Internet-Publications
IthasbeenindicatedthatthedefinitionofEPschangedovertime.Thischangeismorethananadditionoffeatureswithinanotherperspective.ItisamodificationoftheconceptualcoreofEPs.IntheDRIVERproject,thecoreofEPswasconstitutedbytechnicalrequirementsofEPsmodelledwithinacompoundobjectmeta-model.Inlatercontributions,thecoreisaninteractivewebsite,whiletechnicalaspectsbecomesecondary.Someoftheseexampleshavealreadybeenmentioned.Forinstance,theEPoftheastronomyjournaliscreatedbyascript(asmallcomputerprogram)only.ThereisnoindependentlymodelledversionapartfromtheHTMLpagethatcouldbearchivedinarepository.Interactivevisualizations,moreover,arecreatedontheflybymeansofanotherscriptthatisnotevenpartofthewebsite.
TheshiftthattakesplacecreatesanewtermwithintheresearchfieldofEPs.Consequently,someauthorsbegintousethetermRich Internet Pub-lications(Voutsinos2010;Breure,Voorbij,andHoogerwerf2011;Breure2014,hereafterreferredtoasRIPs).ThetermwasinitiallyintroducedbyBreure,Voorbij,andHoogerwerf(2011).AlthoughsomeoftheauthorsformedpartofresearchgroupsthatdevelopedtheEPsmodel,andalthoughtheyemphasizethestrongconnectiontoEPs,theyarguethatthereisaqual-itativechangeinthedevelopmentofEPs.Moreprecisely,theystatethatlittleresearchhasbeencarriedoutonthepresentationlayerofEPs.Theyclaim that there are few connections between research about the struc-turallayerofEPsanditspresentationlayer.AtthesametimethebrowserisimplicitlydefinedastheplacewhereEPsarepresented.
Inasurvey,Breureetal.lookatdifferentwebsitesofpublicationsandpublication-likeresearchoutput.Theycategorizethemintothreedifferenttypes.ThefirstareEPs,typetwoandthreeareRIPs.Thetwomaincriteriawhichenforcethesedistinctionsarethelevelofinteractivitywithwhichausercannavigateandmanipulatethecontentofthewebsite,aswellasthecapabilitytorendercomponentsofapublicationinamulti-medialike
Publishing 3.0 113
style.Theyarguethattherearemoreinvestigationsoftheintegrationofcomponentsinthemannermentionedabove,andthatthereforeanewtermshouldhighlightthisshift.Incontinuation,RIPsrefertophenomenasuchasinteractivemulti-mediapresentationscreatedwithtechnologieslikeFlash49orJava.ThedistinctionbetweenEPsandRIPsisalsoexpressedasthelow-endandthehigh-endpointofviewondigitalpublications.
AnotheruseofthetermRIPhighlightsallegedbenefitsofvisualformsofcommunicationinpublications,incomparisontotextualforms.Byusingthephrase“ShowWhatYouTell”Breure,Voorbij,andHoogerwerf(2011)introduceahierarchyofdigitalpublications,orderedaccordingtotheextenttowhichtheyusevisualelementsinfavoroftextualelements.Thus,RIPsalsoengageagainandinanewmannerwiththedebateabouttheroleoftextindigitalpublishing.
OthercontributionssuchasthosebyVoutsinos(2010)andJankowskiandJones(2013)putRIPsinthecontextoftheWeb 2.0debate.TheWeb2.0debatefocusesonthecapabilityofwebtechnologiestoblurdifferencesbetweenproducersandconsumersofwebcontent.IntheWeb2.0,awebsiteisaninterfaceofmutualcommunicationandeditingbyboththeproviderofawebsiteanditsvisitors.Inthisspirit,Voutsinos(2010)definesa“referencedesignpattern”forRIPswhichcontainscommunicationfeaturesonly.Itincludestheabilitytocomment,toannotate,orsharecontentofRIPswithotherwebenvironments.ThisapproachtoRIPsislesssubstantialthanthedefinitionbyBreureetal.becauseitfocusesonaspectsthatwerealreadypartoftheoriginalEPsmodelunderthenameofpost-publicationdata(Woutersen-WindhouwerandBrandsma2009).
AlthoughJankowskiandJones(2013)sharethesamefascinationforWeb2.0features,theyrefrainfrommakingacleardistinctionbetweenEPsandRIPs.Consequently,EPsare“aninitiativetoincorporatewebfunctionalitiesintoscholarlypublishing”(349),whileRIPsareanalternativeterm“forbasicallythesamedevelopment”(355).
ThecharacterizationofRIPsas“interactiveweb-sitelikeenvironments”(Diender2010,1)leadstoresearchonwaysofincorporatingsuchinter-activity.Forinstance,deBoerandVerkooij(2011)evaluatevisualizationsoftwarelikeGoogleChartsorMicrosoft Pivotviewer50inordertoseeiftheycanbeusedforRIPs.Breure,Hoogerwerf,andvanHorik(2014)andBreure(2014)introduceaFlashbasedapplicationinordertoauthorandrender
49 https://get.adobe.com/de/flashplayer/50 https://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/pivotviewer/
114 Beyond the Flow
RIPswithahighlevelofinteractivity.Morestandardizedtechnologies,likeHTMLwithCSSforthedesign,andJavaScriptforinteractivityareaddressedbutdonotseemtobeimplementedinsoftware.ManyoftheshowcasesoftheprojectwebsiteneedFlashtobepresentable.Therefore,aninterestingaspectoftheshiftfromEPstoRIPsisthefactthatitisalsoashift,fromtryingtoelaborateagenericapproachthatusesstandardizedvocabulariesandtechnologies,toanengagementintoreal-worlddiscussionsandestablishedtechnologiesatthattime.
Reality Check
BeyondthebasicevaluationoftheroleoftextanddisciplinesforEPs,anotherveryimportantdifferencefromotherconceptsneedstobementioned.ResearchonEPsalsoincludesaccompanyingresearchonthedevelopmentofEPs.Thus,studiesexistwhichtrytoinvestigateaspectslikefeasibility,problems,andacceptanceofEPs.
ThefirstcriticalevaluationsarealreadyprovidedbytheDRIVERreportsthemselves.Aftertheimplementationofthedemonstrator,HogenaarandHoogerwerf(2009)concludethattheconceptofEPshasaconflictingaspect.Moreprecisely,thereistheapproachofpotentiallyincludingeverythingthatisavailableinthewebintoEPs,whichendangerstheEPsduetotechnicalandsocialissues.Theseissuesincludethelackofnec-essarymetadataforcomponents,itspotentialanonymityontheweb,differentaccessrights,thechangingstateofresources—forinstanceadatabasethatisbeingupdated—andfinallythephenomenonofdeadlinks.Alloftheseproblemsaddressthelackofcontroloverpublicationswhichbuiltinanetworkenvironmentliketheweb.Theyjeopardizethesta-bility,integrity,andlastbutnotleastthequalityofanEP.
Inaslightlylaterarticle,Hoogerwerf(2009)repeatstheseproblemsandaddsanotherthree:firstheadmitsthatEPsarehardlycreatableandmaintainableinanefficientway,second,hestatesthattheEPmodelisunderspecifiedbothintermsofsemanticsforrelationsbetweencomponentsandofobligatoryfieldsandfinally,heremarksthatresearchersarenotreallyawareofEPs.
Theissuesofsustainability,authoring,andoftheattitudeofresearchersaskeystakeholdersarethemainissueswhichrecurrentlymentionedandfurtherstudied.Diender(2010)carriesoutasurveyonusabilityandasksresearchers:are“EnhancedPublicationsanEnhancedExperience?”Jankowskietal.(2012)setupworkinggroupswithauthorcollectivesfrom
Publishing 3.0 115
threeprintpublicationstoexploreandtesttheirtransformationintoEPs.Faraceetal.(2012)alsoprovideasurvey,butonthewillingnessofresearcherstoactuallyenhancetheirpublicationswithextramaterial.
Theresultsofallthesestudiesarechallenging.Accordingtothemhalfoftheintervieweesarewillingtoprovideresearchmaterials,halfarenot.Alittlemorethanahalfquestionifthesematerialsareofuseforotherresearchers.AlthoughbeneficialelementswerediscoveredwithinthetransformationofbookstoEPs,theoriginalauthorsalsoputinques-tionthebenefitofsuchEPsonabroaderperspective.Additionally,theystressedthelackoftimetocuratesuchpublications.Thereisnoclearpicturefortheissueofusability.Althoughintervieweesgaveanoverallpositivefeedback,manydetailswerecriticized.Faraceetal.(2012)interpretthiscontradictionbyhighlightingthatpeopleconsideredthepotentialinwhattheyhadevaluatedmorethantheirconcreteexperience.AllauthorsagreedonthefactthatmoreresearchneedstobedoneinthesedirectionsinordertohelpspreadingEPs.
TheissueofauthoringisfurtherinvestigatedbyAdriaansenandHooft(2010),Breure,Voorbij,andHoogerwerf(2011),aswellasBreure(2014).Breure,Voorbij,andHoogerwerf(2011)remarkthatsophisticatedRIPscannotbecreatedwithoutprogrammingcapabilities.ThisassertiononlysubstantiatestheconcernthatthetoolstocreateEPsbymanyauthorsaremissing.Inordertoevaluatetheseproblemsingreaterdetail,Breure(2014)describesthedemandsofanentireauthoringprocess.Intheendhecon-cludesthatincomparisontothebenefits,theeffortittakestocreateEPsquestionstheconceptassuch.AdriaansenandHooft(2010)evaluatethelandscapeofavailableauthoringtoolsforEPs.TheyfindthatnoneofthesetoolsactuallysupportworkonallofthecrucialaspectsofEPsandthattheirusageisoftenverycomplicated.
DoorenboschandSierman(2011)reportontheresultsofacomprehensivestudyonthefeasibilityoflong-term-preservationofEPs.HogenaarandHoogerwerf(2009)andothershavearguedthatthecomplexityandquantityofresourcesinEPsneedsre-distributionofarchivingresponsibility.Incontrast,EPsandalsomanyconceptsemphasizedthefundamentalnetworknatureofpublicationsaslivinginthewebbeyondinstitutionalnodes.InthiscontextDoorenboschandSiermanfindoutthatadistributionlevelexceedingtworepositoriesinanetworkjeopardizesEPs,duetorelatedproblemsalsomentioned.Furthermore,theydis-tinguishbetweentechnologicalandorganizationalreasons,mostofwhichbelongtotheorganizationalarea.Despitethesepessimisticresultsand
116 Beyond the Flow
thestrongemphasisEPsandotherconceptsputonthenetworkasafundamentalorganizingprincipleofdigitalpublication,theauthorsarepositivethattheseissueswillberesolved.
WiththeconceptofEPs,anattemptwasmadeforthefirsttimetodefineasystematicandoverarchingframeworkandtechnicalmodelforthedescriptionofdigitalpublications.Theattemptwasdrivenbyacommunitywhichwasonlyindirectlyengagedwithmostpublicationformatsdiscussedbefore:therepositorydomain.Inconsequence,someoftheissuesofdigitalpublicationswhichhadnotraisedmuchattentionbeforehavebeenhighlightedmoreexplicitly.Suchissuesnotablyincludetheroleoftextindigitalpublicationsandpossibledependenciesbetweenresearchdis-ciplinesandcertainfeaturesofdigitalpublications.Similarly,theattempttoestablishanoverarchingconceptfordifferentapproachestodigitalpub-lishingraisedmoreawarenessaboutsocialcomplexities,namelyadifferentevaluationofthefeasibilityoflong-termpreservation,ofthecosts-benefitsrelationship,andtheintegrationofassociatedresearchtothedevelopmentofmoreabstractandtechnicalconcepts.
Theimpactofthesereflectionsareunfortunatelylimited,foravarietyofreasons.Regardingtheroleofthetextafurtherevaluationofthemeaningofthisissueisblockedbyapragmaticdecisiontocomplywiththecen-tralityofthetextatprojecttime.Thequestionaboutdifferencesbetweenscientificdisciplinesisrejectedimmediatelyafteritwasraised,withoutgivingfurtherargumentsthantheconfirmationthatitistheattemptofEPstocarryoutagenericapproach.Issuesoffeasibilityarementionedbuthavenoeffectonthegenericmodelorontheperceptionofdigitalpublications.
TheshifttoRIPsfurthermoremakesthistensionworseforsomeoftheseissues,especiallyforlong-termpreservation.Althoughnotechnicalgenericmodelfordigitalpublicationsassuchexistedbefore,theusabilityoftheEPdatamodelcanbechallenged.Asmentionedbefore,itisbuilton a comparison between publication concepts that ignores important differencesandneglectsotherpublicationconceptsthatwereavailablealready.InadditiontootherreasonsthismightalsohavecontributedtothefactthatthegenericEPdatamodeldoesnotdiffersubstantiallyfromthelogicsoftheOAI-OREmodel.Perhapsitistheconsequenceofmissingper-spectivesderivingfromtheEPsdatamodelthatleadstotheshifttowardsRIPs.SinceRIPshaveastrongfocusonaspectsoftheuserinterface,andsincetheydealwithveryconcrete,partiallyproprietarytechnologiestheyare,however,notcapableofenrichingtheEPsdatamodel.Iftheterm
Publishing 3.0 117
EPreferstothehigherlevelofdigitalpublicationsandthetermRIPstothelower,inotherwordstotheviewpointsofagenericmodelandthepresentationlayer,thentheresearchdomainofEPsshowswellhowoftenbothangleslackconceptualintegrityindigitalpublishing.
Nano-PublicationsThenextpublicationconcepttobeintroduceddifferssubstantiallyfromthoseofthelastsections.ThisconceptisthatofNano-Publications(here-afterreferredtoasNPs).ItisalsobuiltontopoftheSemanticWebinfrastructureandthelinkedopendataprinciples,butitinterpretstheirconsequencesforamodelofdigitalpublicationsquitedifferently.ThisdifferencecanbestbedescribedbyagainreferringbacktoBourne’smetaphorofadatabase.Inmanyapproachesdiscussedsofar,thedatabasereferredtothepublicationitself.Moreprecisely,thepublicationshouldbeusableasadatabase.Nano-Publicationsarepushingthismetaphoronestepfurther.KuhnandKrauthammerofferafirststartingpointforunderstandingthisshiftwhentheyclaimthat:
SmallRDF-baseddatasnippets—i.e. nanopublications—ratherthanclassicalnarrativearticlesshouldbeatthecenterofgeneralscholarlycommunication.(KuhnandKrauthammer2012)
Thetechnicalterm“RDF-snippet”basicallymeansonespecificscientificassertion.Toputitdifferently,NPsconsistofoneclaim(Kuhnetal.2013,1)orfact(MonsandVelterop2009)andoneonly.Thisclaimshouldberep-resentableinonesentence.SuchasentenceisnormallyexpressedasanRDFtriple.RDFtriplesareattheheartoftheSemanticWebapproach.Theyarecalledtriplesbecausetheyconsistofthreeentitieswhichtogetherbuildasubject,predicateandobjectstructure.Hence,atriplerepresentsthesmallestformofastatementaboutsomethinganditissuchastatementthatconstitutesthe(Nano-)publication.Statementsmaytaketheformofobservations,hypotheses,orclaims(MonsandVelterop2009).Thegran-ularityofthepublicationisitskeycharacteristicandthusstandsbehindtheterm“Nano.”
Similarly,toKirczandHarmsze,thescopeofsuchanassertionisdefinedasthesmallest,unambiguousunitofthought(Groth,Gibson,andVelterop2010,sec.2).Thedifferencehoweveristheexclusionofanythingelseinthepublicationthatgoesbeyondoneinstantiationofsuchaunit.Formerapproacheswithsimilargoalstriedtoformallyidentifyandleveragemanyoftheseunitswithinamuchbiggerpublication.InNano-Publications
118 Beyond the Flow
thereisessentiallynothingelsethanthispieceofinformation.Whileother approaches group or semantically relate such pieces of information together,NPsdonothavethisintention.
Goingbacktothemetaphorofthedatabase,itisnotthepublicationanymorethatcreatesadatabasewithinformationbutthe(Semantic)Webitselfbecomesahugedatabaseinwhicheachpublicationisonepieceofdata.Correspondingly,thepointisnotextractingthepiecesofinformationinapublicationanymore,buttotreatonepieceofinformationasapub-licationitself,whichinconjunctionwithothersbuildsaglobal“knowledgenetwork”(Schmidt2014).EventheMAdidnotequatetheboundariesofinformationunitswiththesyntacticalunitofaformalizedminimalsentence.Instead,NPsbreakdownthescopeofpublicationstothesim-plestformalformthatanexpressionmayhaveincommunicationassuch.
ThestronglinkbetweentheSemanticWebandNPshasbeenrepeatedlyindicatedalready.Infact,NPs,likemanyotherapproacheswhichtrytoexploitthepotentialsofformalizedsemanticsincomputation,arenotimaginablewithoutthetechnologyprovidedbytheSemanticWeb.TheextentofthisinthecaseofNPsistheidentitybetweenthecoreunitoftheSemanticWeb(RDFtriple)andthescopeofthemainpartofthepublication(statement).ThespecificapplicationofthesetechnologiesinthecaseofNPsresultsfromissuesthatinfluencedthecreationofOLBsandSPsaswell.
TheconceptofNPsinparticularwasdevelopedoutoftheConceptWebAlliance.Thisinitiativeattemptstonormalizeandstandardizerelevantcon-ceptsfromthefieldofthelifesciencesandbiosciences.ForeachconceptaSemanticWebcompliantURIisoffered,consistentlyandpersistentlylinkedtoit.Bydoingso,CWAwantstocreatebetterconditionsforthediscoveryandalignmentofrelatedresearch.
ThisgoalfollowsthelineofargumentsofMonswhowasalreadyintroducedinthesectiononSPs.ItwasalsoMonsandVelterop(2009)whopublishedthefirstsetofkeyideasofNPsin2009.ThesewerefollowedbytechnologicalspecificationswrittenbyGroth,Gibson,andVelterop(2010).Possiblyduetoitssimplicity,theconceptofNPswasquicklyadoptedbysomeservicesinthelifesciencesthatusedSWtechnologiesbefore.Amongthem are the Open Pharmaceutical Triple Store51(OpenPHACTS),theLeiden Open Access Variation Database52,Prizmas Database,andtheCOEUS Semantic
51 https://www.openphacts.org/52 http://www.lovd.nl/3.0/home
Publishing 3.0 119
Web Application Framework(Lopes,Sernadela,andOliveira2013;Sernadela,Lopes,andOliveira2013;Sernadelaetal.2014).ThelatteralsotriestooffertoolsforthecreationofNPs.TheOpenPHACTSprojectwasresponsibleforthepublicationofthefirstNPguidelinesaswell,whichreceivedthestatusofaW3CCommunityDraft(OpenPhacts2012).Lateron,thecurationoftheguidelinesmovedtotheConceptWebAllianceitself(ConceptWebAlliance2015).
Redundancy, a Non-Technical Interpretation of the Data Deluge
AsoutlinedinthesectiononSPs,hugeeffortisputintothestand-ardizationofsemanticsintheSemanticWebdomain.NanoPublicationspushthisapproachevenfurther.AfirsthintofthisradicalizationcouldbeobservedbyreconsideringthedatadelugethemeintheformthatispresentedbyNPs.InafirstreferenceMonsandVelterop(2009,1)complywiththeprevailinginterpretationthatthedatadelugeisa“chasmbetweendataproductionanddatahandling.”However,Nano-Publicationsdonotstophere.Theybuildontheclaimthatbeyondpurequantitythedatadelugemultipliestheproductionofredundantresearchandresearchresults.Thus,theissueisnotonlytomaketheamountofresearchresultsmanageableandprocessable,buttomergeallegedlyidenticalresearchoutputtogether.Consequently,andaboveall,Chichesteretal.(2015)statesthatSemanticWebtechnologiesaredataintegrationtechnologiesinthefirstplace.
Innoneoftheresearchpapersusedforthecurrentresearchanyevidenceorquantitativeanalysisofthephenomenonofredundancyitselfwasgiven.However,theissueisillustratedbyassumptionsandfictionalshowcases.Accordingly,Velterop(2010)claimsthatthesimplificationofeightmillionPubMedarticlestocorestatementswouldreduceredundancybyafactorofathousand.Kuhnetal.(2013)tellthetouchingfictionalstoryabouttwoauthorsresearchingasimilartopicbutnotfindingeachotherbeforesimilarresearchiscarriedouttwice.
The transformation of an approach where existing articles are “semanticallyenriched”tofindfurtherintegration,toanapproachwherethesearticlesaresubstitutedwithoneformalassertionistheeffectofthisspecificinterpretationofthepublishingsituationtoday.However,thewholeconceptofNPsisnotwhollydescribedbyjustaddressingthesub-stitutionofapublicationwithanassertion.Thereisanotherimportantlevelofintegration.TheassertionsofNPsarenotpublishedontheirownbutincombinationwithdatathatsupportstheclaimexpressedinthe
120 Beyond the Flow
assertion.Finally,NPsbuildacollectionofdatasetsbymeansoflinkingtotheminthecontextoftheassertion.
Thefinalintegrationstepisthemainpointbehindthewholeconceptandjustifiesthesemanticwebcompliantformalizationinwhichtheassertionhastobeexpressed.AdvocatesofNPshopethatwhenresearchresultsarepublishedthisway,acompleteknowledgebaseofrelevantclaimsinascientificdomainwillautomaticallyshowup.TheremaybemanyNPswiththesameclaimandeachmayreferencedifferentdatasets.Byvirtueofthestandardizedformofexpressingtheclaiminthewebasearchforthatclaimwithsemanticwebtechnologieswillinstantlybringthemuptogether.AreferenceimplementationofsuchaNano BrowserisimplementedbyKuhn(2013)anddescribedbyKuhnetal.(2013).
ThisradicalizationoftheapplicationofSemanticWebtechnologiesandtheirstandardizationeffortsinthecontextofpublicationsisinfactalsomeantasacritiqueoftheapplicationofSWtechnologiesinotherpub-lishingapproaches.Forinstance,Kuhnetal.(2015)ironicallyrefertoROsas“megapublications”whicharenotnecessaryinordertogainsimilarbenefits.Additionally,theycriticizeSPARQL53,awidelyusedsearchmech-anismfortheSemanticWebaspoorlyperformant.ThompsonandSchultes(2012)criticizeSPsbyarguingthattheyunderestimatedtheeffortneededtoformallyannotatearticles.Finally,Kuhnetal.arguethat:
Basically,nanopublicationscouldbecomethebasisfortheentireSemanticWeb.Whateverinformationonewantstoshare,itcouldbepublishedintheformofoneormorenanopublications.(Kuhnetal.2013,sec.3.1)
Consequently,Velterop(2010)asksthequestionifNPsmightbethetruerealizationtheSWidea.
The Issue of Text Revisited
Nano-PublicationsareasresoluteineliminatingtextandnarrativeelementsformpublicationsasROswere.Whilethelatterconceptexpungestextduetoitsinterpretationoftheroleofcomputationforfuturescience,NPsdoitinconsequenceofargumentscomparablewiththosebehindMAs.Theyjustradicalizethisapproachbyputtingtheassertionintheplaceof
53 The SPARQL Protocol and RDF Query Language(alsoreferredtoasSPARQL)is,asthenamesuggests,aquerylanguageinthecontextoftheSemanticWeb.Aquerylanguageiscomparablewithaprogramminglanguage,limitedandspecializedforthepurposeofqueryingadatabaselikeenvironment.
Publishing 3.0 121
themodule.Ontheotherhand,authorsinthefieldofNPsdonotcom-pletelyrejectallimportanceoftext-basedpublicationsinscience.Atfirstthegoalisjusttoclearlyseparatebothtypes.Alongthewaythisstrictsep-arationisputintoquestion.Thisprocessisanillustrativeexampleforthechallenges of approaches situating the realm of meaning within a purely information-ordata-orientedcontext.
TheideaofsuchseparationintheareaofNPswasfirstpresentedbyMonsandVelterop(2009)andMonsetal.(2011),atthebeginningoftheNPinitiative.Inconcreteterms,theauthorsassertthatthehistoricalarticleanditstextualprofilearenotwellsuitedforthehonestpresentationofresearchresults.Theauthorsdescribetextasbeingredundant,filledupwithcontextdependentterminologywhichtheyclassifyas“jargon,”andambiguousintermsofmeaning.Itsnatureisrhetoricalandthusaimsat“readersandwriters”needsincontrasttothepreciserepresentationoffactsandclaimsthatistheidealofscience.
Ontheotherhand,suchqualitieswouldturntextintoanexceptionaltoolforthingslikeprojectreports,becausereportsareprimarilymeanttoberead.MonsandVelteropaccordinglycalltextualpublications“minutesofscience.”Theyproposetousethemforreportstofundersorinordertomakeapleaforsomething.TheseparationbetweenNPsandtextisthereforeextendedintermsofspecificfunctionsthateachofthetwoisabletofulfill.Consequently,Monsetal.(2011)depicttextasawaytogiveprovenance information for research results which themselves are better publishedbyNPs.
Theextenttowhichtextualityanditsnarrativestructureareseparatedfrom the presentation of research results is also observable where NPs addresstheSWANontology,introducedinthesectiononSPs.Itisanontologyforthepurposeofmodellingresearchdiscoursebasedonresearcharticles.SWAN,althoughoriginallydefinedearlierthanNPs,isalsocapableofmodellingassertionslikethoseaddressedbyNPs.However,Kuhnetal.emphasizethatincontrasttoSWAN:
Noneofthesepersons“owns”thesentence[theassertionwhichcreatesthecoreofaNP],butthesentencehasanexistenceonitsownandjusthappenstobementioned(i.e. claimed,challenged,refuted,related,etc.)bypeoplefromtimetotime.(Kuhnetal.2013,4)
Thus,forNPstheassertionsarenotfactsthatareisolatedandextractedfromdiscourse,theyontologicallyprecedediscourse.
122 Beyond the Flow
AftertheNPmodelwasintroduced,severalsuggestionstriedtoextendit.Theextensionsputaninterestingperspectiveontheontologicalstatusofformalassertionsproclaimedatthebeginning.Gibsonetal.(2012)forinstanceproposetoimplementso-calledcardinalNPs.CardinalNPsrespondtotheissueofqualityandtrust.Moreprecisely,normalNPsofferawayofdiscoveringhowmuchevidenceexistsforanassertion,butdonotincludeanyinformationaboutthereliabilityandqualityofthisevidence.CardinalNPsaretheresultofa“harvesting”processwhichissupposedtoautomaticallygatherrelevantinformationaboutqualityandreliabilityandwhichtransformsthisinformationintoaqualityassertionthatisitselfaNP.IfaNPisunderstoodasasentence,thenthenetworkofNPsnowcreatesmeaningful,multi-sentenceunits.
KuhnandKrauthammer(2012)alsoproposeextendingNPsinsuchawaythatitispossibletopublishinformalstatementsasaNPaswell.InformalstatementswouldbestatementsthatarenotrepresentableasanRDFtripleandbyusingSemanticWebvocabularies.Thelistofreasonstheauthorspresentisquitecomprehensive.Itreachesfromthefactthatthere are entities where no formal vocabulary exists to the observation thatespeciallyinnovativeandnewclaimsareoftendifficulttorepresentformally.
Kuhnetal.(2013)developthisapproachfurtherbypresentingtheAIDA modelasawaytodescribethekeyconceptsofNPsinanon-technicalmanner.TheacknowledgmentthatnoteverythingcanberepresentedinanSW-orientedapproachtoNPsgoeshandinhandwiththeshiftfromaprimarilytechnologicaldescriptionofNPstoaprosaicone.Cor-respondingly,assertionsinNPsarenotalwaysRDFtriples,butexpressionswhichareatomic,independent,declarative,andabsolute.Thisdefinitionallowspublishinga“continuumbetweenformalandnon-formalclaims”withNPs(Kuhnetal.2013,4).Nonetheless,theformalversionremainstheprimarygoal,whichiswhyKuhnetal.(2015)proposetoworkonbestpracticesfortheuseofvocabulariesinNPs.
Additionally,Kuhnetal.(2013)seektocomprehensively“broadenthescopeofNano-Publications.”Thescopereferredtohereisthenotionofascientificassertion.TheauthorssuggestusingNPsalsoforassessing,interlinking,orcorrectingotherNPs,representingoutputfromminingalgorithmsandtorepresentinsightsderivedfromexistingNPscreatedbycuratorsor“bots.”
Finally,somecontributionstothefieldofNPsremarkthatNPsshouldbepossiblethatdonotcomplywiththeAIDArules.GoldenandShaw(2015,
Publishing 3.0 123
4–5)stressthatmanyassertionsinthehumanitiesarenotevenfalsifiablebecausetheydescribepurelydiscursiveobjects.Thus,thescopeofaNPshouldfollowwhatevertheneedoftheresearcheris.
AtthispointthecleardistinctionbetweentherealmofdiscourseandtherealmoffactsandstatementsthatgavebirthtotheconceptofNPsturnsupsidedown.Whentakenseriously,theoutcomeofthisapproachwithallitsmodificationsandadditionswouldcreateahuge“knowledgenetwork”(Schmidt2014,sec5)ofinterconnectedNPs.Theseconnections,however,resemblelogicalbutmoreimportantlyalsoqualitativefunctionsoflanguage.Thus,insteadofbuildingareliablespaceofthepresupposedpositiveessenceofscientificcommunicationclearlyseparatedfromtherealmofdiscourse,intextpublicationstheadvancementofthecurrentapproachheadstowardsaspacewherecolloquialdiscursiveformisrecon-structedwithNPs.
AnotherconsequenceworthmentioningisthefactthatallthesedifferentNP-flavorsrequirereconsiderationofthefoundingthemeofNPs,andwithminormodificationandadditionsalsoofMAs,SPsandothers:redundancy.Assertionswillprobablyappearthatarerepresentedintheseflavorsbutthatwouldrepresentthesamestatementwithintheoriginalunder-standingofmeaningandlanguage.SincethesecontextualizedandfacetedstatementsaretheoutcomeofNPsthemselves,theyreallychallengetheoverarchingthemeofredundancyinthefieldofNPsandbeyond.
From Ecology to Infrastructure
Intheintroductiontothissectionthedatabasemetaphorwasusedtohigh-lightthedimensionoftheshiftintroducedbyNPs.NanoPublicationswerecontrastedwithSPswherethearticleistreatedlikeadatabase.Instead,theyarepiecesofdatainadataspace,orsomethingwhichcouldbecalledascholarlypublicationweb.
IfNPstrytoturnthewebintoapublicationspaceinthesamewayasSPstriedtoturnarticlesintodatabases,itdoesnotsurprisethatmucheffortinNP-researchisspentontechnologicallypromotingthisturn.AmodelforNPsisonething,butatechnologicalenvironmentinwhichtheseobjectsbehavelikepublicationsisanother.InthisverysenseKuhnetal.(2015)proposetheideaof“PublishingWithoutPublishers”whichfollows“adecen-tralizedapproachtodissemination,retrieval,andarchivingofdata.”Con-sequently,thetermdecentralizedconcernsthewebarchitecture.
124 Beyond the Flow
Toachievetheaforementionedgoal,NP-advocatesstresstheneedtofirstdefinetherequirementsforthewebasascholarlypublicationspace.Theresearchliteraturesuggeststhreedifferentproperties:trust,relia-bility,andquality.KuhnandDumontier(2014)definetrustasthepos-sibilityofassuringthatalinktoaNPwillalwaysandinanysituationgivebackthesameNP.AccordingtoKuhnetal.(2015),reliabilityisachievedbyguaranteeingpermanentandperformantaccesstoNPs.TheaspectofqualityisaddressedbyChichesteretal.(2015).Theydefineitasamech-anismtoassurethatNPscomplywithacertainqualitystandard.
ThereareservicesandenvironmentswhichhavetakentheseissuesupinthecontextofNPsaswell.TheneXtProt54portal,forinstance,offershostingcapabilitiesforNPswhichfacilitatethefulfillmentofthefirsttworequirements.However,thecreationofservicesofferedbyparticularagentsisnotthekindofsolutionaddressedbythequotebefore.Kuhnetal.(2015)consequentlycriticizeinitiativeslikeFigshare55forbuildingcentralizedservicestofindsolutionstotheaforementionedpublishingrequirements.Theyarguethatsuchservicesdependonthesurvivaloftheirownersandtheirserversdonotguaranteeonehundredpercentreachability.
Incontrast,KuhnandDumontier(2014)proposetosolvetheissueoftrustinatechnicalfashionbycreatingURIswhichcontainaso-calledhash56 stringgeneratedfromtheNPitself.WhenthecontentoftheNPchangesorifitisdeliveredincompletely,thehashchangesautomaticallyandthuswouldnotmatchtheURIanylonger.AsimilarapproachistakenbyChi-chesteretal.(2015)forguaranteeingquality.TheauthorsproposetopartlyderivequalityfromtheprovenanceinformationofNPs(author,date,andsource)andtodefineaschemeforlinkswhichencodetheresultofthisautomaticassessment.
Anotherexamplefor“decentralizing”publishinginfrastructureisgivenbyKuhnetal.(2015).Inthesamewayasqualitycontrolisdistributedandsemi-automated,hostingandcurationshoulddissociatefromspecificagentssuchaspublishers.Theauthorsexplicitlycriticizeagent-focusedhostingstrategiesfordigitalresources.Insteadtheyproposeagrid-like
54 https://www.nextprot.org/55 https://figshare.com/56 Hashingisamethodthatallowstoturnahugesetofinputinformationintoaunique
andshortsetofoutputinformation,normallyasequenceofcharacters.Thesamequantityofinputinformationalwaysleadstothesameoutputhash.Indoingso,ahashiswellsuitedforcheckingontheintegrityofdatainacompactway.
Publishing 3.0 125
publicationinfrastructure.Comparabletopeer-to-peer57filesharingservices,NPsshouldalwaysbeavailablefromseveralpublicationservers.TheaspectofcurationshouldtakeplaceonspecificserverswhichfocusonhostingNPsofonlyonetopiccomparedtoserverswhichmirrorNPsregardlessofthesubjectmatter.TheconsistencyregardingsubjectmatterisachievedbyalsoencodingthesubjectintotheURIofNPs,likeitwasdoneinthecaseofNPhashes.Hence,topicrelatedgroupingisnottheproductofacuratororeditoranylonger,ithappensautomaticallywhentheURIofNPsareparsedwithintheservernetwork.
Alltheseeffortshaveincommonthattheytrytodelegatepublishingtasksfromstakeholderrolesandindividualmanualworktoapparentlyself-regulatingelementsinthewebarchitecture.Indeed,theconfidenceinthisstrategyisbigenoughthatSofronijevićandPavlović(2013)claimthatduetoitstechnologicallymediatedbottom-upapproachandresourceman-agement,NPswillsignificantlypushforwardopenaccesspublishingindevelopingcountries.
Publication Formats in the Spirit of Nano-Publications
Referring to the informational content scope of NPs an initiative by the GitHub58servicecalledGist(GitHub2018)shouldbementioned.GitHubisaproviderforhostingversion-controlledsoftwarerepositories.Theyalsocooperate with the Mozilla Science LabandtheaforementionedFigshareservice.Gistsarecompleteversion-controlledrepositories,whichbasicallyconsistofonetextfile.Thistextfilecanprovidetext,code,ordata.InconjunctionwiththeinitiativebyMozillatheseGistscanbecomemini-pub-licationscomparableinscopetoNPsbutmoreflexible.
Infact,Gistsarealreadyusedforthepublicationofspecificresources.ThearticleofPfaffetal.(2015)publishedatWileyisagoodexample,whereasignificantpartofthepublicationishostedasaGist.Beckeretal.(2017)describeanapproachwheresomethingthatresemblestheideaofaresourcemapinOAI-OREispublishedasaGistinordertocreatebetterconditionsforreproduciblepublicationsindata-driven-science.
Ithasbeenarguedthatundertheperspectiveofreducingthescopeoftheinformationunit,NPsintroducedthemostradicalconceptpossible.
57 Thepeer-to-peerprincipleisahorizontalorganizationalprincipleinwhichcomputersinanetworkhaveequalrighttoofferandmakeuseofserviceswithinacomputernetwork.Thus,nocomputerownsaspecificserviceorisrestrictedbyanytypeofrolemanagement.
58 https://github.com/
126 Beyond the Flow
Likewise,itwasdemonstratedthatthisapproachledtoanenhancementofthewebarchitectureinordertocreateascholarlypublicationweb.Thiswebismorethanjustawebofdata,becauseitimplementsregulatoryandclassificatorymechanismswhichinhistoricalpublishingsetupsarecarriedoutmanuallybystakeholders,orwhicharepartoftheargumentofhistoricalpublicationitself.AsKuhnhasindicated,trustandqualityweretheoutcomeofcurationandeditingbyrelatedstakeholdersas,ofcourse,isassuredbyspecificsections,writingstyle,andotheraspectsoftextpub-licationsthemselves.
ItissignificantthatafterNPswereintroducedanewpublicationconceptappeared,positionedinbetweenapproacheslikeNPsandhistoricaltextpublications.ThisconceptiscalledMicroPublications(hereafterreferredtoasMPs).ThenameclearlyalludestothewordingoftheconceptofNPsandisonceagainannouncedasthe“NextGenerationScientificPublishing”(Clark2014)approach.59
MicroPublicationswereintroducedin2014byClarkandCiccarese(2013)andClark,Ciccarese,andGoble(2014).TherearesomesignificantdifferencesofthisconceptcomparedtoapproacheslikeNPsorSPs.First,theauthorsobservethatpreviousapproachestoformalizeandnormalizepublicationsinthesenseoftheSemanticWebhavenotsucceededenough,ormayhaveevenfailed,asinthecaseofsemanticabstracts60.Incontrast,MPstrytodefineanapproachwhichmediatesbetweenformermodelsandwhichpermitstheformalizationandnormalizationofarticlesstepbystepanduptotheextentnecessaryinagivensituation.
ThisdemonstratesthatforMPsitisnottheintenttoremovethenarrativeformfoundinhistoricalpublications.Clark,Ciccarese,andGoble(2014,1)state:“Thelineardocumentpublicationformat,datingfrom1665,hassurvivedtransitiontotheweb.”Correspondingwiththisnuancedevalu-ation,MPsenvisiondigitalpublishingasanexusthatmakesusebothofthe“WebofDocuments”andthe“WebofData”(Clark2014).
AnincrementalorscaledapproachtotheformalizationandnormalizationofarticleswasalsoalreadyproposedintheSPfielditself.ThedifferenceisthatSPsleaveopenwhatontologiesareused,andwhichentitiesareformalizedinsuchaprocess.MicroPublicationsdefineveryclearlyhow
59 AlesstechnologicallyfocusedversionoftheMPapproachisproposedbyPooandWu(2017).
60 SemanticabstractswerediscussedbyHarmszeandShottonasastartingpointfortheuseofsemantictechnologiesforpublicationsbecauseitrequireslesseffortthancreatingawholeSemanticPublication.
Publishing 3.0 127
thisspacebetweenarticlesandpuredatashouldlooklikebybuildingupon“defeasiblereasoning”andargumentationtheory,aswellasselectedmodelsinartificialintelligence(Clark,Ciccarese,andGoble2014,5).Thus,whilethelevelofformalizationisacompromise,thedecisionastothetypeofimportantsemanticsisnot.
Inmanysituations,MPsarealsodefinedasargumentstosupportclaims(Clark,Ciccarese,andGoble2014,5).InthisrespecttheyseemtocomplywiththeoriginalNPapproach.However,theycriticizeNPsandsimilarmodelsasa“statement”focusedapproachandasnotbeingsufficientforscholarlycommunication.
Thisargumentisraisedintwoways.First,theyrespecttheuseofnaturallanguageinresearchcommunication,especiallyforinnovativeresearchwhichneedsqualification.Second,theystatethataclaimwithunqual-ifiedevidenceisnotenoughtopreventthemisuseofthisclaim.StudiesonMPsassertthatinscientificpublishingthelevelofmisuseofcitationsandevidenceistremendous(Clark2014;Clark,Ciccarese,andGoble2014).Infact,theappropriateuseofcitationsispresentedasthedrivingforcebehindMPs.ThisgoalisalsoethicallyframedinausecaseforMPscon-cerning the Drug Interaction Knowledge Base61(Schneider,Collins,etal.2014;Schneider,Ciccarese,etal.2014).Here,badcitationandintegrationofevidencewouldleadto“preventablemedicationerrors.”MicroPublicationsapproachthisproblembyassuringtherightuseofevidenceandcitationsinpublications,byenforcingmoresubtlecitationsemantics.
ThelastparagraphsshowedthatMPsareboundtodiscourse-orientedapproachesinpublishing.However,asanapproachseekingtoprovoketheuseofformalsemanticsinanincrementalfashion,theypermitthecreationofon-statementpublicationsinthesamewayasthecreationofanentire“knowledgebasewithextensiveevidencegraphs”(Clark,Ciccarese,andGoble2014,5).Curiously,theseamlessintegrationbetweenformal-izedandunformalizedperspectivesinMPsalsoseemstocreateitsownsetofdifficulties.Schneider,Ciccarese,etal.(2014)summarizethatintheaforementionedusecasechallengesarisefromthefactthatthedatabaserequiresbothanaturallanguageandaformallanguagerepresentationforanassertion.
61 https://dikb.org/
128 Beyond the Flow
Automated PublicationsThefollowingpublicationconceptdoesnotreallylooklikeanewandgenuineconceptinthefirstplace,atleastnotwhenlookingatthefinalproduct,whichisaresearchpaper.Ontheotherhand,itdoesappearaudaciousifoneconsidersthewaythispaperisproducedwithinthisconcept.Automated Publications(hereafterreferredtoasAPs)arepub-lications which a computer algorithm creates with only partial or even no involvementofhumans.ThetermAutomatedPublicationsisnotpartofthediscourseonthesepublications.Itisintroducedatthispointinordertogatherdifferentlooselyconnectedactivitieswhich(semi-)automatetheproductionchainofscientificpublicationsregardlessoftheirrelationshiptoanyotherpublicationconcept.
ThetopicofAPsismorewidelyknownintheareaofnewsmediaandjournalism,whereitisdiscussedunderthe“RobotJournalism”(Latar2015,title)or“algorithmicjournalism”(Dörr2016).Inrobotjournalism,newsagenciesalgorithmicallyproducestoriesontopicswhichproviderichsta-tisticalmaterialsuchassportsorfinancenews(vanDalen2012),butalsoshortbreakingnews,asinthecaseofanearthquakeonthewestcoastoftheU.S.(Lobe2015).
Inacademiathestrategyofautomaticallyproducingresearchpapersisbroadlydiscussedinthecontextofso-called“fakepapers”or“nonsensepapers”(vanNoorden2014).Thesetypesofpapersareproducedbyalgorithmssuchasthewell-knownSCIGen(Stribling,Krohn,andAguayo2005)whichresemblesacertaintypeofjargonbycontingentlycombiningscientificphrases.Fakepapersbecamefamousbecausethereisalongstoryofthembeingacceptedinwhichculminatedintheremovalofmorethan120papersfrompublicationsbySpringerandIEEE(vanNoorden2014).
Whereasthescandalbehindfakepapersisthefactthattheircontentmakesnosensewhentheyarereadandtheintentionbehindthemisfraud,APstakethisapproachseriously.Untilnowtheissueofautomationinpublicationswasgenerallyconsideredintwoways:themodellingofpublicationstowardsautomatizedresearchprocesses(ResearchObjects,ScientificPublicationPackages),andtheautomatedextractionofcontentfrompublicationsbyminingalgorithms(SemanticPublications).Underthefirstpointofviewtheresearchpaperwasabolished.AutomatedPub-licationssharethebinaritybetweenfactualcontentandtextoftenmetinthelatterapproach.However,theyturntheworkflowupsidedown.The
Publishing 3.0 129
pointisnottoderivefactualcontentfromwrittenpapersbuttoderivewrittenpapersfromfactualcontent.
Accordingly,authoringtoolsaboutdatasetsexist,forpaperswhichrequirethattheauthorentersinformationandgivesreferencetodatainorderforthosetoolstoautomaticallycreatetextarticles(Candelaetal.2015,1755).Robertsonetal.(2014)presentsuchatoolingreaterdetail,calledGBIF Integrated Publishing Toolkit(seealsochap.4.3.1).Resultingpapersarepub-lishedinjournalsliketheBiodiversity Data Journal62 or Zookeys63.
AlthoughAPsturntheproceduralrelationshipbetweenfactualandwrittencontentaround,theycomplywiththeassumptionthatnogenuinelevelofmeaningbelongstothewrittenformofarticles.Thisistheveryreasonwhywritingisconsideredautomatable.In“PublishingAgainsttheMachine”bySofronijević(2012),thisfactisquiteobviouslypresentedinananalogybetweenwritingandclothes.Asclothesareputaroundabodytextcoatsthefacts.Sofronijevicillustratestheideaoffuturescienceinwhichhumanandcomputationalagentsbuildhybridresearchclusters,duetoexponentiallygrowingcapacitiesofcomputers.Thisvisionresemblesideasthathavebeensummarizedinthesectionone-Sciencealready.
Theargumentissupportedbythepresentationofresearchincomputationallinguistics:ruleswerefoundforlanguagephenomenawhichhadbeenconsideredtoocomplexfortheidentificationofrulesbefore.Atthesametime,Sofronijevicequatesrule-basedworkwithroutineworkandarguesthatscientistsshouldfocusonthecreativework.TheseargumentsdemonstratethatAPsareinspiredbyamuchbroaderthemeontherelationshipbetweencomputersandhumans.InthislineofthoughtAPsareonlyoneelementinfullyautomatedscientificprocesses.Theseprocessesarecarriedoutby“ScienceBots”(Kuhn2015)or“LaboratoryBots,”that(Kingetal.2009)alsopublishtheresultsontheirown,astheirhumancounterpartsdo.
SofronijevicmakesitclearthatatthemomentAPsarepublicationswithverystructuredtext,orwherethetextisproducedonthebasisofcom-prehensivedata.However,thewayhehistoricallyframesAPsaswellashisassumptionsaboutthefuturemakeitclearthatthisisjustacurrentstateandthatthisconceptissupposedtobeextended.
62 https://bdj.pensoft.net/63 https://zookeys.pensoft.net/
130 Beyond the Flow
Unbound BooksAsfornow,allpublicationconceptspresentedrootindisciplineslikeinfor-mationscience,computerscience,orinthehardsciences,inparticularlifescience,bio-science,orphysics.Althoughimplementationsfromthehumanitiesexistformostoftheseconcepts,humanitiesdisciplinesdidnotshapetheseconcepts.Insomecases,theconceptwasslightlymodifiedorre-interpretedtobuildabridgefortheneedsofspecificimplementationcontexts.Accordingly,theTEIJournalandDHdJournaluseothersemanticsthanthoseontologiesmostcommontoSPs.TheyrefertotheTEIschemabecauseitisthemostpopularmodelforthemarkupoftextinthehumanities.Furthermore,NPshavealsobeendiscussedinfieldslikearchaeology,butwithoutsharingthesamerigorousunderstandingofthestatusofclaimsenrolledbytheoriginalproposal.
Thefollowingpublicationdesignisdifferentinthisrespect.Itisnotonlywidespreadinthehumanitiesbutalsotheoreticallygroundedinacul-turalscientificperspective.Thetermwhichismostoftenusedtonameitis Unbound Book(hereafterreferredtoasUBs).AsthetermsuggestsUBsperceivepublicationsasobjectsthatarealwaysupdatedandmodified,withoutthedevelopmenttowardsafinalversion.
Thisthemeisnotnewandhasbeenincludedinotherdesignstoo.Theterm“Liquid”intheLPsprojectaddressescomparableideas.Whearyevenusesthe same metaphor in his Living Reviewsjournalbackin1998.However,theLivingReviewsjournalremainedanisolatedexampleinaspecificcontext,whichwasnotextendedorgeneralizedbeyondthiscontext.Likewise,LPsaredistinctfromUBsbothintermsoftheobjectwhichis“puttolife”aswellasoftheimplementationofthisidea.
Groundedinthehumanities,theideaofUBsisinfactverymuchconcernedwithbooksashistoric-culturalentities.Thus,theyaddanativeperspectiveinherenttothehumanitiestothediscourseaboutdigitalpublications.
The Genealogy of Liquidity
UnboundBooks,amongwhichthepresentstudyalsocountsthecon-ceptsofLiquidBooks64orLivingBooks,gobackinlargepartstoresearch
64 TheconceptofLiquidBooksinthiscontextisnottobeconfusedwiththeconceptofLiquidBooksthathasbeendevelopedintheLiquidPublicationsproject.InordertominimizethepotentialforconfusionthetermUnboundBookusedlessoftenbutbeing more open conceptually was chosen as an umbrella term for publications in thissection.
Publishing 3.0 131
activitiescarriedoutbyHallandBirchall(2009)andBirchallandHall(2006)inthemiddleofthefirstdecadeofthenewmillennium65.Bothresearchersworkinthefieldofculturalsciencesandmediatheory.Intheirworktheytrytoreshapeculturalstudiesinawaythatmakesuseofaconcepttheycall“liquidtheory.”BothauthorsarealsoeditorsofCulture Machine66,anonlinejournalwhichispublishedbyOpen Humanities Press67.In2008theyusedthejournaltoapplycertainaspectsoftheirtheorytotheirpublishingactivities.Theydidsobylaunchingtheso-calledCulture Machine Liquid Books series68.ThefirstbookpublishedinthisserieswasThe Liquid Theory Reader(HallandBirchall2009).
TheconceptofUBswasfurtherdevelopedanddiscussedintheout-standingThe Unbound Book Conference(InstituteofNetworkCultures2011),whichtookplacein2011inAmsterdamandTheHague.Althoughtheprogramshowsasignificantlybroaderscope,theUBconceptwasacrucialpartofit(HallandAmerika2011).AtthesametimeHallandJoannaZylinskareleasedaderivateoftheLiquidBooksapproachcalledLiving Books about Life(Hall,Zylinska,andBirchall2011),alsopublishedbyOpenHumanitiesPressandfundedbytheBritishJoint Information Systems Committee69.TheLiving Books about History70seriesemergedin2016,publishedbytheCLIO71 networkinSwitzerland.Finally,thereisastrongentanglementwiththe“remixthebook”project(Amerika2011a)byMarkAmerika.Inthisprojectwhichgoesinparallelwiththepublicationofabook(Amerika2011b),Amerikatheorizesthestrategyofremixingforwritingtexts.
Later,theconceptwasadoptedbyanotherparticipantoftheeditorialboardofOpenHumanitiesPress,thesociologistBrunoLatour.LatourusedtheUBconceptforhisprojectAn Inquiry into Modes of Existence72(alsoreferredtoasAiME),whichengenderedfairlyhugeattentionforthistypeofpublicationafterresultswentpublicin2013.
65 Theterm“UnboundBook”waschoseninstudytoavoidconfusionwithLPsproject.Therearenowconnectionsbetweenthesetwoefforts.
66 https://www.culturemachine.net67 http://www.openhumanitiespress.org/68 http://liquidbooks.pbworks.com/69 https://www.jisc.ac.uk/70 https://www.livingbooksabouthistory.ch/de/71 https://www.infoclio.ch/72 http://modesofexistence.org/
132 Beyond the Flow
A Culture of Liquidity and the Living Against Binding and Scientism
Asnotedearlier,UBsgrewoutofthehumanitiesandareconsequentlyconcernedwiththebookandnotwitharticles.However,UBsarenotonlyembeddedinthehumanitiesasafield,theyalsoformpartofcertaincriticalnarratives.Moreprecisely,supportersofUBsseethedesignofthesepublicationsasapartofananalysisofthebookasaculturalobjectthatimposescertainboundariesandorganizationalmechanismsontheproductionofknowledge.
In“TheUnboundBook”Hall,forinstance,introducesasignificantdifferencebetweenbookandtext.Followingthisdistinction,texthasprecedenceoverthebookinthesensethatwhatanauthorwritesistextinthefirstplace.Thebookbindstexttogetherafteritiswritten,inordertoserveaspecificpurpose,addressanidentifiableaudience,ortoassuredeliveryintodefinedplaces.Hence,thebookaddsalayerofpoliticstothetext.Adema(2015)issignificantlycleareronthis.Sheevaluatestheculturalconceptofthebookasanexusbetweencommercialinterestofpublishers,issuesofpowerinacademia,andquestionsofepistemologicalauthority.Thus,whiletheinterestsofauthorsaretoproducetext,thebookrep-resentsinterests,whichalienatestheauthorfromhertext.
ThemoralweightofthisdescriptionisintendedandfurtherradicalizedwhenHallquotesJacquesDerrida:
Whatthendowehavetherighttocalla“book”andinwhatwayisthequestionofright,farfrombeingpreliminaryoraccessory,herelodgedattheveryheartofthequestionofthebook?Thisquestionisgovernedbythequestionofright,notonlyinitsparticularjuridicalform,butalsoinitssemantic,political,social,andeconomicfor—inshort,initstotalform.(Hall2013,496)
Consequently,forHallabookisaresultof“theforceofbinding”(HallandAmerika2011)andtheUBis,usingtheterminologyofpostmodernphilosophywhichisaddressedinthisquote,anattempttodeconstruct theconceptofthebook.Itintendstoimplementapossibleanswertotherephrasedversionoftheaforementionedquestion:“Whatdowehavetheright nottocalla‘book’”(Hall2013,496).
Obviously,theseanswerscomefromanevaluationofthequalitiesoftext.Textunboundfromitsbookformispresentedasanever-changingdecomposedandrecomposedthing.Halldescribescurrentscholarlywritingpracticeslikepre-andpost-printpublishing,blogging,andtweetingamongothersinordertodemonstratethesequalities.Intheseactivities,
Publishing 3.0 133
text pieces are cut out of longer pieces to put them into transitory com-municationchannels.Differentblogpostsareputtogetherforthepub-licationofarticlesandpost-publicationpublicationscorrectandadaptthetextinreactiontoclassicalpublication.Aftertheillustrationoftextassomethingthatcannotandshouldnotbe“fixed,”HallshowsthatthesamecanbesaidabouthistoricaltextsliketheCodexSinaiticus.AccordingtoHallitistheoldestpreservedbiblewhichcollecttextsthatexistedindepen-dentlybefore,butalsocontaintextswhicharenotpartofmodernbibles.Itisthusashiningexampleofthetext-bookrelationship.
Adema(2015,70–75)extendsHall’scritiquebyre-connectingtextandbook,butnowinadifferenthierarchicalrelationshipthantheonethatforcedHalltoapproachtextandbooksasanopposition.Moreprecisely,Ademacriticizesacertainnotiontowardsbooksbyapplyingtheaforementionedfeaturesofthetextbacktobooks.Theopinionshecriticizesconceivesbooksasrepresentationofstabilityandintegrity.Itisbuiltontheideathatinscholarlycommunicationthebookassuresquality,trustworthiness,authorityandresponsibility.CorrespondingwithHall’slineofargumentAdemastressesthattheseopinionsarefictionsandthatthebookasacul-turalobjecthasalwayschanged.Thus,theseopinionsareaprojectionfromthepresentintothepast.Inheropiniontofallvictimtothisideaofthebookwouldmeantomakeaconservativeandboringentityoutofit.Unan-imously,Hallsummarizesthat:
Wecouldthereforesaythatbookshavealwaysbeenliquidandlivingtosomeextent;digitaltechnologyandtheinternethassimplyhelpedtomakeusmoreawareofthefact.(Hall2013,501)
ForBrunoLatourtheconceptoftheUBisacrucialaspectfortherealizationofanacademicgoal.InhisbookWe have Never Been Modern (Latour1993)arguesthatmodernityinstigatedscientisticideasofprogressandemancipationwhichobscuredotherculturalandgeographicalcon-figurationstothebenefittocultivateanoccidentalfictionofsocio-cul-turalhistory.Itdoessobecausetheseconfigurationsexpressthemselvesbyvirtueofmorestrategiesthanjustscientifictruth.However,thesestrategiesarenotrecognizedwithinthetheoreticalandhistoricalthemeofmodernity.Intheoccidentwherethislineofthoughtappearedtheemphasisonscientificreasoningfurthermoreconcealedthemultiplicityoffactorswhichactuallyshapedthedevelopmentofmodernsciencebeyondrationality.
Correspondingly,Latourtriestoidentifythesefactorsandtheirinfluencesaswellastolookoutforotherculturalconfigurations.Theseconfigurations
134 Beyond the Flow
whichhecalls“modesofexistence”canonlybediscoveredappropriatelywhenthethemeofthemodernityisabolished.ForLatourthismeanstoalsoabolishtheestablishedmodeofknowledgeproduction.Inhiscounterapproachthepresupposedoccidentalnotionofscientifictruthisoneobjectofstudybutonlyoneamongothers.Additionally,itisnevertheauthororscientistalonewhoproducesscientificresultsbutaclusterofpeopleandotherentities(humanandnon-humanagents)whichinteractinthefieldofscientificprocess.Latourcallsthisinteractionnegotiationbywhichsciencebecomesa“diplomaticenterprise”(Leclercq2011).Puttingemphasisonthisstructuremeanstodemocratizescienceforthepurposesthathavebeendescribedbefore.
IntheUB73 An Inquiry into Modes of ExistenceLatour(2014)triestoimplementanonlinebookwhichsupportstheideaofscienceasadiplomaticendeavor.Hecreatedthisbooktofacilitatetheidentificationanddescriptionofothermodesofexistenceinthewaydescribedabove.BymakinguseofabookformwhichrootsinLatour’stheoreticalreflectionsaboutthenatureoftheproblemofmodernitythegoaltorevealhiddenmodesofexistenceshouldbecomemoresuccessful.Additionally,theprojectprovidesastep-stoneforhisbroaderprojecttoestablishaphilosophywhichisbuiltaroundtheideaofdiplomacyinsteadofrep-resentation(Latour2014).
ThedetaileddescriptionresearchbackgroundofthecreatorsofUBsshouldclarifythetightconnectionbetweenbothangles.Thisconnectiongoesfarbeyondtheattempttotestpossibleconveniencesdigitaltechnologiesmightbringtoscholarlypublishing.Nonetheless,itisalsoimportanttohavealookathowthisbackgroundisactuallyimplementedformallyandtechnologically.Withouthavingitsaidexplicitly,thelastparagraphshavealreadyindicatedthatUBsarecreatedinordertosupportthreecoreideas:
1. thefirstideadefinesthatUBsneedtosupportongoingmodificationofitscontents,
2. thesecondideadefinesthatUBsneedtoenableandstimulatetheengagementofmultipleauthorsandcontributorswhicharenotselectedordefinedinadvance,
3. additionally,UBsencouragetore-useexistingcontent.
Accordingly,Hall(2015)definestheterm“liquid”or“living”inthetwoseriesheeditsandcuratesasbeing“opentoongoingcollaborativeprocessofwriting,editing,updating,remixingandcommentingbyreaders.”
73 Latourcallsthisprojectanaugmentedbook.However,asitbecomesobviouslateronitbelongstothesameconceptualframeworkastheLivingorLiquidBooks.
Publishing 3.0 135
WhiletheCultureMachineLiquidBooksserieshasastrongerfocusonthefirsttwoprinciplestheLivingBooksAboutLifeseriesisverymuchcon-cernedwiththethirdone.ALivingBookstartswiththecompilationofatleasttenexistingarticlesfromboththesciencesandthehumanitiesaboutaspecifictopic(Hall,Zylinska,andBirchall2011).Afterwards,theycanbemodified,extendedorcontentcanbeerasedagain.
Technology Beyond Its Cultural Critique
Sincere-useofotherpeople’smaterialscommonlyrequireslegalpermis-sion,theimplementationofthisfacetofUBsissocialandnottechnical.Thus,thefieldofUBsisalsoaprofoundsupporteroftheOAprinciple(Hall2008).
MostadvocatesofUBscomefromthefieldsofMediaTheoryandCulturalSciences.Developmentsshowthattheydonotpayasmuchattentiontothetechnicalcontextoftheirconceptsastheydototheirevaluation.Hence,theydonotdiscusscriticalaspectsofspecifickeytechnologiesandtheinfluencethatdecisionsonthatlevelmighthaveontheoperationalphaseofUBs.Itgoeswithoutsayingthatincontrasttomostofthepub-licationconceptsthathavebeendiscussedsofar,conceptualizationandimplementationarestrictlyseparated,meaningthatinsomecasesthetechnologicalimplementationiscarriedoutbycontractors.Inothercases,contributorstothisconceptlookedforexistingpiecesoftechnologywhichtheyfeelcanrepresentthefeaturesoftheUBconceptwell.
Onetypeofsoftwareconsideredtomeettheserequirementsarewikis.Afeatureofwikisisthepossibilitytoletcontentbeupdatedbyusers,whoareprovidedwiththenecessarytoolstodoso.Atthesametimewikisdoc-umentthemodificationprocessandareveryaccessiblefornon-technicalusers.Anotherreasonmightalsohavecontributedtotheprominentchoiceforwikisoftware:despiteitsappreciationofanykindofmediaforthesakeofpublishing—evenexoticoneslikeaugmentedrealityandinteractivevisualizationsareconsidered(HallandAmerika2011)—UBsremaintextfocusedpublications.Apartfromtext,UBssometimesincludeYouTube74 videosorimages.Thewikiapproachontheotherhand,despiteallitsflexibilities,stilladherestotheformatofdocumentsandtexts.Thekeycomponentofawikiisanarticleorapost.Thissituation,andthefactthatcertain technological issues of this choice only appear when more complex
74 https://www.youtube.com/
136 Beyond the Flow
digitalmediaobjectsareinuse,orinteractionsotherthanreadingareadded,mightalsohaveinfluencedthedecision.
InthecaseoftheCultureMachineLiquidBooksandtheLivingBooksAboutLifeseriesthebackendisprovidedbytheproprietarywikisoftwarePBWiki by the PBWorks75company.TheAiMEprojecthasdevelopeditsownsoftware76,whichresembleswikifunctionalitybutextendstheideaofdoc-uments.IntheAiMEsoftwaretherearefourdifferenttypesofcontent.Themaincontent,glossarycontentfortheexplanationofterms,andapparatuscontentwithmeta-informationandcommentary.
AllthreeprojectscombinetheirUBswithso-called“frozen”versions(Hall2015).ThesetaketheformofPDFsorprintedbooks.InthecaseofLiquidandLivingBooks,frozenversionsareeditedandpublishedbyOpenHumanitiesPress.FrozenversionscontainthecontentofaUBatagivenpointintime,withoutthecontentthatisnotsupportedbythePDFformatorbyprintedbooks.Itisimportanttostressthatinbothcasesthisdoesnotincludethehierarchicalcategorizationofpublishingconcepts.LatourandDavis(2014)calltheAiMEsoftwareasoftwareforpublishing,whileHallassociatesfrozenversionswiththeneedtomonitorandcontrolthemod-ificationprocessofUBs.
Thedecisiontochoosewikiswaspartiallyexplainedbythelackofinter-estintechnologicalchallengesandthedependenceonotherstakeholdersduetothelackofnecessaryknow-how.However,thisexplanationonlyaddressesonesideoftherelationshipofUBsandtechnology.Evidently,UBsputemphasisonverydifferentissueswhenitcomestothedefinitionofaspectsinscienceandscholarlypublicationthatdeservetobechanged.InAdema’sandHall’sdescriptionofthebook,thematerialortechnologicalaspectsofthebookareonlysufficientlyunderstoodwhentheyareputintotheircorrespondingsocialandculturalcontext.Likewise,digitalpublishingcanalsoonlybedevelopedsuccessfullyifnewpublicationformatsconsiderfirsttheaffordances,expectations,andconditionsofthesocialenviron-mentinwhichtheyareimplemented.Thepublicationconcepttherebymaterializesitselfwhileinuse,andnotbefore.Thisapproachisincontrastwiththedecisiontosolvetechnologicalissuesfirstmadebyotherpub-licationconcepts.Adema(2015)consequentlytitledherwork“PerformingtheScholarlyMonographinContemporaryDigitalCulture.”Additionally,Zylinska(2011)remarksthatLivingBooksAboutLifeshouldnotonlyallowcollaborativecurationofcontent,butalsoenablenewmethodsfor
75 http://www.pbworks.com/76 https://github.com/medialab/aime-core
Publishing 3.0 137
teaching,thusconnectingdifferentstakeholderslikepublishers,scientists,orstudentsinnewwayswitheachotherinordertostimulatenewformsofusingexistingcontent.
ThelackofanyformalortechnicalmodelforUBsiscompensatedbythegreatemphasisputontheroleofcurationandmoderation,atleastwithintheAiMEproject.Themissingpublicationmodelissubstitutedherebyasophisticatedlifecyclemodelthatmediatescontributionsandmod-ificationsintheUB.Inordertostimulatecontributions,workshopswerefrequentlycarriedout.Theseareorganizedbyateamofeightpeoplewhowerespeciallyassignedandpreparedforthistask.IndividualcontributionsmadeontheAiMEplatformmustbeforwardedtoamoderationteam,whocansenditbackwithdemandforcorrections.Inthenextstepthecon-tributionishandedovertoanexpertassignedbythemoderationteamforfinalreview.Atacertainpointoftime,contributorswhosesubmissionswereacceptedtoextendtheUBwereinvitedtoaconferenceinordertodiscussthenewstateofthebookanditscontents.Thus,thedesignprocesswhichtookplaceforthisUBmorethananythingelseconcerneditselfwithprocessesandinteractionsinsteadofformat.
Despitethefactthattheemphasisputonthecomplexitiesofsocialandculturalaspectsofpublishingidentifiedablindspotinmanydigitalpub-licationformats,itcausedotherissuesaswell.Moreprecisely,thefocusshiftcausestechnicalissueswhichdemonstrateacertainpotentialtounderminetheUBconcept.Forinstance,thewholeonlineissueof“ForceofBinding”byHallandAmerika(2011)wasnotaccessiblefromtimetotime,duetoFlashrelatedissues.Incontrasttotheemphasisputonopenaccess,theLivingBooksAboutLifeandCulturalMachineLiquidBooksseriesuseproprietarywikisoftwareandthird-partyservices.ThenegativeeffectssuchapproacheshaveontheabilitytoreuseandremixUBsisbarelycon-sideredanywhere.
Furthermore,mediaresourcesareoftennotidentifiableinapersistentway,orseparablefromthesurroundingwikienvironmentwhenuploadedintothewiki.WhencontentcomesfromthirdpartyserviceslikeYouTube,asisoftenthecase,thevideofilesarejustembeddedbymechanismsprovidedbyYouTube.BothstrategiesendangertheintegrityandstabilityofUBs.IncontrasttothegoalsofUBsitalsoreducesoptionsofreusedramatically.
Finally,itisalsoimportanttomentionthatdespitetheintentinmostcasesnoprint-on-demandoptionforfrozenversionsisprovided.Itisverylikelythatthisfactrelates,atleastinparts,tothetechnologicalissuesas
138 Beyond the Flow
well.Duetothewikiapproach,frozenPDFversionsofLivingBooksAboutLifearebadlylayoutedandhardtoread.Thepossibilitytoenablequalityprintpublicationsonthegroundofdigitallycuratedcontentdoesoftennotgowellwithso-calledWYSIWIG77environments.Theprioritizationofaccessibilityandinclusionsuggeststhatimportanttechnicalissueswereunderestimated.
Single-Resource PublicationsManyoftheconceptsdescribedabovestressthepossibilityofusinganykindofmediaresourceindigitalpublications.Therearehoweverdifferencesregardingtheexactuseofmediaresourcesotherthantext.Particularlytheearlypublicationconcepts,butSPsaswell,refertotheseresourcesonlyvaguelyandinageneralway:theuseoftheprefix“multi”inmulti-media,andtheumbrellaterm“supplementary”insupplementarymaterialdemonstratethisverywell.Thelattertermalsoaddsthenotionofahierarchybetweendifferentmediatypes,ahierarchywhichappearedinconceptssuchasROs.Withthisinmind,therearefewimportantaspectsofparticularresourcesormediatypesthatshouldbediscussed.
Acommonandbroadwayofreferringtothebenefitsofpublishingdifferentmediaresourcesistohighlighthowtheypresentevidenceinresearch.Often,thisapproachdoeshowevernotaddmorespecification,whichbecomesobviousinthecaseofROs.InROsthedifferencesbetweenmediaresourcesconflate,sinceforROstheseresourcesareimportantonlyasdata.Semioticorperceptualdifferencesbetweendifferentmedia-typesarenotevenconsidered.ThisisbecauseROsarejustaboutcomputation,andcomputationtreatsallresourcesasdata.Theevidentialvalueofimagedatawithinaworkflowisderivedastheresultofacomputation,notbyanevaluationofhowanimagerepresentsasituationdifferentlythanothermediatypes.
Finally,manypublishingconceptscallingfortheinclusionofdifferentmediaresourcesdonotalwaystakecareofquestionssuchashowtheseresourcesmightformpublicationsoftheirownright.Forinstance,OLBs
77 WYSIWIGistheacronymfor“whatyouseeiswhatyouget”.Itisanapproachfortheauthoringofcontentinwhichtheuserinterfacemakesitpossibletocuratecontentinthewayitshouldappear.Incontrastthe“whatyouseeiswhatyoumean”(alsoreferredtoasWYSIWYM)approachonlypermitstocuratefunctionalaspectsofthecontent.Itsappearanceisaddressedinanotherstep.IntheWYSIWIGapproach,forinstance,aheaderisdefinedbyvisualpropertieswhiletheWYSIWYMwouldusecertainsyntacticelementsinordertoannotateapassageashavingthefunctionofaheader.
Publishing 3.0 139
advocatethepublicationofdataandvisualizationsbyanymeanspos-sible.Thepublicationconcept,however,remainstheconceptofOLBs.ThisisdifferentwhenLongandMobley(2015)discussthenewformofSingle Figure Publications.Someauthorshaveequatedpublishingtotheactofuploadingresourcestotheweb.Thismightbeablogenvironment,oraGoogleservice,oranythingelse.Thiswayanyresourcewhichcouldbefoundonthewebwouldconstituteapublication,becausethewebassuchisconsideredapublicsphere.
Bynotacceptingthissimpledefinition,avarietyofprojectsevaluatewhatitmightmeantopublishdifferentmediaresourcesasindividualpublications.“Individual”meansthatpresentedmodelsdonotdescribepublicationsasconsistingofseveralanddifferentmediaresources.Thescopeofpub-lishingthatisaddressedreferstoresourcesofonespecificmediatypeandonetypeonly.78
WithsomelimitationstheUBseriesLivingBooksAboutLifecouldalsohavebeenmentionedinthissection.Despitethefactthatthisseriesformspartofabroaderconcept,italsobuildsontheideathatvideosshouldbetreatedlikewrittenarticles.Byleavingasidethescopeofananthologyortheeditionofajournal,thearticleisapublicationofitsownrightandLivingBooksAboutLifeadvocateconsideringvideofilesinthisveryself-sufficientlight.
AsimilarcaseisprovidedbytheJournal of Digital Humanities79(alsoreferredtoasJDH).Oneofthekeyideasofthisjournalistolookoutforresourcesofdifferentmediatypesthatarealreadyaccessibleonlinesomewhereelse.Again,aYouTubevideoisconsideredsuch,buttheJDHmorefrequentlyaddressesblogpostsfromprivateresearchblogs,conferenceposters,ortweet sets on Twitter80.Inthiscontextthetermmediaisusedtodenoteaspecificcommunicationchannel.Theelementtheseresourceshaveincommon is the fact that the environment in which this content appears ismorevolatilethanonewouldexpectwhenapplyingcommonpub-licationprinciples.WithinthischangeablesituationtheJournalofDigitalHumanitieslooksforresourcesandcontentconsideredtobehighquality.Ifsuchcontentisidentified,itinitiatesareviewandeditingprocessand
78 Theauthorisawareofthefactthatthetermmediaishardtodefineandoftenusedinaveryfuzzyandproblematicway.Thesecondpartofthestudyathandprovidesmoreinformationonthepresentunderstanding.Uptothispointtheuseofthetermjustreflectsitsuseinthediscussionitself.Thisnormallymeansthattext,images,audio,andvideofilesaretreatedasmediaoftheirownright.
79 http://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/80 https://twitter.com/
140 Beyond the Flow
finallypublishesthecontentinoneofitsissues,therebypullingitoutoftheongoingstreamofcommunication.
Intheexamplesabovethepublicationofdifferentmediaresourceswastestedasasubstituteforresearcharticlesinthehistoricalframeofajournaloranthology.Theinformalbl.ocks.org81 platform sets up a wholewebsiteforthepublicationofonespecifictypeofresourceonly,thatbeingsoftwarecode.Drivenbytheopinionthatonlinesoftwarerepositoriesalonedonotsufficeforpublishing,bl.ocks.orgdefinesasetofcomponentswhichneedtobeattachedtothecodesothatitmeetstheexpectationspeoplehaveofapublication.Thecontentsaddedtothecodeareautomaticallyparsedbythesoftwareinordertocreateapublicationasawebsite.Effectively,theplatformbecameaplatformforthereproduciblepublicationofdatavisualizations.
Thebl.ocks.orgprojectisaprivateinitiativeandfocusesontheidentificationofmetadatacomponentsandmechanismsforthepub-licationofsoftwarecode.Duetoitsinformality,ithasthestatusofareferenceprojectanddoesnotintegratewithservicesotherthanGitHub.Beyondthis,itdealswithnootherpublishingissues,suchasforinstancelong-term-preservation.Accordingly,bl.ocks.orgpresentsandpromotessoftwareasaresourceworthyofbeingconsideredanacademicpub-lication,butitdoesnotcreatesustainablepublicationsoutofit.This,however,istheverygoaloftheCode as Research Objectsinitiativeinitiatedby Mozilla Labs(MozillaScienceLab2013a;MozillaScienceLab2013b).
ThisinitiativebringstogetherGitHub,Figshare,andMozillainordertoprovideaneasyworkflowforthecreationofsustainablepublicationsoutofsoftware.Inthiscontext,sustainablemeansthatthesoftwarebecomescitableandisstoredinanenvironmentthatclaimssustainability.Oneoftheoutcomesisabookmarklet82andawebsitewhichautomaticallycreates a DOI83fortheunderlyingsoftwarerepositoryinGitHubandfortheduplicationofthecontentsinFigshare.
FigshareisafreemiumservicemaintainedbytheMacmillan Publishing Group84.Itsgoalistocreateatrustworthyandsustainableenvironment
81 https://bl.ocks.org/82 Abookmarkletisasmallpieceofcodethatcanbeaddedtobrowsersasabookmark.
Insteadofopeningaspecificwebpagethebookmarkletrunsitscodewhentheuserclicksonit.
83 ADOIisaproviderofpersistentidentifiers,supportedbyaconsortiumandimplementingastandardizedschemeforthecreationofDOIURLs.
84 http://macmillan.com/
Publishing 3.0 141
forthepublicationofnon-textualresearchoutput.Itisthereforealsotheattemptofacommercialpublishertogetinvolvedintothepublicationofdigitalresources.Figsharedoesnotfocusonparticularresourcetypes,asthenamemightsuggest.Itneverthelessimplicitlyintroducesaminimalstandardofrequirementsnecessaryinordertolevelupsuchresourcestothestatusofpublications.Inthispointofview,itisofparticularimportancethatthecompanybehindFigshareisapublisher,sincethecredibilitythecompanypossessesasapublisherwasagreatinfluenceontheperceptionofnon-textualresearchoutputasresourcesworthyofpublishing.
Thekeycomponentsoftheaforementionedstandardare:(a)descriptivemetadata,(b)apersistentidentifier,(c)andalong-termarchivingenviron-mentthatfeelstrustworthyformanyresearchers.Thelastcriterionraisesthe question of whether a private company in a competitive environment withitsowninterestsisreallyabletoprovidesuchatrustworthyenviron-ment.AsmentionedabovethiscapacityischallengedinparticularbyNPs.Chapter4willprovideanexampleofacomparableproject,butonewhichisfundedbytheEuropeanUnionaspartofabroaderinitiativetowardsOApublishinginEurope.
Thefinalexampleforsingle-resourcepublicationsisaparticularlyinter-estingonebecauseitinvalidatescertaindistinctionsthatarecommoninthefieldofdigitalpublications.Distinctionsbetweendataandrep-resentation,formandcontent,researchobjectandresearchresultsarehardertomakeforthisexampleandsoisitsassignmenttothecurrentorthefollowingsection.Ittakestheformoftheso-calledvideo-essay.
Avideo-essayisashortvideoproducedbyfilm-critiques,film-scholarsorfilm-passionates.Theexactpropertiesofvideo-essaysasscholarlypublicationsarestillamatterofdebate(Bernstein2016).McWhirter(2015,396)arguesthatavideo-essay“isessentiallyashortanalyticalfilmaboutfilmsorfilmculture.”Assuchitreusesfootagefromexistingfilmsandrearrangesitinordertomakeapoint.VisosevicaandMyersb(2017)evengosofartoassertthatitis“thesis-driven”andisproducedwithinan“analyticalframework.”Thereare,however,alsoviewpointswhichemphasizetheartisticandpoeticdimensionoftheaudio-visualform:“whileone[video-essay]hasanovertlessonwithevidenceandresearchandbulletpoints,theothersimplyhasaseriesofimagesandleavesituptotheviewertotakefromitwhattheywill”(ReneeinBernstein2016).
Inanycaseauthorstendtohighlightthehybridnatureofvideo-essays.Theyaresupposedtobringtogethertheallegedlyconflictingsidesoflanguageanddiscourseandvisualaesthetics,offilmandessayandthereby
142 Beyond the Flow
ofahistoricallycollaborativeendeavorandtheexplorativeworkofanindividual(Bresland2010)whoisenabledbydigitaltechnologies.
Althoughtheoriginsofthevideo-essayaretrackeddowntothenineteen-fortiesandthesimilarlyunderspecifiedgenreofthefilm-essay(McWhirter2015,371)andalthoughexamplesofvideo-essaysaregiventhatcomefromthenineteen-eighties(Bresland2010)nearlyalladvocatesagreethatdigitaltechnologiesplaythemostsignificantroleinitsdevelopment.Thereasonsincludethedecreaseofcostsofproduction,theadvancedtechnologicalcontrolofaspectsoffilmmakingbyindividualswithpossiblyminortechnologicalknow-how,thepotentialsofremixingofferedbythedigitalrepresentationfilmmaterialand,ofcause,theinternetasanaccessibledisseminationandpublicationspace.Consequently,McWhirter(2015,377)notesthat“thevideoessayisclearlyoneelementofthedigitalrevolutionthatgenuinelyoffersthepossibilityofatransformativechangetofilmcriticismandfilmscholarship.”
Thisbeingsaid,thevideo-essayisonitswaytobecomeasignificantelementoffilmandmediastudiesscholarship.Accordingly,in2012,theSociety for Cinema and Media Studies85conferenceofferedaworkshoponvideo-essaysas“filmscholarship’semergentform”andtheUniversityofSt. Andrewsaskedwhethervideo-essaysrepresentthe“filmandmovingimagestudiesre-borndigital”(quotedinMcWhirter2015,375).FilmstudiesjournalssuchastheFrames Cinema Journal86 or the European Journal of Media Studies87includevideo-essaysintotheirissueswhilethejournal[in]transition88,acooperationbetweenthemedia-commonsnetwork89andtheSocietyofCinemaandMediaStudiesoffersthefirstvideo-essay-onlypeer-reviewedjournal.
Video-essaysadheretotheprinciplesofsingle-resourcepublicationsinsofartheyareone-filedigitalresources,relativelysmallinscope(uptofifteenminutes)and,mostimportantly,insofartheytrytogivethestatusofscholarlypublicationstoobjectsthatwerenotconsideredassuchbefore.Thereare,nonetheless,somedifferencescomparedtotheabovementionedapproaches.Althoughvideo-essaysbecomepartofcommonfilmstudiesresearchculturetheyoftencontinuetoliveintechnologicallyquestionableenvironments.Evenwhenpublishedinjournalsliketheonesmentionedabove,theyaremostoftenhostedon
85 http://www.cmstudies.org/86 http://framescinemajournal.com/87 https://necsus-ejms.org/88 mediacommons.org/intransition/89 mediacommons.org/
Publishing 3.0 143
proprietary platforms such as Vimeo90andonlyembeddedintothejournal.Thisandotherreasonsleadtothefactthattechnicalrequirementsproofedtobenecessaryor,atleast,beneficialforpublicationstofulfillcertainfunctions(seeabove)arehardlymet.ServicessuchastheAV-Portal of German National Library of Science and Technology,therefor,trytooffermoresophisticatedservicesforthepublicationofaudio-visualresources(regardlessoftheresearchfield)inamoretrustfulenvironment(Drees,Kraft,andKoprucki2018).
Transmedia PublicationsThelastsectionaddressedtheissueofspecificmediaresourceswhich,byvirtueofdigitaltechnologies,shouldbecomepublicationsintheirownright.Ithasbeenarguedbeforethattermsmediaandmulti-mediaoftenrefertounspecifiedinclusionsofnon-textualresourcestopublications.This section presents a publication concept that in contrast to the afore-mentionedobservationbuildsuponaverypreciseideaoftheentan-glementbetweendifferentmediatypes.AtermwhichseemsappropriateforincludingallpublicationsinthissectionisthetermTransmediaPub-lications(hereafterreferredtoasTPs).
ThetermTransmediaPublicationsisderivedfromoneofitsearlyprojects,morespecificallyfromThe Institute for the Future of the Book(Meade2013),oneofwhosemajorprotagonistsusedtheterm“transmediawriting”inordertodescribethetypeofworktheinstitutewantedtosupport.Itisintroducedasanumbrellaterminthestudyathandforavarietyofprojectssharingacommonviewofthespecificuseofmediaforpublishing,whichcouldbewelldescribedbythetermtransmediameaningacrossmedia.
Insomecontexts,theterm“multimodal”isalsousedinsteadoftrans-mediainordertorefertothesameaspects(McPherson2008;Svensson2010).Nonetheless,transmediaseemspreferableatthispoint,becausethewordmultimodalwillbeusedinthesecondpartofthisworkinordertodescribepropertiesofdigitalpublicationsthatarebroaderinscope.Anothertermthatsometimesappearsinrelateddiscussionsis“webtexts”(BallandEyman2015).ThedisadvantagecomparedtothetermTransmediaPublicationsinthisparticularcaseliesinthefactthatwebtextsaddressaparticulartechnologicalenvironmentforTPs.However,thisenvironmentisnotanecessityforthemainelementsofthisconcept.
90 https://vimeo.com
144 Beyond the Flow
Itisnowclearwhyvideo-essaysareinfactanedgecase.Obviously,theyalsocombinedifferentmodalitiesinordertocarryoutamultimodaldis-course.Video-essaysarenotonlyonemediumbecauseitstechnologicalrepresentationpackagesitintoonefileassociatedtechnologicallywithaso-calledmedia type91.Inthecontextoftheanalysisofdigitalpublicationformatsthemediatypeaspect,however,isnotwithoutvalue.Publicationformatsareaconflationbetweenconceptualandtechnologicaldefinitions.Thepresentstudy,accordingly,referstoTransmediaPublicationsaspub-licationscombiningbothdifferentmediainthesenseofpresentingamulti-modaldiscourseaswellasofdifferenttechnologicalmediatypes.
The Story of Transmedia Publications
ThebeginningoftheTPconceptcouldbesetaround2005withthereleaseof Vectors,aJournal of Culture and Technology in a Dynamic Vernacular92 as well as Sophie,anauthoringtoolforthecreationof“networkedmulti-media”publications93.IntheirbriefoverviewonTPsBallandEyman(2015)pinpointthebeginningofTPsmuchearlier,startingfrom1996withtherelease of the kairos94journalofwhichtheauthorsaretheeditors.Never-theless,theyadmitthatatthattimethesepublicationswerenotfullytrans-mediabuthtmldocumentsontheweb.
TheInstitutefortheFutureoftheBook,whichwasbehindthedevelopmentofSophie,wasaprojectoftheUniversityofSouthCarolinawithdifferentpartnersaroundtheworld.Itsgoalwastheexplorationofthe“book’srein-ventioninanetworkedenvironment”(InstitutefortheFutureoftheBook2008).Forthispurpose,severaltoolsweredeveloped.Similarly,theVectorsjournalbecamenotjustajournalbutaprojectwhichledtoinstitutionalcooperationandthecreationofsocialinfrastructure,aswillbedescribedingreaterdetailinthenextsection.
In2014theinternationalAnthropocene Project at the Haus der Kulturen der WeltinBerlin95triedtoimaginenewwaysofdoingandrepresentingscience,intendedtomatchupwiththescaleofproblemstoday(Welt2015).Itawardedthreeexamplesofso-called“FutureStorytelling”which
91 https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml92 http://vectors.usc.edu93 http://web.archive.org/web/20150206051256/http://www.sophieproject.org/
(archivedversionfromtheInternetArchive)94 http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/95 http://hkw.de/en/programm/projekte/2014/anthropozaen/
anthropozaen_2013_2014.php
Publishing 3.0 145
weresupposedtobestrepresentthisattempt.ThesepublicationswerealldesignedasTPs.MorerecentexamplesofTPscomprisethejournalThresholds96andtheprojectVega-Pub97(Ball2017).Vega-PubtriestodevelopaneditorialmanagementsoftwareforthepublishingworkflowofTPs.
DuetothetheoreticalbackgroundofTPsexplainedinthenextparagraphs,TPsaremostlycreatedinthehumanities.Nonetheless,examplesliketheRich Interactive NarrativesauthoringtooldevelopedbyMicrosoft Research (Takedaetal.2013)ore-book-orientedapproachesfromthefieldofmed-icine(StirlingandBirt2014)provideexamplesfromotherdomainsaswell.
Transmediality, the Outcome of a Another Perspective on Digital Technology
WhendefiningtransmediainTPs,itishelpfultoreviewthewaysinwhichtheinclusionofdifferentmediahasbeendiscusseduntilnow.Inmanycases,theissueofmultiplemediaresourceswasaddressedbythephraseof“supplementarymaterial.”Thispointstoacertainhierarchybetweenmedia.Atthetopofthathierarchytheremightbetext,orinthecaseofdigitalpublications,data.Ashasbeenarguedbefore,otherresourcesaredelegatedthefunctiontosupportwhatiswrittenorcomputed.Thelattercaseismorecomplicatedinsofarasdatamayrepresentanytypeofmodalitysuchassoundorimages.However,ifROsorSPPsspeakofsup-plementarymaterialinsteadofdatatheyarereferringmoretothetypeofengagementwiththismaterial.Thus,whileaudiofilesasdatainthework-flowarecomputed,audiofilesassupplementarymaterialaremostlikelymeanttobelistenedto.
InTPstheuseofdifferentmediaservesacompletelydifferentpurpose,whichpreciselyemphasizesthedifferentwaysinwhichmediaresourcesareproducedandperceived.Theydosobecausetheyfollowtheideathattheuniquefeaturesofdifferentmediaofferuniquewaystorepresentandcommunicateknowledge.Comparedtotheconceptofsupplementarymaterial,thereisnoconceptualhierarchybetweenmediaresourcesassuch.Eachmediamaycontributeitsowntruthvaluestothescientificdiscourseinapublication.Therelationshipsbetweenthesewaysofrepresentationaremultipleandnouseofonemediacanbefullysub-stitutedbytheuseofanotherone.Accordingly,itdoesnotmakesensetomaintainanyhierarchicalrelationshipbetweenmediaasitisproblematic
96 http://openthresholds.org97 https://vegapublish.com/
146 BeyondtheFlow
toviewdifferentmediaonlyfromtheviewpointofaspecificmediatype.TheVectorsjournalstressesthat“wepublishonlyworksthatneed,forwhateverreason,toexistinmultimedia”(“VectorsJournal”2013).
Nevertheless,thetermmultimediaremainsambiguous,sinceitisalsousedinearlieranddifferentapplicationsofmultiplemediaresources.Itdoesnotmakeanystrategybehindtheseusagesclear,atleastnonethatgoesbeyondaggregation.Thisisthereasonwhythetermtransmediasuitsbetter.Itemphasizes:
…afusionofoldandnewmediainordertofosterwaysofknowingandseeingthatexpandtherigidtext-basedparadigmsoftraditionalscholarship.(“VectorsJournal”2013)
Transmediapublicationsseektorepresentaformofknowledgewhichdoesnotresidewithinthemediaresourcesbut“inthespacesbetween”(McDonaldandTrettien2016).
[Figure3.2]The“Lo.-Fi.Manifesto”publishedintheKairosJournal.Thepicturewas
modifiedforprint.Inordertogettheauthenticcolorimpressionrefertohttp://kairos.
technorhetoric.net/20.2/inventio/stolley/.
Publishing 3.0 147
Inhis“Lo-FiManifesto2.0,”Stolley(2016)givesagoodexampleofhowsimpletransmedialityisusedbypublicationsintheKairosjournal(seefigure3.2).TheManifestoisapleafortheuseofsimpletechnologies,mostlyinthespiritoftheKISS98principlethatwascoinedintheUNIXworldbackinthe80s.Stolleywantstochallengethedevelopmentofcomplexpiecesofdigitaltechnologyandsoftwareincurrenttime.
[Figure3.3]“TotalityforKids,”aTransmediaPublicationfromtheVectorsJournal.The
picturewasmodifiedforprint.Inordertogettheauthenticcolorimpressionrefertohttp://
vectors.usc.edu/issues/7/totality/.
However,thischallengeisnotonlypresentedbyarguments.Thearticleiswritteninamonospacedfontandusescolorsfromthesolarizedcolorpalette.Itrefrainsfromusinganyimagesormediaotherthantext.Infact,thereareiconographicelementssuchastheheader,buttheauthorusescharactersinordertodrawtheimage.Bothfontandcolorschemealludetoterminalenvironmentsandtominimalisticeditorslikevim99 which are operationalbeforeanygraphicaldesktopenvironmenthasbeenloaded.Bydoingso,colorandfontlinktoacertaindiscourseandenvironmentwhichmatchesthemainargumentofthetext.Inthisrespect,theabsenceof
98 KISSisanacronymforKeep It Simple and Stupidwhichdescribesacommonethosforthedesignofsoftware.
99 http://www.vim.org/
148 Beyond the Flow
othermediaisanexplicittransmedialdesigndecision.Thereisnotjustnomediabutbynotusingit,multi-mediaisaddressedexplicitly.
McKenzieWark’s“TotalityforKids”(2013)choosesacompletelydifferentapproach(seefigure3.3).Stolley’stransmediastrategycanbedescribedasarepetitionthroughoutonenon-textualmediastrategy.Thevisualsofthearticlereaffirmthestatementofthewrittentext.Nonetheless,thestrategydoesmorethanjustillustratetheargument.Infact,itcouldbesaidthatthisconstitutesmoreacontradictiontoStolley’sintent,insofarasitmakesthewholeresourcetechnicallymorecomplicatedthanitneedstobe.IncontrasttoStolley,Warkdesignsadenseentanglementbetweentext,sound,drawing,time,andinteractivity,inwhichthelineofargumenttrulygrowsoutofallthesecomponentscombined.
The publication investigates the story of the situationist international in Paris,betweentheearlyfiftiesandtheseventies.Itdoessobyembeddingsnippets from the line of arguments in situationist theory into historical eventsthatarepresentedasagraphicnovel.Therebythevisualsspeakofhistorywhilethetextdevelopsatheoreticaldiscourse.Anotherpeculiarityisthatthereisthenotionofpages.However,theshiftbetweenpagesisautomaticandisalwaysscheduledinsuchawaythatthereadercannotgeteverythingthatisonthescreen.Thisdecisioncreatestheeffectoftran-sitoriness,whichdoesnotonlyemphasizethehistoricityofthewholedis-course,butalsoproducesthefeelingthatsomethingislostorsituational.Thisfeelingcoincideswiththeend,inwhichtheobjectiveofthemovementitselfislost,anobjectivethatconsistedofchangingthesocio-culturalrealityofcapitalism.
Itisalsopossibletointerrupttheautomaticallyscheduledflowofpagesbymouseclicks,enablingthereadertogetfurthertextexplanations,pas-sagesfromtheoreticaltexts,andothermaterial.Morethanjustgivingcontextinformation,thisfeatureenablesashiftbetweenatheoreticalandahistoricalperspectiveontheverysamecontent,bymeansofdesigningtimeandinteractivityasmediumtocreatediscourse.
AnotherstrategytorelatedifferentmediatogethertocreateanargumentispresentedbyScalar100.Scalaroffersthepossibilityofrenderingthepub-licationorpartsofitindifferentviews.Viewsvaryintermsoftext-focusedorvisuallyfocusedpresentationofcontent.Forinstance,thepathviewenablestoseehowdifferentcomponentsinapublicationmightrelatewith
100 https://scalar.usc.edu/scalar/
Publishing 3.0 149
eachotherinotherwaysthantheintendedreadingpath.Otherviewsmayprovidestatisticalinformationorvisualaccesstothecontent.
SayersandDietrich(2013,11)callthisstrategyadesignofmultiple“modesofattention,”inwhichthenarrativestrategybehindthoseviewsisthecon-structionofspecifictypesofperceptionofcomponentsinapublication.Theunderlyingclaimisthatthereisnoargumentorinformationwhichisindependentoftheenvironmentinwhichitiscreated,andwhichhastobeexperienced(Svensson2010,para.150).Infact,thisclaimturnsthewholeapproachofradicallyisolatingcontentfromformexperiencedinotherdigitalpublicationformatsupsidedown.Accordingly,digitaltechnologiesallowaclearerviewofthefactthatformisalwayscontent,andpermitmakinguseofthisaspectformorepowerfulpublications.
Theabilityoftheusertoactivelychangebetweenviews,ortodecidewhenshewantstointerrupttheautomaticflowofthedefaultlineofargumentsintroducesinteractivityasitsown“medium”forstrategicnarrativepurposes.Thedesigndecisionsconcerninginteractivitynotonlyshapehowmuchfreedomareaderhasbutalsoinwhichaspectswithinthelineofargumentsinteractivitytakesplaceandinwhichnot.Thereby,interactivitydoesnotnecessarilyunderminetheauthoredlineofargument.Itcanalsomakeitmoreconvincing.Forinstance,certainpointsmayseemmoreauthenticwhentheyareexperiencedbythereader“onherown.”
Theseexamplesforthetermtransmediasubstantiateanunderstandingofdigitalmediawhichisfundamentallydifferentfromthosefoundinotherconcepts.Theapproachtotechnology,inthiscasedigitaltechnology,informedbycommonargumentsfromculturaltheoryandthehumanities,isverydifferentaswell.
Correspondingly,McPherson,inalectureattheRewiring the Future of Pub-lishingconference(summarizedbyAdema2014),criticizestheso-calledstackmodelofcomputerarchitecture.Inthismodel,computerarchitectureisrepresentedinahierarchywhichfromthebottomupconsistof:plat-form,code,function,interface,andreception.Ithasbeenshownthatinapproachestopublishingthatareinformedbycomputerscience,thishierarchyequatestoanepistemologicalhierarchy.Formcanbesubtractedfromcontentbecauselevelsbelowtheinterfaceleveldonotinterferewiththereceptionlevel.
McPhersonarguesthatthismodelisinconsistentintwoways.First,it neglects that the fabrication of the platform is the result of a cul-turaldecision-makingprocessandtherebyequallyascontingentasthe
150 Beyond the Flow
interface.Second,thedifferentlevelsmightbeusefulforunderstandingdigitaltechnology,butonlyiftheirrelationshipisconsiderednon-hierarchicalandreciprocallyinfluentialincontinuouslychangingways.Thus,itcouldbearguedthattheproliferationofdifferentdigitaldevicesandplatformsisprovokedbythereceptionlevelwhich,farfrombeingpas-sive,stronglyinfluencestherefurbishingofplatforms.
Ultimately,nooneviewisadirectrepresentationofdata.Rather,eachshapesaudienceperceptionandconstructsbothasubjectandanargument(whicharesteepedindisciplinaryhistoriesofinter-pretation).(SayersandDietrich2013,10)
Viewsandtheirentanglementwithdifferentmediaaddressdifferentwaysofperceivingtheworld,butalsodifferentwaysofengagingwithit.Thearrayviewofanimageasanumericalthree-dimensionalarray101 is meant foracomputationalcontext,whilethe“image”viewsuggests“experience.”Yettheeffectofonetypeofconsiderationcanchangetheactivitiesoftheotherandviceversa.
Theframingoftechnologicalconceptsassocio-culturalangleswhichinteractwithothersocio-culturalconceptsonanequallevelispushedfurtherbyMcPherson(2010).Inthispapershecriticizescomputationalapproachestodigitalpublishing,aswellascertaintypesofdisapprovalofdigitalpublicationsfromhumanitiesscholars.Theauthorremarksthatbothdiscoursesdealwithnarrativeorganizationofarguments,linearstructure,andinterpretativemethodologyaspropertiesthatbelongtothetextandprintworld,whiledigitaltechnologieshaveaneedofdifferentmethodologicalandorganizationalprinciples(networkstructuresandquantitativemethodology).
McPhersonarguesthatthisassumptioniswrong,sinceatextdoesalsoprovidenon-linearrelationships,anddigitaltechnologiesenableauthoringofmuchmorethanwhatisdoneine-Science.Shestatesthatthismismatchiscausedbytwobinaries:thebinaryofdatabasesandmonographsontheonehandandofinterpretationandquantificationontheother.Whilebothbinariesaretwodifferentthings—artifactsandmethodology—theyaretreatedasoneandthesamethinginthediscourseaboutdigitalpublishing,justasitissuggestedbyapurelytechnicalinterpretationofthestackmodelabove.
101 TheopenCVpythonclientfortheimplementationofsoftwareprojectsincomputervisiondoesrepresentimagesinathree-dimensionalnumpy-arraywhereeachdimensionencodesinformationaboutonecolorchannelintheRed,Green,Bluespectrum.
Publishing 3.0 151
TheconceptofTPsisthereforepartofabroaderscientificendeavorinthehumanities,thatofchallengingtheusageofcertainbinariesthatareoftendrivenbycommonviewpointsofdigitaltechnologies:
Thus,it[Scalar]mediatesawholesetofbinaries:betweencloseanddistantreading,userandauthor,interfaceandbackend,microandmacro,theoryandpractice,archiveandinterpretation,textandimage,databaseandnarrative,andhumanandmachine.(McPherson2014,185)
Transmedia Publications as Humanist Forms of Experimentation
ItwouldfallshorttoonlypresentthetheoreticalbackgroundofTPsincontrasttootherviewpoints.TransmediaPublicationsarealsopartofaresearchprograminthehumanitieswhichsetsandpromotesitsowngoals.ItcouldevenbesaidthatuptoacertainextentTPsarenotjustanewtypeofpresentingresearchresults,buttheprimarygoalofacertainresearchlineitself.
Accordingly,Svensson(2010),inhispioneeringoverview“TheLandscapeofDigitalHumanities,”callstheVectorsjournaltheepitomeofacertaintypeofhumanities.AlludingtoMcPherson,hecallsthisresearchfield“Multi-modalHumanities.”Hedescribesitasdrivenbytheattempttochallengecommonideasofformandcontent,leadingtoanotionofresearchasartisticpracticeandscienceasanareaofactivismandintervention.Thelastpointisbasedontheargumentthatscientistsneverjustrepresenttheworld,butbyrepresentingitautomaticallyshapeittothelikingoftherepresentation.
InthisrespectTPsinvestigate“whatmightcountasscholarlyargument”(McPherson2010,2).Itwasindicatedthatevenoutsideofapoliticalnotionofsciencethisresearchquestiondoesbynomeansconstituteagoalinitself.Accordingly,theFutureStorytellingcontestwassetuparoundtheargumentthattheproblemsofourtimecanonlybeadequatelyrepresentedinatransmediafashion.Therehasbeenastrongbaseforsuchthinkinginhumanitiesresearchforalongtime.In1991,Flusser(1994,40)alreadywrotethat“esistoffensichtlichgeworden,dassdieProbleme,diesichvorunsauftun,eserforderlichmachen,siedurchsehrvielraffiniertere,exaktereundreichereCodesundGestenalsdiedesAlphabetszudenken.”102
102 “…ithasbecomeevidentthattheproblemsweexperiencetodayrequirethinkingintermsofcodesandgesturesthataremuchmoresophisticated,exact,andricherthanthoseofthealphabet.”(author’stranslation)
152 Beyond the Flow
Thepluralityofrepresentationstrategies,however,doesnotmeanthatTPsareallaboutthecreationofnewpublications.Theysometimesmakeexplicitreferencestoahistoricalpublicationformatthatiscloselyrelatedtothehumanitiesandthatisconsideredtobeindangertoday:themonograph.Consequently,McPhersonassertsthat:
…newformsofexperimentationandbookishnessarenecessaryifwearetoadvance(andperhapssave)scholarlypublishinginthehumanities.(McPherson2010,2)
Correspondingwiththeculturalcritiqueofatechno-deterministicangleonpublicationsandwiththefield’sinterpretationofresearchasanactofsocialengagement,thepreservationofthehumanitiesmonographcannotbecarriedoutinanormativetop-downmanner.Insteaditneedstobelaidoutasasocialprocessinwhichnewformsofpublishingshouldbetheresultofahopefullydemocraticprocessofnegotiation:
…thebookshouldbeseenasaprocessofmutualbecoming:aformofintra-actionbetweendifferentagentsandconstituencies(humanandnon-human).(Adema2015,viii)
ThisisalsothereasonwhyMcPhersontalksaboutnewformsofbookish-nessintermsofexperimentationandwhysheencouragesexper-imentation.Accordingly,abroadrangeofapproacheswillprovidemoreinputforthefutureofthemonographandassurethedemocraticcharacteroftheprocess.InthisrespectMcPhersonremarksthat“Vectorsispartandparcelofthisbroadercultureofexperimentationandchange”(McPherson2010,5).
ThisethosofexperimentationisverymuchcelebratedacrossallTPprojects.Thus,theif:bookinitiative,whichformspartoftheprojectbehindSophie,definesitsprimarygoalin“exploringdigitalpossibilitiesforlit-eratureandthefutureofthebook”(Meade2013).TheFutureStorytellingcontestissetuponthequestion:“WhatkindsofcrossmedialstoriescanbetoldabouttheAnthropocene”(Welt2015)andTPjournalschoosenamesliketheJournal of Visual Experiments, and Audiovisual Thinking.
Two Types of Consequences of a Different Notion of Technology
IthasbeenpointedoutseveraltimesthatallthesignificantdifferencesbetweenTPsrootinadifferentevaluationoftechnologyingeneral,andofdigitaltechnologyinparticular,fortheprospectofscholarlypublications.Svensson(2010par.31)explainsthisdifferencebystressing
Publishing 3.0 153
thattheresearchfieldinwhichTPsarecreatedisconcernedwithdigitaltechnologiesasaculturalphenomenonandaresearchobjectinsteadoftechnologyasan“instrumentaltool.”ThelastparagraphsexplainedwhythisissoandwhattheconsequencesofthisfactforthemanygoalsofTPsare.TheconsequencesforthetechnologicalimplementationforTPsandtheirenvironment,however,stillneedtobediscussed.
Acrucialissuealsostressedbyotherprojectsalreadyconcernsthesupportoftheauthoringprocessofdigitalpublications.Forobviousreasons,thecreationofTPsisanextremelydemandingprocess,varyingaccordingtothetransmedialcomplexityoftheparticularcase.MaybeitwasthefactthatthischallengeissoevidentthatmadethefieldofTPs,incontrasttootherapproaches,respondtoitfromtheverybeginningandwhytheyhavecreatedasetofsophisticatedauthoringtools.Besides,itcanalsobeseeneasily,fromwhathasbeendescribedsofar,thatthisisalsotheresultofeffortstoenableresearchersinthehumanitiestoengageindigitaltechnologies.
AmongthesetoolsareSophie,theRich Interactive Narrative Framework103,ScalarortheDynamic Backend Generator(VectorsJournal2008)someofwhichwereevenawardedingeneralpurposecomputermagazines(Fenton2013).Themainpurposeofthesetoolsistomakedifferentdigitalresourcesmanageablefortheconstructionofmultimedianarrativesandtomaketheresultexportable.Thetoolsintentionallytrytoabstractfromaviewwhichreflectstechnologicalneedsandperformthetaskoftransformingthecon-ceptuallydefinedpublicationintoatechnologicalimplementation.
Althoughthesetoolsexist,theyareoftennotused.ThecaseswhereaTPisdesignedbyateamconsistingofhumanistresearchersandcomputerscientistsarenotsorareinstead.Thissituationmightalsoreflectthefactthattheperspectivesoftransmedialitycreateneedswhichcanneverbefullysupportedbystandardizedtools,becausetheareaswherestandardizationtakesplaceinothercontextshavetobeavailabletotheindividualpurposesofresearcherssimplybyconceptdesign.ThisaspectalsoindicateshowresourceintensivethecreationofTPscanbe.
Sofar,thediscussionofthetheoreticalbackgroundofTPshasmostlyhigh-lightedissuesthatbenefitfromatransmediaapproach,whilethelastpara-graphindicatedthattherearealsoissueswhichbecomemoreproblematicandwhichhavenotbeenwhollysortedout.Atleastoneoftheseissuesistightlyboundtothethemeofthecritiquesofbinaries,givenbyMcPherson,
103 https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/rich-interactive-narratives/
154 Beyond the Flow
especiallythegoalof“meldingformandcontenttoenactasecond-orderexaminationofthemediation”(“VectorsJournal”2013).
Althoughseriousargumentsforthiscritiqueexistonthetheoreticallevel,allofwhicharediscussedabove,thebinaryofcontentandformdoesalsoreflectsomeverypragmaticneeds.Forinstance,itenablesadis-tinctionbetweencoreandcontingentpropertiesofanobjectofinterest.Theoreticallyandpoliticallysuchaprioritizationmightappearproblem-atic,butwhenitcomestothequestionofmaintainingandsustainingmultimedianarrativesaspublications,prioritizationofadditionalcriteriaisvalid.Whenrelatedstakeholdersareabletodevelopaprofileforcertainpublicationtypes,itmeansthattheyareabletosupport,maintain,andbuildanenvironmentaroundit.Thisisoneofthereasonse-Science-orientedpublicationconceptssoeagerlyandradicallyseparatethetwo.Strivingforacompleteconflationbetweenformandcontentjeopardizesthesustainabilityofpublicationsassocio-culturalobjects,aswillbeshowninthefollowingparagraphs.Thus,theissueisnotthatalinebetweenformandcontentexistsassuch,butthatimposingandimplementingsuchalineisaconceptualtooltomakedigitalpublicationsmanageable.Consequently,Ball(2016,52)admitsthat“webtexts[TPs]canbedifficulttostabilizeduetotheirtechnologicalandmediainnovations.”
BallandEyman(2015)giveaverygoodexamplefortheaforementionedconsequences.In2015already,theauthorsstatedthatnoeditorialwork-flowexistsforTPs.Intheirstudytheylistavarietyofreasons,allrelatedtotheindividualcomplexityofTPsandthetopicoftheconflationofformandcontent.Theyillustratehowtheseissuescreatecomplicatedconditionsforrequirementssuchasthereview,citation,dissemination,orarchivingofTPs.
TheproblemofarchivingcanbedemonstratedwellusingtheScalarproject.ComparedtootherprojectsScalardoesinfactprovideasophis-ticatedmodelfortheexportofTPs.ForthepublicationofTPs,Scalarprovidesawebplatformwhichorganizessomeoftheaforementionedtasks.Nonetheless,theexportmodel(in2016)onlydescribespartsofaTP.Moreprecisely,itonlyconsiderstheresourcesincludedinaTPaswellasthelinks(paths)betweenthem.TheScalarviewswhich,ashasbeensaid,formacrucialaspectoftheScalarlogicsarenotpartoftheexportmodel.Additionally,somedesignelementsthatareprovidedbytheauthoringsoftwareandtheScalarplatformarenotrepresentedeither.Inconsequence,thedatamodelre-introducesaseparationbetweencoreelementsofapublicationanditsrepresentation,aseparationthatwas
Publishing 3.0 155
substantiallychallengedbytheprojectbefore.OnlytheplatformassuresthestatusofTPsastransmedial.Theexportintotheaforementioneddatamodelonlyturnsthemintoanaggregationsuchasthosedescribedinsection3.2.1withoutthepossibilityofreproducingthemasTPssomewhereelse.
Scalarisstillapositiveexception.ItexportspublicationsasRDF,therebycomplyingwithcertaintechnicalstandards.OtherTPsareevenmoredependentontheirenvironmentandoftendonotprovideamachine-readableorsoftware-independentversion.
Issuesregardingarchiving,long-term-preservation,andintegritybelongtothemostsubstantialchallengescausedbythepeculiarrelationshipofTPstotechnology.Svensson(2010,para.149)evengoesastepfurtherandremarksthat“thetechnologyitselfdoesnotseemtobeaprimaryfocus.”
Althoughthisassertionisquiteharsh,manyobservationssupportit.ManyTPs,forinstance,areimplementedinFlash.Flashisanoldproprietarytechnologywhich,forexample,isnotsupportedanymorebybrowsersinmobiledevicesandwhichposesmuchmorechallengestotheissuesofthetypediscussedconcerningarchivingbefore.
Vectorpublicationslikethe“RoaringTwentieth”(Thompson2013)donotprovideeitheralinted104norpersistentcitationURL.Inamodernbrowserenvironment105audiostreamssometimesworkandsometimesdonotwork.Thisisasubstantialissueinapublicationwhichisprimarilycon-cernedwithsound.
ManyVectorspublicationsletthebrowsergetstuckinthetabofthepublicationsothatthebrowserhadtoberestartedinordertobeabletochangetabsagain.ThePhotomediations(Zylinskaetal.2015)publicationbyJoannaZylinskacreatesasecondscrollbaronthewebsitefordesignpurposes.However,incertainsituationsthisseemstoconflictwiththebrowserscrollbarandscrollingisnotpossibleatallanymore.Somelinksfromtheindexpagedonotopenthecorrespondingpageafteracertainsequenceofprevioussteps.
104 Inthepresentcontextlintingmeanstouseanunderstandable,clean,andstand-ardizedstructuralschemetodefinelinksthatsubtractsfromthetechnologicalenvironmentinwhichthelinkisdefined.
105 ThepublicationwasrenderedinaFirefoxbrowserversion46.
156 Beyond the Flow
Summary
Allthingsconsidered,TPsintroduceasubstantiallynewapproachtothedesignofdigitalpublications.ThisapproachissoradicallydifferentfromthosethatwereoutlinedalreadythatTPsseemtorepresentanopposingpointofview.Thedifferenceisbasedonaveryspecificevaluationoftheroleofdigitaltechnologiesforpublishing.Moreprecisely,TPsaddresstechnologyasacatalystfornewformsofmeaningandcommunication,andnotasamechanismtomakescholarlycommunicationmoreefficient,implyinganunderstandingofthetermshapedbyinformationandcomputerscience.ThisisbasedonthefactthatforTPsdigitaltechnologiesarethemselvesexpressionsofculturalconstructsandthuscanalsobeappropriatedindifferentways.Theyaretherebynotabletoimposeacertaintypeoflogic.
TransmediaPublicationsresemblealineofargumentwhichcommoninthehumanities.Withoutdoubttheseargumentsareablindspotintheconceptualspaceofotherpublicationconcepts.Ontheotherhand,ithasbeendemonstratedthatmorecomplexreflectionsontechnologyindigitalpublicationsinstigatemorecomplexchallengesforthesocio-technologicalenvironmentofcorrespondingpublications.Hence,thequestionofefficiencyremains,albeitinadifferentguise.Beyondsustainability,itcallsforadditionalviewpointssuchasthereadabilityofTPs.Whileothercon-ceptswerefocusedonthereadabilityofpublicationsformachines,TPsneedtoconsiderthereadabilityforhumansandforthesakeofscholarlycommunicationaswell.Unfortunately,thediscourseonTPsrarelyapproachesthisquestion.
ThebenefitofexistingTPscanfurthermorebechallenged,ifitiscomparedwiththefield’sgoaltocreatenewtypesofmeaningandmorepowerfulmodesofrepresentation.ManymediapropertiesofTPsconcentrateonatmosphericaspectsoronmirroringthemainpointsofthetext.Whilesupportersoftheconceptwouldprobablyarguethatthetermatmos-phericalreadyintroducesaproblematicdistinctionbetweennecessaryandunnecessaryfeatures,theapplicationofmultimediaiswithoutquestionfarremovedfromthe“moreexactandrichercodes”thatsometimesframethediscourse.
[ 4 ]
Publishing-Com Bubble
Theperiodbetween2007and2013wasindeedhighlydynamicandshapedbyanimpressivenumberofindividualprojectsandinitiatives.Despitetheirfundamentaldifferences,alltheseactivities,fromROstoTPs,hadoneaspectincommon.Theyallemphasizethe“revolutionaryforce”ofdigitaltechnologiesinonewayoranother.Thewayinwhichthisforceisinter-pretedvaries.
Thesuccessoftheseactivities,incontrast,remainslimited,especiallyifevaluatedbytheirkeyagents.Consequently,DeRoure(2014b,233),akeyfigurebehindROs,remarksin2014that“scientificpublicationstilllooksremarkablyasitdidinyearspast.”AgroupofprominentcontributorstoSPsandNPssimilarlystatethat:
…twodecadesofemergentandincreasinglypervasiveinformationtechnologyhavedemonstratedthepotentialforfarmoreeffectivescholarlycommunication.Buttheuseofthistechnologyremainslimited.(Bourne,Shotton,etal.2012,41)
Inamoreemotionalmanner,Bardi(2014),involvedinLPs,askstherhetoricalquestion:“ScholarlyCommunication:What’sWrongwithIt?”Atthesametimethesejudgementsweremade,thefundingformanyoftheprojectenvironmentsmaintainingtheseactivitiesended.
Anotherpossibleobservationistheemergenceofagreaternumberofpub-licationconceptsstemmingfromthehumanitiesattheendofthisperiod.Ashasbeenemphasized,theseconceptsintroducenewideasaboutdigitalpublicationorre-interpretexistingideas.Thereisoneaspectamongthesedifferencesthatstandsoutregardingitsmeaningforfuturedevelopments,especiallyvisibleintheAiMEproject.Thisprojectputanamountofeffort
160 Beyond the Flow
intotheorganizationofreliablesocialstructuresarounditsUBpublicationthatisunequalledbyotherpublicationconceptsuptothattime.Itistruethatthescopeoffundingbehindthisprojectfacilitatedthis.However,italsorepresentsahigherappreciationofsocialaspectsinfluencingthesuccessofdigitalpublications.
Thenextphaseinresearchondigitalpublicationsdistinguishesitselfbythewayittakesintoaccountthesocialcontextofscholarlypublications.Therearedifferencesbetweendifferentpublicationsconceptswhenitcomestotheexactwaybywhichthiscontextisacknowledged.Nonetheless,itsbeingconsideredinthefirstplacemarksasea-changeforallofthem.
Hybrid PublicationsOneofthepublicationconceptsbelongingtothosementionedaboveisthatofHybridPublications(hereafterreferredtoasHPs).ItmakessensetostartwithHPsinsofar,astheyareadevelopmentthatinvolvedpeoplewhoalsocontributedtothelastpublicationconceptofthechapterabove(TPs).HPsareaconceptrepresentingsubstantialideasthathavenotbeendiscussedyetinthisform.
ThefirsttimethatthetermHybridPublishingwasusedinconjunctionwithaclearlymarkedresearchagendawasprobablybyMcPherson(2010)inheralreadycitedarticle“ScalingVectors.”Inthesecondpartofthearticle,theauthordescribesinsightsfromexperiencesgainedduringtheyearsoftheVectorsJournal.Additionally,sheintroducestheformationoftheAlliance for Networking Visual Culture(alsoreferredtoasANVC),anorganizationofresearchers,libraries,archives,anduniversitypresses,asameansofsolvingissuesthathadbeenidentifiedduringthepublishingoftheVectorsJournal.
OneofthekeyinsightsfromtheVectorsprojectreflectsonthestatusofTPsasexperimentalspaces.McPhersonstatesthatthisapproachhascertainlimitationsandconcludesthat:
…weneedtoevolvemore“standardized”structuresandinterfacesthatwillallowustodelineatemorestablegenresandtoscalemulti-modalscholarship.(McPherson2010,6)
Thisstandardizationshouldenablethecreationoftechnologicalandsocialinfrastructure,aswellasminimizetheeffortforscholarswhenproducingTPs.Ontheotherhand,thequoteshowsthatTPsarenotconsideredcapableofallowingsuchdevelopments.TheScalarpublicationplatform
Publishing-Com Bubble 161
mentionedaboveisoneoftheoutcomesofthisprocessandthealliance.Therelationshipbetweenthetwonames“Vectors”and“Scalar”highlightsverywellhowtheallianceandtheScalarplatformareshapingtheissueofdigitalpublications.Thegoalistofindscalarsonthevectorsofdigitalpublishing.
ThesectiononNPscontainedadensedescriptionofstrategiesbywhichthose publications try to transfer certain requirements of publications fromsocialagentstotechnologicalplatforms.Thistransfershouldmakeitpossibletoremovestakeholders,namelypublishersandeditors,fromtheecologyofpublishing.TheHPs’approachanditsunderlyingconvictionsaretheoppositeofNPsinthis.Boththeevaluationofstakeholdersandtheirrelationships,aswellasthesocialfunctionofreferenceimplementationsarebasedondifferentpointsofinterest.
Thedifferencestartswiththetypeofdiscussionthattakesplacearoundtheissueofstandardizedstructures.InthespiritinwhichtheyareaddressedbytheNPsexample,standardsareoftenconceptuallytakenforgranted.Theyfollowastrategywherecertainstandardsareadvo-catedagainstexistingsocialstructures,whichneedtoadapt.Accordingly,CameronNeylondiscussesinhisblog:
…thatthebestwaytogetresearcherstobeseriousabouttheissueofmodernizingscholarlycommunicationswastoletthescholarlymonographbusinessgotothewallasanobjectlessontoeveryoneelse(Neylon2012,para.1)
IntheHPsapproach,manyoftheissuesthatintheeyesofpeoplelikeCameronNeylonarealreadysortedoutactuallyarenot.Theidentificationofstandardizedstructures—socialandtechnologicalones—dependsongreaterinsightsintoquestionslike:“howwilleditorialfunctionsandtheirtemporalitiesshift…?,”“whowillberesponsibleforupdatingandsustainingdigitalpublications?,”“whatrelationshipsmightevolvebetweenpresses,libraries,andarchives?”or“howbesttoorganizethedigitalarchivetofacilitatescholarlyanalysis?”(McPherson2010,10–12),questionsthathavenotbeenansweredcomprehensivelyenough.
ItistruethatHPsaskthesequestionsmainlyforpublicationsfollowingtheTPsandrelatedconcepts.Nevertheless,theattitudeisverydifferent,andtheScalarportalisameans,notofestablishingapointofreference,butofcreatingan“experimentalspaceforpublishingfocusedonunder-standingtheentanglementbetweenpublishingtechnologyandculture”(Adema2015,38).Furthermore,thisnewtypeofexperimentisajoint
162 Beyond the Flow
ventureofallstakeholdersinthepublishingsector,astheallianceconsistsofrepresentativesofallofthem.
An Integrative Perspective on Digital Publications
ThedifferencewiththisfreshattempttodigitalpublicationsisvisibleinavarietyofdiscussionsandactivitiesthattakeplaceinthecontextofHPs.
Thebestexamplearethetopicsofopenaccessandopenscience.Itistransparentthroughoutthisworkthatstrongethicalargumentsaremadeaboutopenaccesspublishing.However,ofsimilarimportanceistheaspectthatthesuccessofmanyofthepublicationconceptsdependssignificantlyontheavailabilityofopenaccessresources.Thediscussionsofthesepub-licationdesignsandopenaccessmutuallysupporteachother.
AsHall,Kuc,andZylinska(2015)pointoutintheir“GuidetoOpenandHybridPublishing,”thisisnotsignificantlydifferentforHPs.HybridPub-licationsdonotrejectopenaccess.ThetitleoftheguidementionedaboveevenextendsthenameofHPswiththeterm“open.”TheVectorsjournal,furthermore,wasanopenaccesspublicationfromtheverybeginning.However,advocatesofHPsalsostressthedifficultiesofopenaccess.
Moreprecisely,theyarguethattherearelotsofunansweredquestionsbarringopenaccessfrombecomingasociallyandeconomicallysustainableendeavor,especially,butnotlimitedto,thecaseofnewdigitalpublicationformats(McPherson2010,11).Asitwillbecomeclearlateron,HPsdonotrejecthistoricalpublicationformats.Inthehumanities,thisformatistypicallythemonographthatpeoplelikeNeylonwanttoseegoingtothewall.
Burkhardt(2015)fromtheHybridPublishingLab,aswellasEveandEdwards(2015),clearlystatethatcommonopenaccessbusinessmodelsdonotworkoutformonographs.1Reasonsrelatetotheformatitselfandtodifferentsocialconditionssuchasfundingschemesinthehumanities.2 However,insteadofgivingupontheseformats,initiativesofHPstrytoformallianceswithopen-mindedpresseslikethoseinvolvedintheANVC,inordertodevelopspecialopenaccessmodelsthatmightworkwithin
1 Inthecommonopenaccesspublishingbusinessmodelitistheauthorwhohastopayafeethatcoversthepublicationanddisseminationcosts.ArgumentsforwhythisisproblematicinthecaseofthemonographaregivenbyHerbandSchöpfel(2018).
2 ForfurtherdetailsonthismatterseealsoCollins,Milloy,andStone(2015),MilloyandCollins(2016),Ferwerda,Pinter,andStern(2017).
Publishing-Com Bubble 163
particularenvironments.Tothisend,theHybridPublishingLabformedtheOApublisherMeson PressandalsocontactedDe Gruyter,animportantpublisherinthehumanitiesbutnotparticularlyknownforpushingopenaccessforward.VectorsbecamepartoftheOpenHumanitiesPress,anopenaccesspublisherforthehumanities,whenthisinitiativewaslaunchedin2009(OpenHumanitiesPress2015).Finally,Scalarcooperateswithmorethanonepress.
Anotherintegrativeapproachtoopenaccess,regardingtheissueofrevenueandfinancialsustainability,isproposedbyHall,Kuc,andZylinska(2015)intheir“GuidetoOpenandHybridPublishing.”Theauthorsdefineastrategycalled“subsequentmonetization.”SubsequentmonetizationdoesnotunderminethecoreofopenaccessinHPs,butproposesderivativesandreformattedversionsoftheoriginalcontent.Theysummarizethat:
OpenandHybridPublishinglearnsfromopenaccess,itsometimesborrowsfromOA;itmayincorporateOAstrategies,butitcanalsogobeyondthem.(Hall,Kuc,andZylinska2015,4)
Thediscussionofopenaccessisprobablytheonetopicinwhichpeculiaritiesofanintegrativeapproachtodigitalpublicationscanbeillustratedbest.Significantdifferencescanneverthelessbeobservedinotherareas,too.Scalar,forinstance,followsbestpracticesoftheCritical Commonsinitiative(CriticalCommons2016).Asthenamesuggests,CriticalCommentsreferstotheCreativeCommonsinitiative.However,insteadofjustfocusingonlicensingissues,CriticalCommonsevaluatesbestpracticesoffairuseandreuseofmedia.Theethicalissuesofopenaccessaretherebycruciallyextended.Additionally,theapproachemphasizesthatpositiveeffectsonthefieldofpublishingdonotjustderivenaturallyfromtheintroductionofcertainlicensingmodels.
ItisalsosignificantthatScalarpublications—whicharealsoaggregatedpublications — use semantic web technologies for the integration of resourcesbutdonotlimittheissueofinteroperabilitytothisonesolution.ScalarmakescontractswithpartnerarchivessuchastheInternet Archive3or the Visual History Archive4 of the Shoah Foundation5.ThesecontractsassurethatcriteriaoffairuseinthesenseofCriticalCommonsarekeptbeyondissuesoflicensing,andthatinteroperabilityismaintainedbeyondthetechnologicalprotocol.Fromthestudyof(DoorenboschandSierman2011),
3 https://archive.org/4 http://vhaonline.usc.edu5 https://sfi.usc.edu/
164 Beyond the Flow
outlinedintheEPssection,itbecameobviousthatsuchanapproachiscriticalwhendealingwithdistributedmediaresources.
Thistypeofinteroperability,whichcouldbecalledsocialinteroperability,extendstheperspectivesoftechnological,structuralandsemanticinter-operabilityofcomputerscienceaddressedinpreviouspublicationdesigns.InthetenrecommendationstocreatingHPsbyHall,Kuc,andZylinska(2015),noneactuallytackleissuesoftechnologicalinteroperability.Fur-thermore,thetransformationofonepublicationversionintoanother—forinstance,awebsitewhichisturnedintoaprintbook—isdescribedasaprocessbasedonhumanintervention.Theauthorsdonotjustignoreaspectsofinteroperability,butfollowtheimplicitcritiqueinHPsthattechnologicalandformalperspectivesoninteroperabilityarenotalwaysthemosteffectiveonesandhavelimitedimpactonthesocialworldonagenerallevel.
Defining Hybrid Publications
AcleardefinitionforHPs,albeitaddressedasaspecificpublicationtype,doesnotexist.ItistruethattheconceptofHPsemergedpartiallyoutofTPs.Hall,Kuc,andZylinska(2015)furthermorereferenceUBsasoneofitspredecessors.Nonetheless,itskeyaspectisanargumentbywhichitopposestheattitudeofmanyotherpublicationformats.Accordingly,HPsarguethatitisnotpossibleanymoretofocusononespecificpublicationformatasthenewmodelforpublications.Instead,apluralityofformatsisthewaytogo,includingnon-digitalformats.
McPherson(2010)firstusedthetermHybridPublicationinordertosum-marizethatdigitalpublishingissuccessful—asearlyas2010—whereveritdoesnottrytosubstituteprintortextpublications.AsLiuetal.(2016,31)putitinthecontextoftheirhybridbookapproach:“previousresearchsuggeststhat,whiledigitalcontenthasitsadvantages,printedcontentstilloffersbenefitsthatcannotbematchedbydigitalmedia.”McPherson,furthermore,drawsuponexperiencesintheVectorsJournal,revealingthatVectorsarticleswereoftenre-editedandre-publishedinprintorinablogpublication.Intheoppositedirection,existingpublicationsweresometimesre-editedinordertobecomearticlesinVectors.Sheoutlinesthatthebackgroundofsuchstrategiesistheneedtoaddressdifferentaudiencesanddifferentmedianeeds,makingitimpossibletoaddressalloftheminjustoneformat.
Publishing-Com Bubble 165
Hall,Kuc,andZylinska(2015)similarlycallHPscollectionsofresources,remixedandreformattedinordertosatisfytheneedofdifferentdevices,economicalneeds,andsocialchannels,andwhichonlycompletelyexistwhenallareconsideredtogether.
Moreclearly,theauthorsstatethatHPsaretheoneprinciplewhichunderminesthetop-down,one-to-many,and“onesizefitsitall”approachofotherpublicationconcepts.Intheauthor’sviewtheoneplayerwhocontrolledpublishinginatop-downfashionwasthepublisher,whosemechanismofcontrolwastheprintpublication.Incontrast,HPsadvocatepublicationsinmultipleformatsusingdifferentresourcesbypotentiallydifferentagents,wherethenetworkofrelatedpublicationsformstheabstractnotionofaHP.
Havingsaidallthis,thetaskofHPsisnottodefineapublicationbuttocata-logueandsupportdifferentpublicationformatsaswellastheconversionsbetweenthem.ThefirsteffortwasstartedbyWorthingtonandFurter(2014).Evenifincomplete,oflowquality,andnotataxonomyinastrictsense,theirpublication taxonomy was still the most comprehensive attempt tolistpublicationdesignsuptothatpointintime.
Examples of Hybrid Publication Bundles
The PhotomediationsprojectisanoutstandingexampleforaHybridPub-lication.PhotomediationsstartedinMarch2013withPhotomediations Machine(Zylinska2015).Eversincethen,ithasbeenajournal-likeonlinepublication,associatedwiththeCultureMachinejournalpreviouslymentioned.Itpublishesreviewedandcuratedtextaswellasvisualcontentaroundthetopicofphotography.
Intheyear2015,JoannaZylinska,themaineditorofPhotomediationsMachine,publishedPhotomediations: An Open Book(Zylinskaetal.2015).Thisonlinebookiscomprisedofeightchaptersdifferingbothincon-tentandform.Thefirstchapterisacomprehensiveintroductionintophotomediationasaspecifictheoryonphotography.Thenextfourchaptersincludeovertwohundredimagesgroupedanddescribedintermsoflight,motion,hybridity,andrelationship.Thephotoswerenotoriginallycreatedforthebook,theyarereusedversionsofmostlyopen-licensed
166 Beyond the Flow
photosgatheredfromPhotomediationsMachine,Europeana6,Flickr Commons7,orWikimedia8,followingthespiritofremixing.
Whereasthebeginningchaptersaremeanttobeinafinishedstate,chapterssixtoeightareopenforongoingupdatesandextensions.Chaptersixisanopencompilationofgeneralessaysaboutphotography,whilechapter seven consist of a Tumblr9blog,conceivedasa“socialspace”fordiscussiononthetopicofthebook.Thelastchapterreorganizesselectedcontentsofthebookintoan“exhibition”designedinconjunctionwithEuropeana Space.Lastbutnotleast,OpenHumanitiesPresspublishedaprintpublicationofthesixthchapteroftheopenbookin2016(KucandZylinska2016).
Hall,Kuc,andZylinska(2015,6)callthewholePhotomediationsHybridPublication“anexperimentinopenandhybridpublishin—aswellasacelebrationofthebookasalivingobject.”Itisanoutstandingexampleofthis publication concept because it showcases excellently how the con-ceptofhybridityinHPsrespondstotheso-calledbinariesintroducedbyMcPherson(see3.11.2):itcontainsmultimediacontent,itisaclusterofworkinprogressandfinishedparts,itremixesexistingcontentandcreatesnewcontents,therearedigitalandnon-digitalversions,andfinallyitincludesotherpublicationconcepts.ThislistalsoprovidesabetterunderstandingofthedifferencebetweenTPsandHPs,evenifthereisadeepentan-glementbetweenthetwo.
FurtherexamplesofHPsfocusingonparticularissuesoftheresearchfieldareprovidedbytheHybridPublishingLab(Worthington2015),forinstance the Hybrid Lecture Playerdevelopedhere.ThePlayerismorelikeawebenvironmentforpublishingrecordingsfromacademiclecturesincombinationwithimages,otheradditionalmaterials,andtranscriptions.Theideaisagaintorepublishmaterialalreadypublishedsomewhereelse,butinanewformatthatcreatesitsownadditionalvalue.
In the Merve Remixuse-case,theHybridPublishingLabdigitizedexistingprintmonographspublishedbythepublisherMerveandturnedthemintoweb-publications(Worthington2016,4–7).Thegoalwastogetcertaininsightsaboutthereformattingprocesses.Theuse-caseisalsowellsuitedforhighlightingagainthatHPsarenotnecessarily“digital-first”publications.ApublicationbecomespartofHPsthemomentdifferent
6 https://www.europeana.eu/portal/de7 https://www.flickr.com/8 https://commons.wikimedia.org9 https://www.tumblr.com/
Publishing-Com Bubble 167
publicationformats—digitalandnon-digital—exist.TheDebates in the Digital Humanitiesseries(Gold2012;Gold2016a)presentsaHPapproachinwhichtheprintedbooksarepublishedinparalleltoawebversion,providingsophisticatedtoolsforannotation-baseddiscussionsandcomputationalanalysisofreadingbehavior(Gold2016b).
Tensions
Incontrasttotheobsolescenceofthe“onesizefitsitall”principledeclaredbyHall,andasthemainpointofthelastparagraph,theunderstandingofthemulti-formataspectinHPsremainscontradictory.Accordingly,Burkhardt(2015,4)alsocallsmulti-formatpublishing“single-sourcepub-lishing”(seealsoRasch2017).However,theyarenotthesame.TheconceptofhybridityasitisusedinPhotomediations,Scalar,orMerveRemixisintentionallynotsetuparoundtheprincipleofonesourcefromwhichallotherformatsemerge.Theabovementionedprincipleandtheconceptofsocialinteroperabilityareinfactpreciselyarguingagainstit.Nevertheless,theHybridPublishingLabhasdesignedasoftwarecalledA-Machine which seekstoprovideatoolforsingle-sourcepublishingaspartofHPs(HybridPublishingConsortium2015).
HallcalledPhotomediationsan“experiment”(above).McPherson(2010,6)similarlydepictsScalarasaspacefor“experimentalwork.”Ontheotherhand,itwassaidatthebeginningofthischapterthatHPssomehowovercomethephaseofexperimentationinherenttoTPsande-Scienceapproaches.Thedifferenceisadifferenttypeofexperimentingthatisgoingonevenifthetermisstillused.
Whileinthefieldofe-Science,experimentsorso-calledreferenceimplementationsaremadetopushforwardtheideaofafutureconsid-eredtobeclear,HPs,ifexperimental,aresuchinordertoevaluatepossiblefutures.Whileinthespiritofe-Sciencereferenceimplementationsservetomakeclearhowagentgroupsshouldadapt,inHPstheyservetofindoutwhatthereconfigurationofthepublishingrolesmightlooklike.
Thissignificantdifferenceiswellexpressedintheself-descriptionoftheHybridPublishingLab.Itsaysthat“UnserZielistdasProduzierenvonWissendurchdenProzessdesMachens”10(Burkhardt2015,4).Thus,exper-imental implementations are necessary in HPs because publishing is in a phaseofradicalchangewheremanythingsbecomeuncertain(McPherson2010,1)andnotbecausetheycanbeconsideredcertainbutnotrealizedyet.
10 “Ourgoalistocreateknowledgeusingtheprocessofdoing”(author’stranslation).
168 Beyond the Flow
Resume
TheHPconceptfurtherdevelopstheuniqueattitudechosenbysomecon-ceptsofthehumanities,inordertodealwiththechallengesindigitalpub-lishing.Ithasbeenshownonmultipleoccasionsthatthisuniqueattitudeconsistsofaculturalperspectiveondigitaltechnologiesandamoreopenunderstandingofdigitalpublishing.
HybridPublicationsneverthelessdonotleavecertaintensions—alreadyexperiencedwithTPs—completelybehind:thosebetweenatheoreticalevaluationofdigitalpublicationsandtheapplicationoftechnology.Theissueofmulti-formatversussingle-sourcepublishingispartofthistension.Single-sourcepublishingexactlyrepresentsthestackmodelincomputerscience,criticizedbyMcPhersonandAdema.Likewise,thereisagreattensionbetweentheattempttofosterthepublishingecologyandthatofcreatingbetterconditionsforsustainablepublications,outlinedbyMcPhersonandthesetofHPsbestpracticeslistedbyHall.ThesepracticesincluderecommendationstouseserviceslikeWordPress,Flickr,Google,orGoDaddy,whichcreateseriousissuesforpublishingonatechnical,legal,andecologicallevel.Theseissuesarenotevaluatedinaseriousmanner,insteadtheeaseofuseisemphasized.
ThesetensionsalsocontinuetoframethetheoreticaldiscourseinHPs.Thepublicationtaxonomy,forinstance,introducesasimplebinarybetweennewandoldpublicationformats.Ittherebyreproducesanessentialistwayofthinking,criticizedabove,andcontradictingthebaselineofargumentsinHPs.Correspondingly,Burkhardt(2015)reproducesthemotifinthee-Sciencediscourseondigitalpublications,statingthatthesciencesarefaraheadofthehumanitiesinthistopic.Contrastingly,theoriginalattemptofHPswastoescapethisverylogic.
Scaling Digital Publication ConceptsTheHybridPublishingapproachmighthavebeenthefirstpublicationconcepttotakeupadifferentapproachtothesocialaspectsoftechnologyinpublishing.Itdid,however,notremaintheonlyinitiativetochoosethisdirection.Inthepreviouschapter,theconceptofLiquidPublicationswasintroduced.ItwasarguedthatadominantaspectofLPsistheideaofapplyingprinciplesfromcomputersciencetopublications.TheLPslit-eratureisfullofconcretesuggestionsandmetaphoricalterminologyinthisrespect.Intheend,apublicationiscomparedtoasoftwarerepository.
Publishing-Com Bubble 169
ManyauthorslikeManghiandCastelli,whoparticipatedintheLPsproject,re-engagedwiththetopicbytakingpartintheOpenAIRE11project.ThisprojecttookupmanyoftheactivitiescarriedoutbytheDRIVERproject,namelyadatabaseofopenaccesspublicationsintheEuropeanUnionandtheconceptofEPs.Apartfrommaintainingtheworkofprojectsthathadended,OpenAIREwaslaunchedto“supportingthediffusionandadoptionoftheEuropeanCommissionOpenAccessmandate”(Manghietal.2010,31).Additionally,theprojectwastomakeitpossibletoevaluatetheimpactofthismandate.
ThefirstOpenAIREprojectstartedin2009andendedin2012.OpenAIREplus,whichextendedtheactivitiesofOpenAIRE,wentonbetween2011andtoday.WhileOpenAIREfocusedontheinclusionofEU-fundedopenaccessarticlepublicationsandtheprovisionofcoreservices,theOpenAIREplusprojectextendedthescopetoallarticlepublicationsintheEUregionandtodatapublications.Theserviceportfoliowasextended,andaconceptualframeworkintroducedtoupdatetheconceptofEPslateronandunderthenewfundingschemeofHorizon 202012.
Manghi,Bolikowski,etal.(2012,3)listfourdifferentgoalsforbothOpenAIREandOpenAIREplus.Accordingtothis,theprojectsareaimedat“buildingsupportstructuresforresearchersindepositingFP7researchpublications,”the“establishmentandoperationofOpenAIREe-Infras-tructureforpeer-reviewedarticlesandotherformsofscientificresults,”the“explorationofandexperimentationwithscientificdatamanagementservices,”andthe“sustainabilityoftheOpenAIREe-Infrastructure.”
ItisworthmentioningthatcomparedtothelanguageusedintheLPsproject,thesegoalsareexpressedfarmoremoderatelyandopen.Thisissignificantinsofarastheprogresscouldalsohaveintimepermittedtheexpectationofmoredefinedandambitiousgoals.Infact,thestepbackfromthehighlyinnovativebutalsoveryspecificideasofferedbyprojectslikeLPsisthemajoroneintheOpenAIREprojects.ThiswillbecomemoretransparentwhentheproblemsbehinddigitalpublicationsaspresentedbyOpenAIREaredescribedbelow.ItwillbecomeobviousthattheOpenAIREapproachismotivatedbycomparablereflectionsonthesituationofdigitalpublications,suchashavebeenpresentedbyTaraMcPherson.However,thereactiontotheseissuesisstillfundamentallydifferentandemphasizesadifferentwayofthinking.
11 https://www.openaire.eu/12 Horizon2020istheprogrammaticframeworkforresearchfundingintheEuropean
Unionbetween2014and2020.
170 Beyond the Flow
A New Problem Awareness
LikeMcPherson,BardiandManghi(2014)nowacknowledgetherichnessandvarietyofexistingdigitalpublicationformats.Theauthorssimilarlybegantorealizethatthissituationistheresultofbroadexperimentationonpossiblescenarios,withtheaimofintegratingscholarlypublicationsanddigitaltechnologies.IncorrespondencewiththeexperiencesoftheVectorsJournal,theyalsostressthatthisnotionofexperimentationisasignificantreasonforthelackofbroadersuccessofnewlydefineddigitalpublicationobjectsinreallife.Moreover,andnowincontrasttoHPs,theyregretthataconceptualcommongroundforthesepublicationobjectsismissing.
TheOpenAIREprojectisthefirstenvironmentdiscussedinthisworkinwhichpeoplefromtheareaofinformationandcomputerscienceacknowledgethatconceptualheterogeneityisthemajorcharacteristicofdigitalpublicationsandalsoitsmajorchallenge.Itistruethatthetopicofheterogeneityiscrucialtoalloftheapproachesconnectedtothesedomains.Inallofthesecases,thediscussion,however,focusedonheterogeneityintermsofformalsemanticsandtechnologicalimplementation,notontheheterogeneityofapproachestodigitalpub-licationsassuch.EventheDRIVERprojectevaluateddifferentapproachesaspartofthesamedevelopment.
Anothernewandsignificantaspectisthefactthattheproblematizationofheterogeneityisnowalsoappliedtoprotocolsusedfordataexposure.Castelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013)specificallymentionOAI-PMH,OAI-ORE,andtheLOD,amongothers.Curiouslyenough,theseprotocolswereoriginallyintroducedtoreduceheterogeneity.Bystatingthatjustthesethreeprotocolsalreadycreatesignificantconfusionaroundtheimplementationofdigitalpublicationservices,theauthorsimplicitlyadmitthatthegoalsoftheseprotocolscouldnotbereached.Indeed,inthecurrentstudyapproachesweredescribedwhichuse“pure”LODstrategies(NPs),orwhichadoptedOAI-ORE(ROs)byclaimingthat“LinkedDataisnotenoughforscientists”(DeRoureetal.2013).
AccordingtoOpenAIRE,alltheabovementionedproblemscauseanothertypeofproblem:stakeholdershesitatetoinvestintodigitalpublicationinfrastructuresduetouncertaintyaboutthedirectionintowhichdigitalpublicationswilldevelop(Castelli,Manghi,andThanos2013).Incontrast,digitalpublicationproducershesitatetomakeuseofexistingservicesorareunabletofindserviceprovidersthatmeettherequirementsofacertaintypeofdigitalpublication.Consequently,theseenvironmentsare
Publishing-Com Bubble 171
mostoftensetupfromscratch,usestandardsandtechnologiesfromtheenvironmentinwhichtheywerebuilt,andarethereforeconsiderednon-reusablebyOpenAIRE(BardiandManghi2015a).
Althoughthenotionofstandardizationastheonlyvalidsolutionremainsinthebackgroundofthisevaluation,itisthewordingthatmarksacontrastwithformerevaluationsofthesametype.Thisdifferenceisthefactthatthesituationofstakeholderswithinthechanginglandscapeofdigitalpub-lishingisaddressedinamoreunderstandingway.Agentsnotonlyrefusetousestandardsandtechnologies,theyarethemselvesfacedwithacompli-catedsituation.Accordingly,Castelli,Manghi,andThanosstressthat:
Theproblemismainlycultural,sinceshiftingbehavioralnormsisaslowprocessandrequiresallstakeholders,fromlibrariansandrepositorymanagerstodatamanagers,tounderstandanddissemi-natethebenefitsofdatacitationforresearchers.(Castelli,Manghi,andThanos2013,sec.4.1)
Inthequote,datacitationismeanttobethecrucialconditionforEPs.Thus,whiletheauthorssharetheoldclaimthatthemainproblemfordigitalpublicationsisthementalstateofstakeholders,theydifferentiatethisbyacknowledgingthatchangesneedtobeintroducedinasubtleprocess.AnotherquotebyManghietal.(2010),presentingthegoalsoftheOpenAIREproject,showstheconsequencesofthisapparentlytinydistinction:
Experiences…showthatacceptanceandbroadtake-upbythescientificcommunitycriticallydependsonaccompanyingsupportmechanisms,….(Manghietal.2010,33)
Hence,implementersofdigitalpublicationsstartedtoshiftfromjustdemandingstandardizationtoevaluatinghowtoachievestandardization.AmajorgoalofOpenAIREistodefineanddeveloptheaforementionedsupportmechanisms.Likewise,supportmechanismsareamuchbroaderconceptthantoolsforthecreationofdigitalpublicationconcepts.Thefirstquote,furthermore,givestestimonyofthefactthatOpenAIREattemptstoaddressspecificstakeholdersinaspecificway.
Castelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013)lookatthesituationofdatacentersandresearchlibraries.Intheeyesoftheauthors,thesearethemostimportantstakeholdersforthedevelopmentofdigitalpublications.Besidestheuncertaintyaboutfuturedirectionsmentionedabove,theyarguethatthereisanotheruncertaintyabouttheserviceprofilebothinstitutiontypeswouldhavetoprovideinthefuture.Digitalpublications,soitisargued,requiretheimplementationofcompletelynewservices.Castelli,Manghi,
172 Beyond the Flow
andThanos(2013)stressthatitisnotclearwhichstakeholdershouldincludewhichservice,i.e. howspecifictasksaredistributedwithinthenetworkofexistingstakeholders.Inconsequence,differentstakeholdersresponddifferently,andthealreadyexistingheterogeneityindigitalpub-licationsincreasesfurther,resultinginmoreexpensiveinfrastructuredevelopment.
Assanteetal.(2015)similarlyinvestigatetheroleofdifferenttypesofdigitalresearchinfrastructuresfordigitalpublications.Theyarguethatinfra-structuresfollowingdifferentpurposesarenotsufficientlyintegratedwitheachothertoleveragetherealvalueofthepublicationsthattheyprovide.
TheexamplesclearlydemonstratethatOpenAIREdoesnotseektopromotedigitalpublicationsbycreatingnewdemonstratorsorformalmodelsagain.ThisalsodistinguishesOpenAIREfromitspredecessorDRIVER.Instead,ithighlightsproblemsthatsuggestengagingwithstake-holdersandreconsideringtheirrelationships.Accordingly,Castelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013,167)arguethatdigitalpublicationinitiativesneedtointegrateintolarger“eco-systems.”
Scaling the Network
Differentmeasuresweretakeninordertoprovideorientationandsupportforstakeholdersfollowingthedefinitionoftheproblemabove.Manghi,Bolikowski,etal.(2012)summarizesomeoftheseefforts.Accordingly,OpenAIREtriesto“efficientlydisseminatebestpractices,guidelines,initiatives,andevents”(sec. 1)andseekstoengagewithexistingprojectssuch as DataCite,13 Mendeley14,ORCID15,EUDAT16,REIsearch17.
Inordertosufficientlyachievethisagenda,OpenAIREestablishesa“Europeanhelpdesksystem”(RettbergandSchmidt2012;Manghietal.2010;Koukounidou2017).Thishelpdeskisacentrallycoordinatednetworkofnationalagentsfromtheresearchrepositorydomain.AccordingtoManghietal.(2010),itisusedforseveralpurposes.First,beinganetwork,itshouldfacilitatetheaforementioneddisseminationprocess;secondly,itshouldprovidehelpforissuesregardingthemanagementofopenaccessrepositoriesandforfacilitatingthepublicationofresearchresultsinit;finally,thehelpdeskshouldfosterrelationshipswithexternalstakeholders
13 https://www.datacite.org/14 https://www.mendeley.com/15 https://orcid.org/16 https://eudat.eu/17 http://reisearch.eu/
Publishing-Com Bubble 173
inordertoextendthenetworkofopenaccesspublishingstakeholders.Thehelpdeskexplicitlyaddressesmultiplestakeholdersandnotjustrepositorymanagers.Amongthemarealsoindividualresearchersaswellasresearchinstitutions.
The same applies to the OpenAIRE Guidelines(OpenAIREplus2013;Príncipeetal.2014).Theseguidelinesconsistofthreedifferentsectionstargetingdataarchives,documentrepositoriesandCurrent Research Information Systems(alsoreferredtoasCRIS)services18.Itmainlydescribeshowmetadatashouldbepresentedbyrepositoriesandwhatmetadataformatsshouldbeusedinordertodescriberesourcesinrepositoriesinamachine-readableway.Theguidelinesaimintwodifferentdirections.
OnegoalistoenableeasyharvestingofinformationbyOpenAIREforthecreationoftheOpenAIREplatform(seebelow).Anothergoalisthedefinitionofaminimalsetofbestpracticesandstandardswhicharecommunicatedfromabovebyusingthe“hierarchicalorganization”(Manghi,Bolikowski,etal.2012,sec.1)ofOpenAIRE.Bydoingso,OpenAIREaddressesthestakeholder’slackoforientationdescribedabove.Con-sequently,Príncipeetal.(2014)notethattheseguidelineswillfacilitatethecreationofEPsandpromisethatOpenAIREwilldosoontopofcollectedinformation.
Scaling Engagement
Guidanceandleadershipareonewaytoharmonizethelandscapeofdigitalpublications.Theotheroneisdirectintervention.Thelastparagraphindi-catedthatOpenAIREcollectsdigitalpublicationmetadatafromalloverEurope.TheplatformissupposedtoprovideanoverviewofopenaccesspublicationsandEuropeanresearchfunding,inlinewiththegeneralgoalsoftheprojectdescribedatthebeginningofthissection.
Asaresultofthis,OpenAIREisconfrontedwiththesameheterogeneityasdatacentersandrepositorymanagers.Inthisrespect,Castelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013)regretthelackofbestpracticesindatapublications.Theauthorsstressthattheformatofmetadata,itsgranularityandqualityvarysignificantly.Manghi,Bolikowski,etal.(2012)diagnosethattheintegrationofdigitalresourcesinapublishingenvironmentstruggleswithmissinginformationandredundancy.Thus,theorientationreturnstoanarrativefamiliarfromformerpublicationconcepts.
18 CRISservicespresentinformationaboutresearchactivitiesinEurope.Itwillbedis-cussedbelowinfurtherdetail.
174 Beyond the Flow
Kobosetal.(2014)offerdetailedinsightsintotheeffortsOpenAIREcarriedouttoprocessdatafromrepositories.Metadatawasnotonlyharmonizedandcorrected,itwasalsocreatedbyvirtueofcontentminingtechniques,appliedtoresourceswheresuchmetadatadidnotexist.TheoutcomeofthiscurationprocessisnotonlythecreationoftheOpenAIREplatformbutanimprovementandenhancementofthesituationofavailablepublicationmetadataassuch.SincetrulydigitalpublicationsintheeyesofmanyauthorsrelatedtoOpenAIREaremetadatadescriptionsoflinkedpublishedresources,themachine-readableexposureofthismetadataautomaticallyimpactstheconditionsofcreatingthesepublications.
Scaling Technology
TheharmonizationandexposureofinformationonresearchpublicationsinEuropeisnottheonlyobjectiveoftheOpenAIREplatform.Asaserviceonitsown,itrepresentsaspecificapproachtosolvingthetechnologicalissuesofdigitalpublications.ThisapproachisgeneralizedandpresentedbyCastelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013)underthenameofScholarly Com-munication Infrastructures(SCIs).ScholarlyCommunicationInfrastructuresisareactiontotheneedforextendedservicerequirementsinordertocreateandusedigitalpublications(above).
ThemainpointbehindSCIsisaspecificresponsetothisproblem,becauseitisclaimedthatneitherdatacentersnorresearchrepositoriesshouldextendtheirserviceprofile.Theyshouldfocusontheworktheyhavedonebefore.Instead,anewtypeofserviceshouldbeimplemented,aservicewhichintegratesexistingbutisolatedservices.ScholarlyCommunicationInfrastructuresistheinitiativetoorganizeandharmonizefragmentationofdigitalpublicationsonahigherlevelandbyinfrastructuralmeans.
Castelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013)presentthemainideasofSCIsinadiagramwhichshowsfourlayersofabstractionandwhichispresentedinasimplifiedversioninfigure4.1.Thelowestlayer,whichcouldbecalledthesource layer,consistsofexistingstakeholderssuchasresearchlibraries,datacenters,andsimilar,commonworkflowsaswellasdigitalresources.Eachoftheseprovidedifferentcontentandservices,therebyreflectingthecurrentheterogeneoussituation.ThesecondandthirdlayerformtheSCIapproach.First,themediation layerconnectsthedifferentinterfacesbywhichcontentandfunctionalityofthefirstlayerareexposed.Thisallowsaccesstodifferentenvironmentswithinanewenvironment.Secondly,intheSCIs’application layer,therearethreetypesofservicesintheselayers:
Publishing-ComBubble 175
– organizationofaconsistentaccesstoalltheunderlyingenvironments,
– harmonizationandlinkingofallofthecontentmetadatafromtheunderlyingenvironments,
– abstractionandexposureoffunctionalityfromtheunderlyingservices.
Thefourthlayerconsistsofscientificstakeholders,alreadyinvolvedinthefirstlayer,butnotinteractingdirectlywiththislayer.Instead,theyinteractwithitbymeansoftheservicesprovidedbySCIs.
[Figure4.1]SimplifiedandslightlymodifiedversionoftheconceptofSCIsasdefinedinCas-
telli,Manghi,andThanos(2013)
A Fallback Solution
WhiletheOpenAIREportaltriestoharmonizeandbundleexistingenviron-ments,theZenodo19researchrepositoryaddressesanotherproblem.Inthedescriptionofitsgoalsatthebeginningofthissection,OpenAIREnotablyseemedtoemphasizearticlepublications.Indeed,thepublicationofotherresourcetypeswasconsideredmainlyinthesecondprojectphase.
Correspondingliteraturenowalsochoosestoputastrongerfocusonconceptualcomponentsofpublications,ascanbeseeninAssanteetal.
19 https://zenodo.org/
176 Beyond the Flow
(2015),orBardiandManghi(2015a).Thisseemsreasonableiftheproject’sunderlyinganalysisrevealedthattheeffortsexistingatthattimehadnotbroughttolighttheconditionsnecessarytorealizetrulydigitalpub-lications.Thefactthatmostoftheseissuesweresocialorculturaldoesnotmeanthattechnicalandinfrastructuralissuesdidnotalsoremain.
Zenodoisadirectinterventioninthissituation.Itisaresearchrepositoryforthedepositionofso-called“orphan”resources(Manghi,Bolikowski,etal.2012).Theterm“orphan”denotesresourceswhichhavenootherplacetobestored.Thelackofaccesstoappropriaterepositoriesbyresearchersisonereasonforthissituation,ashighlightedatthebeginningofthesection.However,thetermisnotmisusedwhenappliedtosituationsinwhichnorepositoryexistsforaspecificresourcetype.Consequently,Zenodonotesonitswebsitethatitaccepts“allresearchoutputs”and“anyfileformat.”
Zenodocontributestothissituationinmultipleways.First,itimplementsaresearchrepositoryfollowingtheguidelinesOpenAIREseekstoestablish.Secondly,itestablishesanoperationalinfrastructureforaservicethatisrarewithinthescopeofitsgoal.Third,ittherebyprovidesbetterconditionsforthefuturecreationofdigitalpublications,whichcanmakeuseofitsservices,itscontent,anditsassuredsustainabilityinaconsistentway.Fourth,itextendstheOpenAIREplatformbyintegratingZenodointhespiritofSCIs.Finally,itsubstantiatesandmaterializesacertainnotionofdigitalscholarlypublishingwhichremainedsilentinearlieractivities,butstarttobeheavilypromotedinthissituation.
Accordingly,Assanteetal.(2015)introduce“modernscientificcom-municationworkflows”whicharedefinedbytwomaincriteria.Oneistopublish“during”theresearchactivitiesasopposedto“ondate”(sec. 4).Theotherwasalreadyaddressedinthelastparagraphsandstatesthatanytypeofresource—technicalaswellasconceptual—shouldbepublished.Thus,intheeyesoftheauthors,modernscientificcommunicationwork-flowsareincreasingly“blurringthedistinctionbetweenresearchlife-cycleandresearchpublishing”(sec. 1).
Thismodelneedsthesupportofaspecialtypeofrepositoryyettobecreated.Theauthorscallsuchrepositoriesscience 2.0 repositories.TheserepositoriesarecloselyintegratedwithVirtualResearchEnvironmentsas“theplacewhereresearchisconducted”(sec. 1).Thestrongreferencestothemesdiscussedunderthetermofe-Scienceaboveareobvious.Zenodoisaservicewhichimplementsasmallselectionoftheideasofscience2.0repositories.
Publishing-Com Bubble 177
Scaling Standardization
Despitethesesimilaritieswithmanydigitalpublicationconcepts,thereisasignificantdifference.ThisdifferencebecomesobviouswhenOpenAIREchangesthefocusfrominfrastructureandecologyofpublicationsbacktothestructureofpublicationsthemselves.Themainpointofsimilaritybetweenthepublishingprocessdescribedaboveande-Sciencepublicationconcepts is the notion of a publication that integrates most of the output of anentireresearchprocess.
Themodelofscience2.0repositories,completelyinlinewithitsgeneralapproachtoresolveobstaclesinthecreationofdigitalpublicationsincrementally,providesapragmaticmodelforthedesignprocessofsuchpublications.Forinstance,itsimplifiestheactofsingle-resourcepub-lication,becausecuratinganentiredigitalpublicationismoreexpensivethanpublishingasingleresource.Itdetachesthedescriptionofrelation-shipsbetweenresourcesfrompublishingtheseresourcesinthefirstplace.Thefullbenefitscience2.0repositoriesintenttoprovidewillneverthelessbeexperienceableonlyifpublishedresourcesaresemanticallyputtogetherbyformingadigitalpublicationasacompoundobject.
Infact,OpenAIREcreatesEPsonitsown.Moreprecisely,theprojectcreatesandusesspecificmetadataonpublications,collectedfromresearchrepositories,inordertomakeconnectionsbetweensingleresources.Thesemanticsusedbytheprojectaredescribedinthe“DataModeloftheOpenAIREScientificCommunicatione-Infrastructure”(Manghi,Houssos,etal.2012).Thismodelisprimarilyare-useofexistingsemantics,namelyfromDataCiteandCRIS(seeabove).WhileDataCitefocusesontheappropriatecitationofdigitalresources,CRISprovidesclassesandtermsthatreallyconnectresources.
Asthenamesuggests,CRISdefinesentitiesandtermsthatshouldmakeitpossibletoformallydescriberesearchactivities,theiroutput,andtheircontext.Itparticularlyofferspossibilitiesofexpressingwhichinstitutionswereinvolvedinaresearchprocess,theprojectcontext,therelevantlineoffunding,andcomparablemostlyadministrativeinformation.Bydoingso,EPsintheOpenAIREportalformbroadagent-networksinwhichresearchoutputistheresultofsocio-economicallymeaningfulactions.
TheEPsmodelofOpenAIREisconsistentwiththeapproachexpressedinscience2.0repositoriesintwoways.First,itsupportsthepublicationofindividualresearchoutput,independentfrompublicationsascompoundobjectsandsimultaneoustoresearchitself.Secondly,thesemanticsthat
178 Beyond the Flow
connect resources prefer social relationships in research in favor of any epistemologicalormethodologicalrelationshipfoundinconceptslikeROs.This means that the level of semantic integration of research output scales upwiththepossibilitiesandtheneedofdoingso.
Itcouldbeargued,however,thatthisapproachjustresemblesthefactthattheprojectsfollowaclearpoliticalagenda(above).ThesemanticsoftheOpenAIREmodelallowmonitoringoftheimpactandsuccessofthisagenda.Grassanoetal.(2016)evaluatetheOpenAIREinfrastructureinjustsuchaway.
Followingthesamelogic,OpenAIREalsomadeattemptstocontributetothemodelofdigitalpublicationsattheendofthesecondprojectphase,andafterothergoalshadbeenpushedforward.In2014,BardiandManghi(2014)presentedasignificantevaluationofdigitalpublicationconceptsdatingbacktotheninetiesandtoMAs.Althoughittriestobecom-prehensive,thepresentationstillignoressomeconcepts,mainlythosebelongingtothehumanities.ComparedtothesameattemptintheDRIVERproject,itisneverthelessmoreconsistentandsystematic.Itdoesnotonlypickoutsomeaspectsofselectedapproachestoassertahomologousdevelopment,itispreciseenoughtograspsignificantdifferences.Accordingly,thestudyaimsat“introducingcommonterminologyandclas-sificationschemesinordertoshedsomelightandputsomeorderinsucharichbutfoundationlessrealm”(265).
Theauthorstrytointroducethisterminologywithoutmakingtoomanyimplications.Forinstance,theytrytogiveorientationtoexistingapproachesbygroupingthemaccordingto“scientificmotivation.”Thesemotivationsare:“packagingwithsupplementarymaterial,improvingread-abilityandunderstanding,interlinkingwithresearchdata,andenablingrepetitionofexperiments”(253).
Despitethisattempt,theevaluationclearlyrevealsitsfoundationine-Scienceandcomputerscience.Thisbecomesevenmoreobviouswhennotonlymotivationsofpublicationobjectsbutalsocomponentsareevalu-ated.Theauthorsfollowthecategoricaldistinctionbetweentextanddataasdescriptionandevidence(241),whichappearedine-ScienceapproachesandwhichwascementedbytheEPmodelintheprecedingDRIVERmodel.LikeDRIVER,itreferstoEPsasanoverarchingconceptfordigitalpub-lications,althoughitsbasicelementsalreadyexcludesomeoftheconceptspresentedinthisstudy.
Publishing-Com Bubble 179
Theentanglementbetweencertainpracticesinresearchandspecificresourcetypescanbefoundinmostofthemotivationsandcomponentspresentedbythearticle.Theimplicitdecisionsaboutwhichpracticecorrespondswithwhichresourcetypealsoclearlyfollowsthee-Scienceagenda.Accordingly,theattempttore-approachEPsdifferently,lyingatthecenterofmanyrelatedactivitiesinOpenAIRE,failswhenitcomestoacon-ceptualizationofEPsthemselves.
Thisconceptualization,nevertheless,isnotanendtoitselfbutameanstorealizeEnhanced Publication Management Systems(BardiandManghi2015b;BardiandManghi2015a).ThetermalludestoDatabase Management Systems,asoftwareenvironmentbuiltaroundadatabaseinordertoorganizeuserandsoftwareinteractionsondataanddatamodelsinadatabase.Inthesameway,EnhancedPublicationManagementSystems(alsoreferredtoasEPMS)shouldsupportandfacilitatethecreationofEPmodelsandEPs.
ThestrategyofEPMSiscomparabletotheonebehindSCIs.Onetheonehand,itacceptsthatcontextspecificheterogeneityexists,ontheotherhandittriestostandardizeEPunderOpenAIRE’sspecificnotionofgenericfeaturesofdigitalpublications.InthecontextofEPMS,itledtotheproposal of an Enhanced Publication Data Model Definition Language(BardiandManghi2015a,sec.2).Theyintendedtocreateaconsistentstartingpointforthedevelopmentofnewdigitalpublicationsandpublicationenvironments.Thisisthepointwhereaself-declaredecologicalapproachtodigitalpublicationsfinallygoesbacktothemorecommontop-downapproachofformerconcepts.
Atthebeginningofthissection,OpenAIREwasintroducedasaprojectformingpartofageneraltendencytoaddresssocialissuesofdigitalpublishingoverthelastyears.Indeed,OpenAIREreflectedonthesitu-ationofsomestakeholders,triedhardtooffermultifacetedexplanationsofobstacles,andtriedtoworkwiththesituationasitisinsteadofasitshouldbefromtheproject’spointofview.Inthisrespect,itdiffersfrommanyformerapproaches.Thevalueofrecognizingandengagingwiththissituationanditsstakeholders,however,remainedameanstoanend.Inotherwords,OpenAIRE’sstrategicorientationinthisrespectisbasedontheacknowledgmentthatthecreationofmodelsandreferenceimplementationsisinsufficientforthebroaderuptakeofdigitalpublicationobjects.Incontrast,themainideasabouttheseobjects,theirfeatures,andthefocusonspecificconditionsthatneedtobesatisfiedfordigitalpub-licationobjectstosucceedremainthesameasinformerapproachesfrom
180 Beyond the Flow
thelastphase.TheseaspectsbecamemoreandmoredominantintheworkonSCIsandEPMS.
ThisissignificantlydifferentfromthedirectiontakeninHPs.PartnershiporganizationsliketheAllianceforNetworkingVisualCulturewereformedbecausepeoplewereconvincedthatsustainablesolutionswillariseonlyinsuchaninclusiveenvironment,solutionsthatarenotyetknown.InHPs,theevaluationofmeansandendarethuspartofthesameprocess.Correspondingly,OpenAIREfallsbackonthecreationofinfrastructure,whereasHPsmaintaintheiremphasisonsocialorganization.Infrastructurecreatestheboundariesforthematicallyrelatedfutureactivities.Thisholdstrueespeciallywhereitscreationissocloselyconnectedtoresearch-policymaking,andwhereitsfundingissetonacontinentallevel.Inthisrespect,theinfrastructuralapproachisanefficientwaytosteersocialprocessesintoacertaindirection.ForOpenAIRE,thisdirectionandthewaytogetthereisconciselysummarizedbyCastelli,Manghi,andThanos:
Theideaofenablinga“globalscientificcommunicationinfrastructure,”unifyingandgivingaccessinasystematic,discipline-specific,author-ized,andreusablewaytothewholeoutcomeofworld’sresearch,mustrelyoncommonpracticesandstandardways….(Castelli,Manghi,andThanos2013,167)
Thus,theOpenAIREapproachisindeedatop-down,globallyorientedapproach,drivenbycertainideasabouttheshapeoffuturescientificcom-municationthataresupposedlygeneric.Moreover,thetotalityofscholarlycommunicationisconceivedofasaderivativeofaconsistenttechnologicalenvironment.
Data PapersComparedtoOpenAIRE,theconceptofData Papers(hereafterreferredtoasDPs)concentratesonacertaintypeofpublicationonly.ThekeyaspectshighlightedinDPs,however,varysignificantlyfromthosepromotedinotherpublicationconcepts.Obviously,DPsareaboutthepublicationofdigitaldata,eveniftheterm“paper”seemsstrangeinthisrespect.Inordertoclarifythisapparentcontradiction,ithelpstorefertotheworkingpaperofRees(2010)whichwasanimportantsteppingstoneinthebroaderadoptionofthedatapaperapproach.Rees(2001,1)states:“Adatapaperisapublicationwhoseprimarypurposeistoexposeanddescribedata,asopposedtoanalyzeanddrawconclusionsfromit.”Thisdescriptionnormallyincludesade-referenceablereferencetothedescribeddataset
Publishing-Com Bubble 181
intheformofaURI.However,thisdescriptionstilldoesnotrevealwhydatapapersaredifferentinawaythatwouldsufficetoincludeitasaconceptofitsown.Themainargumentisthefactthatthepublicationofdataitselfisonlyasuperficialreason.Commondeclarationsonthevalueofdatasharingarenotlacking.ChavanandPenev(2011,2)highlighttheproblemof“darkdata”(unpublisheddata),andRobertsonetal.(2014,1)stresstheneedformassive“datamobilization.”Similarly,strategiesforthepublicationofdataasaresourceexistedbefore,ashasbecomeclearthroughoutthelastsections.Accordingly,DPsareperceivedintheresearchcommunityasonespecificstrategytopublishdatainadditiontoothers(Reillyetal.2011;Garcia-Garcia,Lopez-Borrull,andPeset2015).FollowingPampelandDallmeier-Tiessen(2014)andGarcia-Garcia,Lopez-Borrull,andPeset(2015),andinlinewiththepresentanalysis,otherstrategiespublishdataasaresourceofitsown(single-resource)orasanisolatedcomponentofabroaderpublication(ROs,EPs).
Comparedwiththesetwoapproaches,DPswerethelatesttoappearinthefield.Theirdevelopmentwasdrivensignificantlybytheobservationthatthesituationofdatapublicationisprecarious,eventhoughtheafore-mentionedstrategiesexistedalready.Thus,Rees(2010,1)declaresthata“datare-usefailure”exists.Additionally,ChavanandPenev(2011,4)quoteearlierresearchinwhichresultsshowthatatthetimeofwriting,onlythreepercentofpublishedresearchdatacouldactuallybelocated.Con-sequently,theauthorssummarize:“However,theseeffortsareyettoyieldanysignificantresultsbecauseexistingdataremainunpublished,undis-coveredandthusunderused”(ChavanandPenev2011,4).
Thereareseveralweaknessesindatapublication,addressedingreaterdetailbytheconceptofDPs,whichwillreceivemoreattentionbelow.ThekeyaspectofDPsisthefactthatmostadvocatesdonotconsiderspecificissuestobethemainreasonsfortheaforementionedevaluation.Instead,theyarguethattheproblemresidesinadifferentwayofdealingwithalltheseissues.Reesargues:
Weencourageeveryoneinvolvedindatasharingandreusetotakeaholisticviewofthedatareuseproblem.Theattentionthatthevariouspiecesoftheproblemarereceivingiswelcome,butit ’snotjustaboutreview,orpublication,ordepositguidelines,orarchiving.Allpartsofthesystemmustworktogetherifwearetocreatetheincentivesneededforadequatepublication….(Rees2010,3)
Thus,theinitialstatementthatDPsstandoutintheareaofdigitalpub-licationconceptswasmadebecauseofthisshiftofperspective.
182 Beyond the Flow
Rees’paperisaworkingpaper,publishedin2010.ThecontextwashisengagementwiththeCreativeCommonsinitiativementionedabove.ThisworkingpaperwasthefirstattempttopromotetheconceptofDPsonabroaderscale.Thereweretwoarticlestheyearbefore,presentingcomparableinitiatives(Callaghanetal.2009;NewmanandCorke2009).Theseinitiatives,however,focusedonspecificenvironments,i.e. meteorologyandrobotics.Theseeffortswerefurthermorelinkedtoaconcreteprojectandanexistingjournal.Asignificantsteptowardsthelater success of the DP concept was the cooperation between the pub-lisher Pensoft20andtheGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility21,presentedbyChavanandPenev(2011).Thisinitiativeproducedoneofthemostsuccessfuldatapaperprojectsasyet.Itisthusreasonabletoarguethat2010marksthebeginningoftheDPsapproach.
Garcia-Garcia,Lopez-Borrull,andPeset(2015),Candelaetal.(2015)andChen(2017)madethefirstattemptstosummarizetherecenthistoryofDPs.22Whilethefirstsurveypresentsexamplesandcomparessubmissionguidelines,thesecondandthirdextractskeyfeaturesinamoresystematicform.Incontrasttothelastparagraphs,Garcia-Garcia,Lopez-Borrull,andPeset(2015)setthestartingpointofDPsintheyear1956.Moreprecisely,theauthorsincludesixjournalsfoundedbetween1956and2002intheconceptofDPs.Thereasonforthisdeviationisthefactthattheauthorsdonotfocusonanytechnologicallinkagebetweenadatasetandapaperbutinsteadonthemainpurposeofdescribingadataset.
TheaccentuationofdifferentfacetsoftheDPapproachacrossprojectsisageneralphenomenoninthisresearchfield(Candelaetal.2015).Itdoesnotreflectinconsistency,butisanimmediateconsequenceofitsgeneralapproach.Intotal,Candelaetal.(2015)count116data journalsalreadyin2015thatpermitthesubmissionofDPsorexclusivelypublishDPs.Thesubjectmattersrangefromhealthsciences,lifesciences,physicalsciences,socialsciences,andhumanitiestomultidisciplinaryjournals.Additionally,stakeholderslikeThompson Reuter begin to show interest in the DP format (Forceetal.2016).
20 https://pensoft.net/21 https://www.gbif.org/22 Alistofdatajournals,i.e. journalswhichfocusonpublishingDPswastemporally
curatedbyAkers(2014).
Publishing-Com Bubble 183
A Family Resemblance Between Different Key Functions
ThenextparagraphswillsummarizehowdifferentfunctionsofDPsareaccentuatedindifferentenvironments.ThiswillhelptoelaborateamoresubstantialideaofDPs.ItwillalsoclarifythesmalldistinctionswhichledtodifferentevaluationsofthetemporalframeofDPs.
Rees’quotefromthebeginningofthissectionindicatedthattheconceptofDPsisoftendescribedinaveryminimalisticway.ReeshighlightsexactlyonefunctionofDPs,theneedtocontextualizedatasetsthatareavailableontheweb.NewmanandCorkeareevenmoreminimalisticbystressingthat:
Adatapapershouldprovideacrispstatementofhowthedatawascollectedandasummaryofitssalientpropertiesandintendedaudience.(NewmanandCorke2009,1)
InthisrespectDPshavethepurposeofbridginganinformationgapbetweenarticlesthatpresentresearchresultsontopofadatasetandmetadataaboutthisdataset,whichinturnmightbeavailableinthecor-respondingdatarepository.Themainargumentbehindthisfunctionistheclaimthatneitherresourceprovidesthetypeofinformationnecessarytoreusethedatasetefficiently.FillingthisgapwithinformationisthecontentfunctionofDPs.
NewmanandCorkefurtherwritesthatbeyondthenecessarypropertiestofulfillthisfunction:
…datapaperswillbetreatedinthesamefashionasregularpapers,undergoingthestandardpeer-reviewprocessandappearinginprintinregularjournalissues,andauthorsshouldexpecttheirdatapaperstobecitedjustasregularpapersare.(NewmanandCorke2009,1)
ChavanandPenev(2011,3)similarlystatethatthecreationofDPsshouldrequireasfewtechnologicalskillsandresourcesaspossible.Furthermore,thecreationandpublishingworkflowofDPsshouldbecloselyconnectedtoexistingstakeholdersandpublishingprocesses.Bydoingso,advocatesoftheDPapproachhopetodevelopdatapublicationpracticesmoreefficientlythanhasbeenthecaseformoreambitiousattemptsbefore.ThisfunctionofDPscouldalsobecalledtheembeddingfunctionofDPs.
Embeddingfornowtakestheformofconceptualcongruencewithhis-toricalarticlepublications.However,themainpointaddressedhereisnottheformofthearticlebutthealreadyorganizedsocialenvironmentexistingaroundthisform.Thisfactbecomesmoreevidentbyanalyzing
184 Beyond the Flow
moreambitiousDPprojects,suchastheBiodiversity Data Journal.Inthecontextofthisjournal,thepublisherPensoftdevelopedasophisticatedauthoringtoolcalledthePensoft Writing Tool(Smithetal.2013).
Oneofthemajorbenefitsofthistoolistheabilitytodistributedifferenttasksinthecontextoftechnologicallyveryambitiousdatapublicationsacrossdifferentstakeholders,andwithinexistingstakeholderroles.Thedevelopmentofthetooliscontrastedwithdatapublicationstrategiesthatrequiresstakeholderstobetechnologicallyspecializedthemselves(ChavanandPenev2011,2),orsophisticatedinfrastructuresuchasinOpenAIRE(Robertsonetal.2014,2).A“datapaperenablesadivisionoflabor”(ChavanandPenev2011,9).
Accordingly,theembeddingfunctiondoesnotmeanthatonlyafewthingsshouldbechanged.Actually,thePensoftWritingToolprovidesalotofautomatedprocessesforincludingfeaturesofSPsandHPs.EmbeddingmeansthatthedesignofDPsisintendedtoactivatestakeholdersandresourceswheretheycurrentlyare,inordertoadvancedatapublicationanddigitalpublishing.Hence,thecreationofauthoringtoolslikethePensoft Writing Tool or the GBIF Integrated Publishing Toolkit(Robertsonetal.2014)arenotonlywaystomakethecreationofanewtypeofpublicationeasier.Theyareactiveinterventionsintoapublishingecology,forthesakeofbetterconnectingitspieces.ComparedtoOpenAIRE,thisinterventionisneithertop-downnormotivatedbypolicy(Smithetal.2013).
AnothercloselyconnectedfunctionisthescalingfunctionofDPs,comparabletotheOpenAIREapproach.Bystartingwiththesimplestidea,consistingofonlychangingthetopicandcontentofarticles,thelevelofinnovationintroducedforspecificDPscanbedefinedinaflexibleway.DPsexistonascaleofinnovationthatadaptstotheconditionsfoundinaspecificcontext.Dependingonthecapabilitiesofapublisher,forinstance,thesizeofthedataandauthors’accesstoitissometimesembeddedinthepaper,storedinarepositoryownedbythepublisher,orinanofficialdataarchive(Garcia-Garcia,Lopez-Borrull,andPeset2015).
DataPapersaresometimesalsopublishedasprintedarticles(NewmanandCorke2009),aswebsites23,asaparsable“metadatadocuments”(ChavanandPenev2011),andsometimesalloptionsexisttogetherasinHPs.AnoverviewofsimilarvariationsofDPsisofferedbyCandelaetal.(2015).TogetherwiththegoalofembeddingtheconceptofDPsintosocialreality,theideaofscalingenablesto“downstream”(Robertsonetal.2014,5)
23 http://dhcommons.org/journal/
Publishing-Com Bubble 185
technologicalsophisticationwithoutpreventingit.Withdownstreaming,the authors refer to a stepwise enrichment of DPs with features commonly discussedinthefieldofdigitalpublishing,aprocesswhichtakesplacewhileDPsmovefromtheauthoracrossotherstakeholdersinthepub-lishingprocesstospecificenvironmentswithspecificneeds.
AnotherfeatureofDPs,ofparticularinterestforsomeauthors,isthefactthatDPscreatealayerofabstractionamongdatasets.Therefore,theseauthors also sometimes call DPs Overlay Papers(MoyleandPolydoratou2007;Callaghanetal.2009).24Thisfunctiondoesnotintroducesomethingcompletelydifferentcomparedtotheaforementionedfunctions.However,itisageneralizationofanaspectimplicittotheotherfunctions.
Byhighlightingthisfunction,thepossiblescopefortheapplicationofDPscanalsobeextended.Moreprecisely,authorslikeCallaghanetal.(2009)orWhyteetal.(2013)proposethatthistypeofarticlecanalsobeusedtocreatearticlesaboutsoftwareandmodels,amongothers.Infact,manyonlinejournalsappearinginthelastyearshadthisverypurpose.Especiallyinthehumanities,publicationserieslikeDHCommonsJournal,orRIDE(seealsoSteinkrüger2016)giveevidenceofthesuccessofthisapproach.
Callaghanetal.definethefunctionoftheiroverlayjournalasfollowed:
Theoverlayjournaldatabaseitselfconsistsofanumberofoverlaydoc-uments,whicharestructuredocumentscreatedtoannotateanotherresourcewithinformationonthequalityoftheresource.(Callaghanetal.2009,sec. OverlayJournals)
ApartfromillustratingtheoverlayfunctionofDPs,thequotealsoaddressesanothersetofargumentsforwhythisabstractionisnecessary.IthasbeenmentionedbeforethatthediscourseonDPsalsoconcernsspecificdatapublicationproblems,despitechangingthewholeperspectiveondatapublicationissuesitself.Here,oneoftheconcreteproblemsisthelackofassessmentofthedatameanttobepublished.
Callaghanetal.(2009)makenoexceptionhere.ThereisnoarticleaboutDPsthatdoesnotstressthatDPsareameansofofferingnecessaryreviewandqualitycontrolforresourcesotherthantextpublications.FromCallaghanetal.(2009)andRees(2010),toChavanandPenev(2011),totheDHCommonsJournalandRIDE,eachinitiativewouldconfirmthatthese
24 AnoverviewofdifferenttermsusedtodenominatetheconceptofDPsispresentedbyCandelaetal.(2015,1752-1753)
186 Beyond the Flow
publications“bridgethe‘evaluationgap’”( Jackson2014,544)betweenmakingsomethingaccessibleandconsideringitafullypublishedresource.
Similartotheissueofqualityisthatofcredit.InmostcontributionsaboutDPs“thelackofprofessionalrewardstructuresofincentives”(ChavanandPenev2011,4)isaddressedasa,ifnotthemajorobstaclefortheimplementationofsuccessfuldatapublicationpractices.Accordingly,Callaghanetal.(2009)presentresultsfromasurveyinwhichsixty-sevenpercentofresearcherssaidthattheywouldpublishdataifreliablerewardmechanismsexisted.
Suchacreditsystemrequiresthatthecreationandcurationofdatacanberewardedindependentlyfromthepresentationofresearchresultsinacommonarticle,andalsofromtheactofderivingresearchresultsfromadataset.Thus,datapublicationrequiresamorespecificattributionsystem,sometimescalled“micro-attribution”(Candelaetal.2015,1754)initsextremeform.DataPaperstrytosupportthisdevelopmentbyexposingapublicationwhichpermitsrewardingthecreationandcurationofadatasetindependentlyfromotherscientificachievements.
Bothquality-controlandrewardingaddresspublicationsasimportantmeanstoarrangetheresearchasasociallyorganizedspace.DataPapersstandoutcomparedtomanyoftheconceptsthathavebeendiscussedinthelastchapter,byputtingrelatedissuesfirst,andbythestrategytheychooseinordertoachievethisarrangement.
Whiletheethicsof“radicalsharing”inapproachesclosetoe-Sciencediscourageanyattempttodecidewhetherpublicationsareworthpub-lishing,thisdecisionconstitutesacrucialconditionforthesuccessofdatapublishingintheviewpointofDPs.Additionally,DPscompletethistaskstrategicallybyreviewandselection,incontrasttoapproacheslikeNPsinwhichthesocialfieldofresearchissupposedtoorganizeitself.Therefore,DPstendtocarryoutasocialmanagementfunction.Theunderlyingques-tionishowmuchaprocessthatconsidersitselfinnovativemustabstractfromthematerialityoftechnology,theunitofinformation,thelogicofsharing,andotheraspects,sothatdigitalpublicationsmightbebetterreceived.
Incontrast,Candelaetal.(2015)accentuatethelinkagefunction.IntheirsurveyonDPs,citedhereseveraltimesalready,theauthorscomplainthatthereisa“lackofstandardsinthisarea”(1752).StandardizationofDPsisconceivedasanecessarysteptocreatebetterconditionsfordatapublications.Inordertoachievesuchstandardization,theypresentan
Publishing-Com Bubble 187
entity-relationship-model,astheDRIVERprojecthasdoneforEPs.InthismodelthestructureofDPsisrelatedtothestructureoftraditionalarticles(seefigure4.2).
Consequently,thedatapaperisasubclassofthecommonjournalarticleform.Theonethingthatdistinguishesitfromthisformisitsconnected-nesstoadataresource,asshowninthefigure.FramingDPslikethisobviouslyimpliesmorethanmakingthelinkfeatureofDPsmoreunder-standable.Itsuggestsacertainjudgmentwhichbecomestransparentinthesummaryofthesurvey.Inthissummary,DPsaredescribedasacon-ceptthatlagsbehindotherconceptsdevelopedearlier(1761).TheauthorssuggestthatDPsshouldborrowideasfromEPsinfutureversions,toover-cometheproblemsof“no,slow,incomplete,inaccurate,orunmodifiablecommunication”(1760).
[Figure4.2]DataPapersinanUMLviewbyCandelaetal.(2015)
ThecritiquethatDPsareaconceptnotworthyoffurtherdevelopmenthasalreadybeenraised.In2013,CallaghandefendedtheDPagainstaccusationssuchastheirbeinga“soon-to-be-obsoletesteppingstonetosomethingbetter.”InlightoftheoverviewofdifferentgoalsandfunctionsofDPs,itisnowpossibletoassessthiscritiquebetter.
First,theoriginalargument,thatDPslackconceptualstandardization,missesthewholepoint.Socialembeddingsandcontext-awaretechnicalflexibilityarethemostimportantaspects,conceptuallyopposedtotheideaofformalconsistencyandstrictness.Withthispriority,theconceptofDPsbecame successful after many other approaches putting a technological modelfirsthavefailedtocreateimpact.TheexistenceandsuccessofDataPapersisatestimonyofthisfailure.
Secondly,themisunderstandingofthecontextofDPsleadstoaconfusingmodelofDPs.ThepointisnotonlythataformalmodelofDPshaslittletooffer.Infact,theinclusionoftwolinkrelationsdoesofferlittlecomparedtothewrittenevaluationofthelastparagraphs.Itconcealsthewhole
188 Beyond the Flow
metaphoricalmeaningoftheselinks,notjustlinkingtextswithdatabutintheendalsostakeholders,communities,andknowledgecultures.
Correspondingly,ParsonsandFox(2013)ask:“IsDataPublicationtheRightMetaphor?”Theyarguethatthetermdatapublicationdoesnotwellrepresentthedistinctwaysinwhichresearchcommunitiesperceiveandusedata.Thedifferentways,however,inwhichDPsareimplementedandwhichareindicatedingreaterdetailbelow,showthatthisvarietyhasitsplacewithinexistingDPs.Itisspecificallynotsomethingthathadtobeovercome.
Third,thecritiqueofalackofinnovationismisleadingbecauseDPsseektoestablishpracticesofinnovationinsteadofpresentingideasthatexpressahighlevelofinnovativethought.DataPapersaresignificantlymoresuccessfulthanotherdigitalpublishingconcepts.Accordingly,Assanteetal.writeintheirconclusionthat:
…datajournalsarenowanestablishedphenomenoninthescientificliterature.Infact,thenumberofpublisheddatapapersanddatajournalsisrapidlygrowing;23.5%oftheexistingdatapaperswerepub-lishedin2013.(Assanteetal.2015,1760)
However,itisnotonlythenumberofpublicationchannelsforDPsgivingevidenceoftheirsuccess.ThefactthatalsostakeholderslikeThomson ReutersmakeheavyuseofDPstofeedtheirDataCitationIndex(Forceetal.2016),aswellasthenumberofdifferentdisciplinesinwhichtheconceptofDPsisadoptedsupportthisjudgment.
Additionally,thereareveryinnovativeDPsinthesensethatisusedbyCandelaetal.(2005).TheBiodiversityDataJournal,forinstance,usesfilledoutmetadatatemplatestogeneratewrittenpartsinamanuscriptonthefly,(Smithetal.2013;Robertsonetal.2014)therebyautomatizingthewritingprocess.Thesemantictaggingofentitiesinthepaper,similartoSPs,issemi-automaticallytakingplacewithintheauthoringenviron-mentprovidedbythepublisherPensoft.InformationisfinallyextractedfromtheDPonceitispublishedandexposedasdataonitsown(Smithetal.2013,8).Thereby,thisspecificexampleofaDPcomprisesawholesequenceofintegratedandhighlysophisticatedinnovations,goingfromdatasetstoarticlestoprocessedstandardizedmeta-data.AlthoughitisnotthepurposeofDPstocomplywiththisnotionofinnovation,itisnottruethatDPscannotprovideitifitfitsinwiththerespectivepublishingenvironment.
Publishing-Com Bubble 189
A Family Resemblance Between Different Implementations
ThelastargumentdrawsattentiontoanotherfacetofDPs.Asmentionedpreviously,DPsarenotmeanttoestablishanewfixedstandardpub-licationformat.Obviously,thismeansthattherearemanydifferentDPimplementations.WhiletheaforementionedBiodiversityJournalcomplieswithmanyideasfromthefieldofe-Science,theotherexamplesmentionedabovesuggestdifferentpreferences.Infact,DPsareusedbystakeholderstopromoteavarietyofideasdependingonthestakeholders’priorities.
InRees’workingpaper,therelativelysimpledefinitionofDPsisfollowedbyaverydetailedlistofrecommendations.TheserecommendationssuggestusingopenstandardsforaformaldescriptionofDPs,andputtingparticularemphasisonlicensingofdatasetsinthepublicdomain.AsamemberofCreativeCommons,thisfocusisareasonablestep.Otherpub-lishersofDPsshowlessinterestinthisspecificissue.
TheDPconceptpresentedbyNewmanandCorke(2009)includesthepub-licationofDPsasprintedarticles.Mostly,DPsarepublishedonline,andmanytakeahybridapproach.TheBiodiversityDataJournalprint-,PDF-,andxml-versionsareallofferedatonce.Theconnectionbetweendatasetsandarticlesmaysimilarlylookverydifferent.SomeDPsevenembedchunksofthedatasettheydescribe,othersareautomaticallyupdatedwhenrelevantchunksofthecorrespondingdatasetareupdated.Mostoften,thereisalinkwithapersistentPIDwhichleadstothedataset,butsometimesDPspoliciesdonotrequirethis,either.SomeDPsadditionallyexperimentwithnewtypesofreviewing,morepreciselytheopenpeerreview approach25.ManyofthedifferencesofDPimplementationsaresum-marizedbyCandelaetal.(2015).
Data Papers as Boundary Objects
Insteadofcreatingisolatedreferenceimplementations,DPsprovokeinnovationfromwithintheexistingpublishingecologies.
ThesummaryofaspectsandfunctionsofDPshasmadeclearhowmuchtheconceptiscommittedtotheideaofenablinginnovationinscholarlypublishinginsteadofjustpresentinganinnovativeidea.Thesearetwodifferentmotivationalneedswhichneedtobedistinguishedclearly.
25 Openpeerreviewisasetofalternativepropositionsinordertomakethepeerreviewprocessmoretransparent.Openpeerreviewmayincludeamongotherthingsthatthereviewprocesshappensonline,thatthereviewsarepublishedtogetherwiththepublication,orthatauthorshavetheabilitytointeractwithreviewers.
190 Beyond the Flow
Otherwise,theassessmentofDPsisnotabletograsptheirmostvaluablefeatures.ThisistheproblemoftheevaluationbyCandelaetal.(2015).IfthekeyaspectofDPsistheprovisionofalink,astheauthorssuggest,thenthislinkconnectsfarmorethanatextresourcewithadataresource.
DataPaperslinkstakeholderstostakeholders,differentwaysofperceivingandusingdata,datawithmetadata,differentambitions,andofcoursealsodifferentideasofhowpublishingwillchange.RegardingthisfinalaspectitisnotsurprisingthatitispossibletofindkeyfeaturesofotherpublicationconceptsinoneortheotherinstanceofDPs.Inthissection,SPs,liketagging,theexistenceofDPsacrossdifferentformatsasinHPs,andtheautomatizationofitscreationprocessasinAPswasmentionedexplicitly.Weilenmann(2014)furthermorediscussesDPsintermsofnewformsofinformationunitsaswell,whichisreminiscentoftheargumentofMAs.DataPapersareindeedahybridconcept.Theyarenotaimedatimposingastandardbutatcreatingbetterconditionsforstandardizationindigitalpublishing.Thus,itmissesthepointtodemandamorestandardizedversionofDPsashasbeendonebyCandelaetal.(2015).
Intheend,DPsalsodoconnectthepastofpublishingwiththefuture.Byvirtueofbeingahybridconcept,theyfunctionlikeaboundaryobject26 ofwhichdifferentstakeholdersandresearchcommunitiescanbeapart.Therefore,itdoesnotsurprisethatdifferentauthorsdefineadifferentperiodfortheemergenceofDPs.ItalsofitswellinthiscontextthatRees(2010)encourageswritingDPsaboutdatasetsthatwerecreatedinthepastandarenotavailableindigitalform.
LikeHPs,DPsstandoutbythestrongemphasistheyputonculturalandsocialaspectsofpublishing.ThedifferenceisthatDPsasboundaryobjectsarestillahybridconcept.Itisaconceptusedtomobilizethecommunityaroundscholarlypublishing.InthecaseofHPs,thingsaretheotherwayaround.HybridPublishingisanattempttomobilizethecommunitysothatnewsustainableformsofpublishingmightbeforged.
26 Theconceptofboundaryobjects,stemmingfromsociologyandinformationscience,isanobjectthatisbothflexibleenoughtoadapttothespecificsituationofdifferentsocio-culturalcontextsandstableenoughtoshareanidentifiableideaacrossthesecontexts.Assuch,itisanobjectthatisperfectlysuitedforlinkingdifferentcom-munitiestogether.ForfurtherdetailsontheconceptrefertoStarandGriesemer(1989).
Publishing-Com Bubble 191
Self-Contained PublicationsThefinalconceptinthecurrenthistoryofdigitalpublicationformatscouldbecalledSelf-ContainedPublications(hereafterreferredtoasSCPs).Atthebeginningoftheseconddecadeofthenewmillennium,theongoingsuccessofthePDFformat,despitealleffortstoestablishnewpublicationformats,ledtoasystematicevaluationofitsstrengths.AccordingtoPettiferetal.(2011,213)aroundeightypercentofdigitalpublicationswerestillinPDFformat.
AcomprehensiveoverviewofstrengthsisofferedbyAttwoodetal.(2010),Pettiferetal.(2011),andWillinsky,Garnett,andPanWong(2012).Accordingtothem,PDFsarereliablyresistanttolegalandtechnologicalchanges,aswellaschangesofthecontentitself.Theycanbeusedpersonally,onalocalmachine,andofflinebyresearchers.Theyarebuiltontopofamaturetechnologyassociatedwithaplethoraoftoolsfortheircreationandcon-sumption.Thepresentationofthecontentismostoftencarefullydesignedintermsoflayoutrulesbenefitingfromalonghistoryofreadingexpe-riences.RelativelystandardizedworkflowsexistforthecreationofPDFsinthepublishingprocessbetweenresearcherandpublisher.AccordingtoWillinsky,Garnett,andPanWong(2012,sec. Conclusion),thisisnotthecaseforotherpublicationformats,especiallySPs.
InanattempttoexplainthesuccessofthePDF,Pettiferetal.(2011)discussthestateofthediscourseondigitalpublishinginrelationtotheimageCeci n est pas une pipe27byRenéMagritte.Inthesamewayinwhichtheimagetitleseekstohighlightthedifferencebetweenanobjectandacertainrep-resentation,peopleshouldnotconfusepublicationsasrealobjectsandpublicationsasabstractconcepts.Theauthorsdistinguishbetweenworks,expressionsofsuchworks,andtheirmanifestations.Aworkisanabstractentitywhichmayhaveseveralexpressions.Eachexpressionisrealizedwhilehavingdistinctgoalsinmind.
TheabovelistedbenefitsofPDFsaddressspecificusagepatternsandpublishingrequirements.Otherformatsaddressdifferentpatternsandrequirements.Themainclaimofthepaperisthatnotechnicalformatassuchshouldbeconfusedwiththeconceptofapublication.Digitalpub-lishinginparticularoffersandrequiresexpressionsofpublicationsthataimatverydifferentusagescenarios.ThelackofsuccessofnewpublicationformatsisduetotheirgoalofreplacingthePDFandtothedevaluationofspecificadvantagesofthePDFoverotherformats.
27 “Thisisnotapipe”(author’stranslation)
192 Beyond the Flow
Puttingitmoreconcisely,thislineofargumentissimilartotheapproachofHPs.Theconsequencesareverydifferent,however.AccordingtoAttwoodetal.(2010,569),manyoftheaforementionedbenefitsresultfromthefactthataPDFisa“self-contained”document.Allitscomponents,informationwhattodowiththem,andhowtorenderandpresentthemarepartofthesameobjectormorepreciselythesamefile.APDFpackagesallthesethingsinawaythatisveryhardtomodify.Infact,PDFsareevencapableofstoringcomputercode.ItisnothardtoseethatthesecharacteristicsfundamentallyopposemainprinciplesofSPs,ROs,andLPsamongothers.However,asWillinsky,Garnett,andPanWongputit:
Ifwewerebeingcynical,wecouldeasilysuggestthatitisexactlyPDF’sstodgyinflexibilitythathasborneoutitssuccess,andwewillforthatmatteralwayshavesomeneedforastodgy,inflexibledocument.(Willinsky,Garnett,andPanWong2012,sec. Conclusion)
ContributionsinthissectionthereforeallbuildupontheideaofSelf-Con-tainedPublications.
Self-Containedness and Emulation
Pettiferetal.(2011)insistthatdatashouldbestoredinthePDFandnotjustreferencedthere.UndernamessuchasUtopia Documents(Attwoodetal.2010),orinteractive PDFs(LabtivaInc.2015),PDF-likepublicationsarecreatedthattrytoimplementsomeofthefeaturesproposedinotherpub-licationformatswithinthePDFframework.Theseinitiativesmostlystartbymakingchangesontheapplicationlevel(readingsoftwareandauthoringtools)andthenontheformatlevel.Significantly,approachesliketheonebyWillinsky,Garnett,andPanWong(2012)eventrytoshowhowacertainprogresscanbeachievedjustbyusingtheexistingpotentialsofPDFsdifferentlyandwithoutanychangetotheformat.
ThetwomainpointsbehindthelineofargumentbyPettiferetal.havesomeweaknesses.Ontheonehand,aPDFisnotreallyself-contained.Itstillneedssoftwaretobepresented.Ontheotherhand,thepointofembracingmultipleexpressionsofpublicationsinsteadofpushingaspecificexpressionisnotcompletelyconsistentwithextendingthescopeofPDFsthemselves.
However,theuseofthetermself-containedness,asintroducedbytheauthors,isproblematicitself.Itishardtoimagineanydigitalpublicationthatdoesnotneedsometypeofadditionalsoftwareenvironmentinordertofunction.Self-ContainedPublicationsarethusnotreallyself-contained,
Publishing-Com Bubble 193
butfocusonthedevelopmentofpublicationsthatallowamuchhigherdegreeofself-containedness.Regardingthediversityofexpressions,itneedstobesaidthattheauthorsjustusethisargumenttostrengthenapublicationformatwhichhadbecomethesymbolofwhatneedstobeovercome.
TheenhancementofPDFs,furthermore,isnotacompleterefutationofthediversityargument.Asopposedtoallotherformats,thePDFbecameastandardbecauseitbuildsmuchmoreuponthelonghistoryofprintpublications.Therearefewerelementsinthishistorywhichotherformatscanreferbackto,andthusalsofewerexistingsupportivemechanismsandorganizationalmeansfortheseformatstobenefitfrom.Itsverymaturityandlevelofadoptioncomparedtoothersolutions(seebelow)arethereasonswhytheauthorshavechosenit.
ScientificPublicationPackages,ROs,andrelatedformatshadalreadyintegratedsoftwareasakeyresourceintothepublication.Buildingupontheideaoflinkedopendata,theynonethelessdonotincludesoftwareinaself-containedmanner.Yetin2012,Zhaoetal.(2012)presentasurveywhichshowsthatatthattime,eightypercentofROsfromthemyExperimentportalcouldnotbeusedanylongerbecausethecomputationalenviron-mentinwhichtheyhadbeencreatedwasnotreproducible.MengandThain(2017,705)alsorefertothisissueasthe“workflowdecay.”Boettiger(2015,72)similarlyremarksthatreproducibleresearch,despitealltheseattempts,isnotrealizedduetoissueslikeunmaintainedsoftware,lackofdocumentation,and“barrierstoadoptionandreuseinexistingsolutions.”
SuchexperiencesalsoinitiatedadevelopmentprocessofSCPsine-Sciencedomains.Mostoftheseformatsmakeuseofso-calledemulation.Putsimply,emulationistheabilityofanoperatingsystemtoemulateaspecificsoftwareenvironmentwithinitself,suchasanotheroperatingsystem.28 With some technological assistance it is possible at any point in time to savethestateofanentireoperatingsystemtoafile.Thisfileismostoftencalledanimage.Whenimagefilesareopenedonacomputercapableofemulation,theuserispresentedwiththeverysameoperatingsysteminthestateinwhichitwassavedontheoriginalcomputer.
28 Thetermemulationisnotusedinthestrictwaythatcomplieswiththesubtledis-tinctionsbetweenthisconceptandcomparableconceptslikevirtualizationandcontainerizationamongothersfromthefieldofcomputerscience.Hereitisusedinsteadasanumbrellaconceptforalltheseapproachesinordertopreventthereaderfromhavingtodealwithdifficultiesthatarenotcrucialforthepresentwork’slineofargument.
194 Beyond the Flow
Publicationsasimagesdonotonlyallowpublishingofcontent,butalsoofwhatisrequiredtoopen,render,orexecutethecontent.Ofcourse,aprogramtoopenandruntheimageitselfisstillneeded.Theissuenever-thelessshiftstoahigherlevelofabstraction,ashasbeennotedbefore.Thepublicationisself-contained,becauseitputsallresources,andalsoallapplications,programminglibraries,andcompilersamongotherthingsintoonefileinordertointeractwiththeresources.Additionally,itcouldbearguedthatthishigherleveloftechnologicalabstractionreducestechnicalheterogeneity.
TheshifttoemulationandtheresultsfromthesurveyconfirmfromanoppositepointofviewwhatWillinsky,Garnett,andPanWong(2012)saidabouttheinflexibilityofthePDF.Acertaindegreeofinflexibility,orbetterstability,appearsnecessaryforpublicationformatstomeettheirrequirements.Often,earlierprojectshavetriedtoachievethissta-bilitybyattemptingtoproposetechnologicalorsemanticstandardsforthestructureofpublications.Theproliferationofpublicationformatsdescribedinthiswork,togetherwithinsightsliketheonebyZhaoetal.(2012,seealsoabove),suggestthatthepredictedstandardizationprocesshasnotadequatelytakenplace.Liewetal.(2016,66:1)seetheSCPapproachasaresponseto“thecomplexityanddiversityofapplications,thediversityofanalysisgoals,theheterogeneityofcomputingplatforms,andthevolumeanddistributionofdata.”
Besidesmaturityandself-containedness,thereisanotherinterestingfacetofSCPs.InthesamewayPettiferetal.(2011)highlightthemeritsofPDFsincontrasttoapproachesappearingmoredigitallynative,theauthorsstressthenecessityofnarrativeformandillustrativecontentinpub-lications.TheircritiqueisexplicitlydirectedatMons'considerationsonNPs,butaddressesanyinitiativethatprivilegescomputationalfeaturesofdigitalpublications.Theyelegantlyturntheargumentupsidedownthattheseelementsonlycompensatetheabsenceofdataandexperimentsinhistoricalpublications.Theypointoutthatonlytheworstprogrammersleavecodeuncommented.Thisissobecausecodeitselfishardtoreadandunderstandevenforthepeoplewhowroteit.Thus,code,data,text,andillustrationsamongothersshouldnotjustbeperceivedasservingapurposeintheirownright.Theyshouldbetakenasdifferentmeanstoserveoneandthesamepurpose—transmittingscientificresultsandtruths—andthereforecombinedassuch.
Infact,suchanintegratedglobalmodelexistssincetheearlyeightiesevenincomputerscience.Thismodeliscalledliterate programming(Knuth1984).
Publishing-Com Bubble 195
Whileearlymodelsofliterateprogrammingmainlyaddressedtheissueofcodedocumentation,lateradoptionsextendedittoauniquewayofcomputingandforthecreationofdigitalpublications.Inso-calledelectronic notebooks,executablecodealternateswithlayoutedtext,diagrams,andrichmediawithequalrightsandinanarrativelinearway.Thesenotebooksareusedheavilybothincomputerscienceandbyresearcherswhousecomputationinresearch.
Thepopularityofprojectslikethejupyter notebook(seefigure4.3;PerezandGranger2013),thebeaker notebook29,butalsoprojectslikeknitr30 give evidenceaboutthesuccessofthisapproach.
[Figure4.3]TheJupyterElectronicNotebook
Electronicnotebooksarenotonlyusedtoproduceinformalpublicationslikeresearchblogs(Fanghor2014)butalsoadvertisedforbroaderadoption(Perkel2018)—notwithoutsuccess.In2014,O’Reilly,oneofthebiggestpublishersofcomputersciencebooks,announcedthatitacceptsjupyternotebooksfromauthorsastemplatesforbookstoprint(Odewahn,Kelley,andMadsen2014;Odewahn2015).Additionally,theauthoringplatformAuthorea31whichenablesdirectsubmissionofauthoredpublicationstopublishersfromearthsciences,lifesciencesandastronomypermitsembeddingjupyternotebooksintothemanuscript.Therebyjupyter
29 http://beakernotebook.com/30 https://yihui.name/knitr/31 https://www.authorea.com/
196 Beyond the Flow
notebooksarepartofpublishingworkflows“ateachofthetop100researchuniversitiesworldwide”(jupytercon2017).
Curiouslyenough,thejupyternotebookwasalsooriginallyinventedtoprovide“anopensourceframeworkforinteractive,collaborative,andreproduciblescientificcomputingandeducation”(PerezandGranger2013;Wittek2014;Thomasetal.2016).Nevertheless,insteadofseparatingarticlesfromdataandsoftwarethejupyternotebookattemptstoachievethisgoalbytyingalltheseelementsmorecloselytogether.
However,thisdigressiontoelectronicnotebookswasnotjustintendedtodemonstratethatargumentssimilartothoseprovidedbyPettiferetal.existine-Science,too.Infact,electronicnotebookshaverecentlybecomeSCPsintheirownright.Originally,theydidnotincludethesoftwarelibrariesrequiredbythecodeinthenotebookinordertofunction.Theyprovidedanenvironmentthatcanmakeuseofsuchlibrariesiftheyexistonacomputerinordertoexecutepartsofcodeinplace,ormorepreciselyinsidethenotebook.Inthisscenario,electronicnotebooksmayrunintothesameproblemsoutlinedbyZhaoetal.(2012)andothers.
Topreventthis,projectsusingelectronicnotebooksforpublishingsim-ilarlyrecommendemulationstrategies.O’Reilly,accordingly,proposesaso-calledDocker32containerwhichdoesnotonlycontaintheelectronicnotebook,butalsothewholecomputationalenvironmentusedbythenotebookinordertocreatea“self-contained”environment(Citoetal.2017,323).AcomparablepathistakenbytheprojectBinder33.
Ontheonehand,electronicnotebookshavebecomeSCPs.Ontheotherhand,SCPprojectswhichoriginallyhadnothingtodowiththeapproachofelectronicnotebooksuseliterateprogrammingconceptstocircumscribetheirkeyfeatures.Therefore,SCPsdonotonlytonedownthedistinctionbetweenthecontentofpublicationsanditscarrier,butalsothehierarchybetweendifferentmodesofrepresentation.ItcouldevenbesaidthatSCPsimplicitlyusesomeoftheargumentsofTPs.Thisisimportantbecauseelectronicnotebooksandemulationaredeeplylinkedtoe-Scienceandcomputerscience,where,aswasshownalready,texthasbeenwidelytreatedasdocumentation.Accordingly,Welchetal.stress:
Thepreservationcommunitycouldbenefitfromwideningitscollectingscopetoincludecomplexobjectssuchatscientificdesktops,databases,machinesrunningnetworkedbusinessprocessesor
32 https://www.docker.com/33 http://mybinder.org
Publishing-Com Bubble 197
computers….Suchobjectsarenotjustinterestingintheirownrightbutalsohavethepotentialtoprovideamoreimmersiveandcon-textuallyrichexperiencethansimplerdigitalobject.(Welchetal.2012)
Uptothispoint,twodifferentstrategies(PDFandemulation)toachievethegoalofself-containednesshavebeenintroduced.Otherstrategiescouldbedescribedwhichtrytoachievesimilargoals.However,itisacomparisonbetweenthedifferenttypesofemulationtechniquesthatoffersmostmeaningfulinsightsintothemostrecentstateofdigitalpublications.Formally,suchdifferencescouldbesplitintotwogroups:differencespertainingtothequestionsofatwhichpointself-containednessbegins,andthoseofapplyingdifferentmechanismstoproduceself-containingobjects.Santana-Perezetal.(2017)andNüstetal.(2017)alsoprovideanoverviewofscholarlypublicationsusingemulation,butonethatislesssys-tematicthanisintendedforthenextsection.
What Is a Self-Contained Object?
Thequestionconcerningthenatureofself-containedobjectsisaques-tionofscopeaswellasofcontenttype.Whatdoesapublicationneedtoincludeinordertonotsignificantlydependonresourcesoutofitscon-trol?Definitionsvarybetweenextremelysimpleandhighlysophisticated.Inthefirstcategory,therearecontributionsliketheonebyPebesma,Nüst,andBivand(2012),whoproposetousetheconceptofadependency treecomingfromsoftwarepackagemanagementintheUNIXworld.Putsimply,adependencytreeisadescriptionofsoftwarepackagesthatneedto be available in a software environment so that another software can be executed.Aformaldescriptionoftheadditionalsoftwareinstalledduringtheprocessofinstallingtheoriginalpieceofsoftwarecanbereadbyanothersysteminordertoreproducethenecessaryenvironmentforthepresentation34ofapublicationonanothercomputer.
Alistofnamesandversionnumbersofrequiredsoftwareisasimplething.TheothersideregardingscopeisrepresentedbyapproacheslikePaper Mâché(Brammeretal.2011)andSHARE(Mazanek2011;vanGorpandMazanek2011).Theunderlyingstrategybehindtheseprojectshasalreadybeendiscussed.Theseprojectscreateimagesofso-calledvirtualmachineswhichcontainthe“frozen”versionofawholecomputersystem,providingit
34 Herepresentationincludesbothrunningcomputationalexperimentsaswellasmakingdatasensuallyperceptible,forinstance,byshowingapageorvisualizationonthescreen.
198 Beyond the Flow
asatransferableandcopyablefile.Theapproachisaccordinglyoftencalledfullvirtualization35.
Dependencytreesandvirtualmachineimagescouldbeunderstoodasthetwopolesofthescopeinwhichitisreasonablypossibletodiscussthethemeofself-containedness.However,itistheinclusionofotherconcepts such as sandboxesandcontainersthroughwhichthisdiscus-siongainstheoreticalvalue.ThebenefitofsandboxesforSCPsishigh-lightedbyMengetal.(2015).Inprinciple,sandboxesareworkingspacesonacomputerwhicharegraduallyisolatedandindependentfromtheunderlyingoperatingsystem.Assuch,theyhavetheirowndiskspaceandconfiguration,butmaystillusecoreservicesandsoftwareoftheoperatingsystem.Oneuse-caseforsandboxesissoftwaredevelopment,whereitisusedtoproduceanenvironmentimportantforthesoftwareprojectthatdoeshowevernotaffecttheoperatingsystem.Itispossible,forinstance,thatasoftwareprojectneedsanotherversionofasoftwarelibrarythantheoperatingsystem.Sandboxesallowuseofaspecificversioninthedevelopmentprocesswithouttheneedtoremovetheversiononwhichtheoperatingsystemdepends.
Sandboxescanbereproducedonanotheroperatingsystem.Thethingstheyarenotabletoreproducearethecomponentsoftheoperatingsystemthatthesandboxrequiresinordertofunction.FollowingMengetal.(2015),thisisthepointwherecontainerscomeintoplay.Containersdonotcontaina whole operating system but only those software components crucial inordertorunthemainapplicationsinthecontainer.Accordingly,thisapproachiscalledpara-virtualization.RegardingSCPs,Phametal.(2015)callcontainersalightweightvirtualizationapproach.Containersrecentlybecameaverysuccessfulapproachinmanyareasincomputerscience.Besidestheauthorsmentionedabove,Odewahn(2015),Cito,Ferme,andGall(2016),andBoettiger(2015)proposecontainersaspartoftheconceptofSCPs.
Thetermlightweightindicatesoneofthereasonsthatledtoareasonableshifttocontainersinsteadofvirtualmachineimages.Allauthorshighlightthatvirtualizationisexpensive,meaningitneedsalotofdiskspaceandcomputationalresources.Consequently,thisissueposesthequestionof
35 Thereadershouldrememberthatthisstudy,forthepurposeofsimplicity,refrainsfrommakingallthesubtledistinctionsbehindsomeoftheconceptsinthisfieldofresearch.Here,itispossibletoequatevirtualizationwithemulation.Fullvirtualizationreferstothefactthatwhatisvirtualizedreallyisanentireoperatingsystem.
Publishing-Com Bubble 199
whatexactlyisnecessaryforareproduciblepublication.Thisquestionisinturnjustanotherwaytoaskwhatself-containednessis.
Correspondingly,ZhengandThain(2015)describefourdifferentscenariosforcontainerizationinwhichtheboundariesofeachcontaineraresetdifferently.Terminologicallyinterestingisthefactthatboundaryisdefinedbytheterm’sisolationandconsistency.Althoughthesetermshavedomainspecificmeaningincomputerscience,suchmeaningiseasilytransferabletoatheoreticaldiscussiononwhatitmeanstocreateaself-containedobject.Finally,theauthorsmeasurethe“costs,”i.e. thenecessaryeffortstoproduceSCPs,foreachcontainertype.
Indeed,inrecentyearsthediscussiononself-containednessturnedtheoreticalwithintheSCPscommunityitself.Cranmeretal.(2015),whoevaluatedifferentcontainerizationstrategiesfortheATLAS36archive,introducethedifferencebetweenreproducibilityandreplicability.Thelatteraddressesastrategyinwhichtheunderlyingtechnologiesofapublicationareconstantlyupdatedandnotconserved.Thegoalistonotreproducethesamesoftwareenvironment,buttoassurethatthesupposedkeyaspectsofapublicationcanbepresentedinanalwaysup-to-datesoftwareenvironment.Withthisdistinction,thequestionoftheidentityofpublicationscompletelyshiftsawayfromthepublicationasaphysical—inthesenseofbeingstoredonaharddrive—objecttopub-licationsasidealthings.
Likewise,Mengetal.(2015,139)discussthedistinctionbetweenrepeat-abilityandreproducibility.Whilethefirsttermdescribesthecapacitytoregeneratethesameresultsagainandagain,thesecondconceptemphasizesthecapabilityofchangingparameterswithinthesameset-upthatwasoriginallypublished.Arguingthatsuchset-upsaretherealoutputsofaresearchprocess,thequestionofwhatthecoreofthepublicationreallyisoncemoreputintoanewcontext.Welchetal.concludetheircon-tribution with questions such as:
Whatexactlycomprisestheobjectwhichistobepreservedauthentically?Arethenumerousoperationstoreducetheoriginaldiskimagesizeidentitytransformations?Couldthepreservationoftheintegrityofthepreservationtarget’scontentbeproveninanautomatedway?Howmuchchangeoftheoriginalimageontheblocklevelisacceptable?(Welchetal.2012,278)
36 https://atlas.cern/
200 Beyond the Flow
How to Obtain Self-Containedness
Inconsequencetodifferentdefinitionsofself-containedness,differentstrategiesexistforidentifyingallnecessarycomponents.Onagenerallevel,suchstrategiesdistinguishbetweenimaging,tracking,anddescribing.Additionally,strategiescouldbefurthercategorizedintoimper-ativeanddeclarativeapproaches.37
Imagingapproacheswerediscussedatthebeginningofthissection(seealsoWelchetal.2012).Automationstrategiestrytotrackcomputationalresearchprocessesinacomputationalmanner.Apieceofsoftwarethatmonitorsagivenresearchprocessissupposedtoidentifyandrecordanyofitsinvolvedelements.AstheboundariesofSCPsvary,sodoesthemonitoringsoftware.SomeapproachesincludethedevelopmentofsoftwarespecificallydesignedforcreatingSCPs(Phametal.2015),othersuseprovenstandardsoftwaresuchastheUNIXtoolptrace(Mengetal.2015).
DescriptivestrategiescreateSCPsinamanualfashion.Boettiger(2015),forinstance,outlinestheusageoftheDockercontainerizationsoftwareforreproducibleresearch.Hehighlightsthatforthecreationofsuchcon-tainers,allthatisneededisasmallshell script.38
Assemblingalistofcommandstocreateacontainerisoneapproach.Obviously,itdependsonaspecificcomputationalenvironmentsuchasDockertobefunctional.Anotherapproachistouseso-calleddeclarativesemantics.Thesesemanticsdescribethefeaturesoftheexpectedoutputenvironment,notthestepsrequiredtogetthatenvironment.Accordingly,differenttechnologicalenvironmentscaninterpretsuchdescriptionsintheirownway.Boettiger(2015,73)pointsoutthatthe“blackbox”vir-tualizationisseenasachallengetotheideasoftransparencyinsciencebyitscritics,anyway.Declarativedescriptionshelptoovercomethissituation.
Theuseofdeclarativesemanticsforthedescriptionofcomputerenviron-mentsisdetailedbySantana-Perezetal.(2014)andSantana-Perezetal.(2017).Theauthorsremarkthatthereisaplethoraofvirtualizationandcontainerizationsoftwarealready,andthatthereforeastandardizedmodelisnecessarytobeabletonegotiatebetweenprojects.Furthermore,thearticlesdemonstratehowtheuseofsuchmodelsinresearchcanenable
37 ForadifferenttypeofclassificationseeNüstetal.(2017)38 AshellscriptisbasicallyasmallcomputerprogramusingaUNIXshellenvironment.
Inthiscontextitcontainsasequenceofcommandswrittenbytheauthorofthepub-licationandparsedbyacomputertocreatethecontainerenvironment.
Publishing-Com Bubble 201
purelydescriptive,reproducibledigitalpublications.Purelydescriptiveheremeansthatthesoftwareandotherresourcesarenotpartoftheresultingpublicationsanylonger.Inthecontextofthiswork,itispossibletosaythatsuchpublicationsareextendedversionsofROs.Theydonotonlycontainadescriptionofaworkflowanditsresources,butalsooftheenvironmentinwhichthisworkflowtakesplace.Althoughthisapproachaddressesvir-tualization,itjustremainsadescription.Therefore,itisnotreallyanSCPanymore.ItneverthelessitisoneoutcomeofthepathofSCPs.
Nüstetal.(2016)andNüstetal.(2017)presentanapproachthatismoreofahybrid.TheconceptofExecutable Research Compendiums(alsoreferredtoasERC)isstillacontainer,butacontainerwhichfollowsastandardizedmodel(alsoreferredtoasERM)ofwhatSCPsshouldlooklike.
ThedesignsofvariousscopesofSCPs,aswelldifferentapproachesfortheircreation,demonstratethatthispublicationconceptreintroducestheideaofsoundauthoringofmonolithicobjects,insteadofaggregatinginformationunits.Thecreationofcontainersinthisapproachisaprocessofdecisionmakinganddesign,carriedoutbyahumancreatorinthefirstplace.Evenifautomatedprocessesputthecontainertogetherattheend,manydesigndecisionsintermsofwhatisrequired,andhowtherequiredthingsaregatheredtoobtainself-containedness,mustbemadeinadvance.ThisobservationbecomesclearerifonelooksatfouroffivemajorissuesthatturnupduringthecreationofcontainerizedSCPs,high-lightedbyMengetal.(2015,138–39).Theseissuesdealwiththeaspectsofdependencies,configuration,selectivity,andvolatilityintheprocessofauthoringSCPs.
Theideaofauthoringasahuman,decision-drivendesignprocessbecameextremelymarginalinmanypublicationconceptsinthelastchapter.OLBsandROswereaimedatunfilteredmediationoftheresearchprocess.TheimplementationofROssubsequentlyshowedthatitisnotonlythework-flow,butalsotheenvironmentoftheworkflowthatneedstobetracked.Inafinalstep,itbecameclearthattheenvironmentcannotjustbetracked,butdependsonauthoringtasks.Thismeansthatwhiletheactofauthoringseemedillegitimateatthebeginning,itisconceivedofasunavoidableyearslater.Topushthingsfurther,itmightevenbepossibletoarguethatSCPstoday“author”differentmodesofauthoringstrategies,suchasimaging,tracking,anddescribing.
202 Beyond the Flow
From Artifacts to Aggregations to Artifacts
Self-ContainedPublicationsarecomparabletoDPsinpreciselyoneaspect.LikeDPs,theconceptofSCPsisanopenandinclusiveconcept.MostapproachestoSCPsdonotprescribetheexactcontentofapublication.Itwould,forinstance,beeasilypossibletoturnaTPintoaSCP.Infact,thiscouldevenprovideasolutiontothepreservationissueofTPsraisedbyBallandEyman(2015).ThedifferencebetweenDPsandSCPsisthepropertybywhichsuchinclusivenessisachieved.WhileDPsofferaflexibleandopenconcept,SCPsenabletechnologicalflexibility.Incontrast,thismeansthatDPsarecriticizedasinneedoftechnologicalimprovement(seesectiononDPs),whileonlystakeholderswithahighleveloftechnologicalunder-standingareevencapableofauthoringSCPs.
Asdescribedatthebeginningofthissection,emulationstrategiesinSCPswerealsotheresultofissueswithpublicationconceptssuchasROs,whichputastrongemphasisonreproducibility.AnothergoalofROswastobuildpublicationsontopofadistributednetworkofresourceslinkedtogetherinaspecificwayineachpublication.Self-ContainedPublicationsbuiltontheargumentthatdistributionisnotafeasiblewayoforganizingpublicationcontent.StudiesfromwithintheresearchfieldofSCPshavepresentedalotofevidenceinordertosupportthisclaim.EmulationandpackagingaretheoppositeapproachtotheideasofLOD,butitisconsiderednecessaryforachievingmorereproducibility.
Theconsequenceofthisdecisionisadiscussionabouttherightscope,thenecessaryelements,andreliableauthoringstrategiesinordertoreallyachieveself-containedness.Thisdiscussionhashighlytheoreticalimplications,andsometimesevenmakesuseofpoeticalphrases,suchasinWelchetal.(2012,79),stressingthatthecreationofSCPsneed“acertain‘cooperation’oftheoriginaloperatingsystem.”Thetheoreticaldimensionofsuchdiscussionsofcausealsochallengesthetheoreticalfoundationsbehindotherpublicationtypes,even,orespecially,when,thecontextistojustsolveconcretetechnologicalproblems.Thisdimension,moreprecisely,questionsthescopeoftheimpactofnotionsliketheaggregativenatureofpublications,orthepossibilitytoformalizereproducibility.
Thefactthatthisdiscussioniscarriedonbycomputerscientists,andthus within the same community in which such concepts were born in thefirstplace,supportsthisobservationfurther.ItwasHerbertVandeSompelwhocoinedthephrase“FromArtifactstoAggregations,”andwhosignificantlyinfluencedawholesetofdigitalpublicationsbydevelopingtheOAI-OREmodel.Yet,withtheemergenceofSCPs,thenotionofartifacts
Publishing-Com Bubble 203
isre-introduced,andthetermre-appearswithpositiveconnotationbyauthorssuchasWelchetal.(2012).
AlthoughSCPssolvesomeproblemsofconceptualandtechnologicalheterogeneity,theyalsoproducetheirowntypeofheterogeneity.ThisheterogeneityisactivelyaddressedbySantana-Perezetal.(2017),andregrettedbyNüstetal.(2016).Itdrivesanewattempttodefineformalsemanticsforthedescriptionofcomputationalenvironments(Santana-Perezetal.2014;Santana-Perezetal.2017),orforthecomponentsthatscientificpublicationsascontainersshouldprovide.
Inlightofthelastparagraph,SCPsremainaconceptauthenticallyresidinginthefieldofcomputerscience.Thesuggestionofanontologyinordertodescribecomputationalenvironmentsinastandardizedway,withoutpreservingtheseenvironments,againtriestofindatechnologicalsolutiontoaproblemthatconceptssuchasHPsandDPspredominantlytreatasasocialissue.
AninterestingaspectofSCPsisthefactthatacertainsensibilitytowardssocialissuesofpublicationconceptsemergesinacompletelydifferentarea.Theargumentbehindthedevelopmentof“light-weight”containersolutionsinsteadofoperating-systemimageshasbeentheinefficientamountofresources(diskspaceamongothers)theseimagesrequire.Inothercontributions,theterm“costs”isused.ZhengandThain(2015)offeracomprehensiveevaluationofdifferentcosttypesfordistinctapproachestoSCPs.
Althoughthistermisnotmeantmonetarilyinthefirstplace,iteffectivelyaddressesmonetaryissues.Computationalresourcesconsistofhard-wareandenergyusedbythishardware.Bothmustbeboughtinthesamewayastimeresourcesequatetosalaries.Hence,therecurringthemeofcostsinSCPscorrespondswithanawarenessofwhatcouldbecalledthesocialweightofdigitalpublicationformats,thatis,theperceivableeffortsnecessarytotreatthesepublicationconceptsasafuturestandard.SimilarquantificationsofeffortscannotbefoundforotherpublicationconceptsinsuchdetailasinZhengandThain(2015).
Theseeffortsareconcreteandcountable,comparedtothemoreabstractreferencestonecessaryeffortsinconceptslikeSPs.Self-containedpub-licationsmightmakesenseforsuchissues,duetothekeydecisiontonotmakeaformaldistinctionbetweenformandcontentofapublication,theallegedlycontingentsocialaspects,andthetechnologicallypurepartsofadigitalpublication.
204 Beyond the Flow
Putting Digital Publications into ContextTheperioddescribedinthischaptermarksasignificantchangeinthedevelopmentofdigitalpublications.
Sometimesopenly,butinmostcasesimplicitly,thefourconceptsinthischapterrelativizemanyoftheparadigmsadvocatedinearlierprojects.Hence,inHPsthediscourseofopenaccesswasputintoperspective,butnotabandoned.Instead,astrategyof“subsequentmonetization”wasproposedthatacceptscertainsocialdependencies.HybridPublications,atthesametime,tonedownthejudgmentaldistinctionsbetweennewandoldpublicationformats.Theydosobyarguingthatdifferentpublicationformatsservedifferentneeds.Theideathat“old”needsdisappear,justbecausedigitaltechnologiesareabletoalsoserveotherneeds,appearsasanunnecessarysimplification.
SCPsraisedsimilarcritiques.However,theircounter-approachtothemodularizationofpublicationsandtheirabolishmentofthecontent/formdistinctionareclearlymoreimportantaspectsofthisconcept.AlthoughOpenAIREdidnotabolishthethemeofstandardization,itsapproachisneverthelessclearlydifferentfromthewayformerprojectspursuedthisgoal.Theprojectsupportedagradualapproachtostandardization,inwhichtheresponsibilityforitsachievementwasinpartsmovedtoahigh-levelinfrastructureandtotheprojectitself.
Suchanapproach,inwhichharmonizationispursuedbyactsofcuration,hasalsobeentakenbyOverlayJournalsand,lateron,DPs,conceptsthatintentionallymakeuseofhistoricalpublicationformats.TheconceptofDPsalsotookaccountofepistemologicalissueswhenParsonsandFoxask:“IsDataPublicationtheRightMetaphor”(seeabove).Emphasizingwhatdatameans,andhowinteractionwithdatatakesplace,andhowthisdiffersbetweendomains,meansunderminingthelineofargumentofconceptsine-Science,inwhichdata-drivensciencehasonefaceandoneonly.
ThesupportforthearticleforminDPscouldalsobeunderstoodasasup-portoflinearnarrativityasauniquemeanstoadequatelycontextualizeempiricalresearchbeyondjustmetadata(seealsoGilandGarijo2017).Thesuccessofelectronicnotebooksinresearchfieldsthatmakeheavyuseofcomputationgivesreasontoexpectare-evaluationoftheaffordancesoflinearnarrativityine-Scienceonamoregenerallevelwithinthenextyears.Correspondingly,Keryetal.(2018,17:1)in“TheStoryintheNotebook:ExploratoryDataScienceUsingaLiterateProgrammingTool”quotesthe
Publishing-Com Bubble 205
computerscientistKnuthwhooncecalledfor“consideringprogramstobeworksofliterature.”
Theongoingrejectionofgreatpartsofscholarlystakeholders,connectedwiththescholarlydomain,ofwhichthecomplaintsintheintroductiongiveevidenceaswell,furthermore,demandedfindingnewwaysofengagingwiththesestakeholders.Thepositionthatagentswhodonotwanttoadapttotheallegednecessityofprogress“gotothewall,”asCameronNeylonputit,wasnotmaintainableanylonger—especiallynotforthesakeofadvancingdigitalpublications.
Ifjustgoingbackisneitherdesirablenorpossible,andcontinuingtoproposenewinnovationsnotsustainable,analternativestrategyistolookoutforpossibilitiestobetterincludestakeholders(seealsoHoltermann2017).Thefocusneedstoshifttosocialissues.Significantly,duringtheadventofDPs,Reesemphasizeditsroleasa“socialmanagementfunction.”
Eachoftheconceptsinthischapterreflectsthisturntowardsamoresociallyacceptablenotionofdigitalpublicationsinitsownuniqueway.HybridPublishinggivesthemostprominentexampleinthesensethatitliterallyputsallstakeholders(McPherson)andpublishingenvironments(Hall),eachwithequalrights,atthecenterofallprogressindigitalpub-lishing.DataPapersdeliveramechanismofconceptuallyandpoliticallyaddressingpublishingconcepts,andaresignificantlydifferentintermsoftechnologyaswellasgoals.Thatwaytheyredefinethefragmentedandheterogeneouslandscapeofdigitalpublicationssuchthatitispossibletoperceivealltheseactivitiesaspartofthesameprocess.
Self-ContainedPublicationsdothesamethingthatDPsdoconceptually,butinatechnology-drivenway.Itistruethatduetotheirvasttechnologicalrequirements,SCPscannotbeusedbyeveryone.However,theyallowthedevelopmentofconsistentsolutionsforproblemssuchaslong-termpreservationandaccessacrossverydifferentdigitalpublicationsformats.Hence,theneedtostandardizeformandcontentofdigitalpublicationsascontainersisminimized.Creatorsofsuchpublicationsarelessforcedtothinkabouttechnologicalconsequencesoftheirpublicationmodel.
OpenAIREisaspecialcasebecausetheprojectshiftedintotwodifferentdirections.Ontheonehand,theconceptofSCIsseemstoacceptapub-licationlandscapethatremainsatacertainlevelofheterogeneity,ontheotherhandthescaledapproachofOpenAIREanditsinterventionsrevealsatop-downstandardizationstrategy.Suchminorcontradictions,however,alsoappearedwithinthepublicationconceptsmentionedearlier.Theidea
206 Beyond the Flow
ofSingle-SourcePublishingproposedbyBurkhardt(2015),forinstance,con-tradictsthenotionofcontinuousremediationoutlinedbyGaryHallinthecontextofHPs.Likewise,thereisatensionbetweenself-containednessasasolutiontosemanticheterogeneityandthelaterattempttosemanticallystandardizecontainersinSCPs.
Thischapterdemonstratedthatoverthelastyearsasignificantshifttookplaceindigitalpublishing.Thisshiftsignificantlycomplicatestheanalysisofthedevelopmentofdigitalpublications.Before,developmentwasdrivenbystrongideasthatofferedorientationforpersonalengagementandcommit-ment.Therelativizationofsuchideaspartiallytakesthisorientationaway.Hence,theinconsistenciesobservedinthelastparagrapharenotsur-prising.ThefactthatalmosteveryaspectofdigitalpublicationssincetheACMpublishingplanisnowputintocontextmakes“rewiringpublishing”achallengingtaskthathasjustbegun.
[ 5 ]
Post-Digital …
A Less Random Definition of the DigitalAfterthefirstdecadeofthenewmillennium,fieldslikemedia-studies,culturalstudies,andtheartswereattractedbyanewconcept:post-digitality.Inafirstattempttograspanoverlappingcorebehindthevaryingapplicationsoftheterm,Cramerwrites:
Morepragmatically,theterm“post-digital”canbeusedtodescribeeitheracontemporarydisenchantmentwithdigitalinformationsystemsandmediagadgets,oraperiodinwhichourfascinationwiththesesystemsandgadgetshasbecomehistorical—justlikethedot-comageultimatelybecamehistoricalinthe2013novelsofThomasPynchonandDaveEggers.(Cramer2014)
Thelastchapter’stitlesuggestedthatthedevelopmentofthefieldofdigitalpublishingcanbeobservedinasimilarway.However,itmightnotbeclearimmediatelyinwhichwayoruptowhichextendthisisthecase.Obviously,thefieldofdigitalpublishingcanbydefinitionnotactasdisenchantmentfromdigitalinformationsystems.Thesecondpartofthequoteseemstobeapplicablemoreeasilyhere,however.Ithasbeenarguedthatprojectsdiscussedintheabovechapterrelativizeformerkeyideasofdigitalpub-lishing,eachintheirownway.
Evenwheresuchideasarestillgoingstrong,asthecasewithOpenAIRE,theirstatuschangesfrombeingseenasimperativestoprovidingpointsofreferencetoaspireto,uptotheextentpossiblewithinagivensituation.TheconceptofSCIsasaunifyinglayerofabstractionisusefulonlybecausetheidealsofdigitalpublishingarenotexpectedtobecomemanifest
210 Beyond the Flow
incolloquialscholarlypublishingsoon.Thus,itistheOpenAIREinfra-structure,andonlythat,whichsustainssuchideals.
ThediscoursearoundconceptssuchasROsandLPspresumedthatcorrespondingidealsadheretoaninnerlogicofcomputation,whichinconsequencedrivesatransparenthistoricaldevelopmentofscienceandscholarlypublishing(e-Scienceandopenscience).Incontrast,theexpe-riencesthatledtotheconceptualizationofSCIsgivetestimonyofdoubtsabouttheinherentnecessitybywhichsuchidealswillbeadopted.Bydoingso,OpenAIREtransferstheconceivedlogicsofahistoricalprocessintoinfrastructurethatcreatessocialnecessities.
InthesamewayitwouldbewrongtosaythatDPsarecompletelydetachedfromkeyideasofdigitalpublishing.Nevertheless,ifsuchideasconstitutewhatis“fancy”aboutdigitalpublishing,thenthemostimportantaspectofDPsisthefactthattheyaresignificantlylessdrivenbyfascinationaboutthem,comparedtoearlierpublicationconcepts.SCPs,incontrast,oftendofollowastrongcomputationallogicandarealsopartiallylinkedtothee-Scienceresearchmodel.Still,ithasbeenshownthatthewaytheydosocompletelyrearrangestheconceptualmatrixofdigitalpublications.Theyalsoprovideasolutionwhichisnotonlyvaluableforthisspecificresearchmodelalone.EmulationstrategiescanbeusedtosolveproblemswithTPsinthesamewayaswithcomputationalworkflows.
ThecaseofHPsneedslessexplanation.Asdescribedatthebeginningofthelastchapter,HPsbydefinitionincludeacritiqueofcertainaspectsandclaimsbehinddigitalpublications.Infact,bothterms—HybridPublishingandpost-digitality—arementionedtogetherinLudovico(2015).
Thequotefromthebeginningofthischaptersuggeststhatpost-digitality,asascientificterm,referstoacertainkindofsocialbehaviortowardsdigitaltechnologies.Indeed,thetermitselfdoesnotcomefromthescientificdomain,butfromperformativearts.ItwasfirstusedbyCascone(2000)andAndrews(2002)tooutlinetheagendaforpost-digitalartandmusic.Genuinescientificstudiesonpost-digitalitytookplaceincloselycon-necteddisciplines.Accordingly,Hayward(2013)wroteacontributionaboutpost-digitalcinemainaRoutledgeHandbook.
WhileaccordingtoCramertheearlypost-digitalmovementsseektorejectideasofprogressandperfectionassociatedwithdigitaltechnologies,thesystematicscientificappropriationoftheconceptbeginswiththeremarkthat while this complete:
Post-Digital … 211
…withdrawalmayseematemptingoptionformany,itisfundamentallyanaiveposition,particularlyinanagewheneventheavailabilityofnaturalresourcesdependsonglobalcomputationallogistics,andintelligenceagenciessuchastheNSAinterceptpapermailaswellasdigitalcommunications.(Cramer2014,sec. Revivalof“old”media)
Inthislightthegrowingphenomenaofrejection,disenchantment,ordecreasingfascinationprovokedamoresystematicevaluationofthisphenomenon,aswellastheconceptofpost-digitalityitself.Moreover,itprovokesrethinkingoftheconceptofdigitalityinthefirstplace.
Cramerconductssuchanevaluationaspartofabroaderresearchgroup.Thisgrouppublisheditsfindingsonpost-digitalityinaspecialissueoftheAPRJAonline-journal(Andersen,Cox,andPapadopoulos2014).Herespondstotheleadingquestion:“Whatis‘Post-Digital’?”byseparatelydiscussinghowtheprefix“post”shouldbeunderstoodandwhatisaddressedbydigitality.
AccordingtoCramer,“post”inpost-digitalisnotmeantinthesenseofthe“post-histoire”thatis“theendofhistory”asFrancisFukuyamaputit(Fukuyama2006).Itisnotintendedtomarkaclearlydifferentnewtimeperiodthatmostfundamentallyunderminesallaspectsbywhichformertemporalperiodscouldevenbeidentifiedassuch.Incontrast,theauthorarguesthattheprefixfunctionslikeinpost-feminismorpost-colonialism.Moreprecisely,itfunctionsasamarkerfora“criticallyrevisedcontinu-ation”ofwhatisprefixed.Inthesamewayandwithinamoreproblematiccontext,thetermpost-colonialdoesnotassumetheendofcolonialismbutthetransformationofcolonialistrelationshipsintomoresubtle,morecom-plex,andmorediversevariationsofthisrelationships.
Cramerselectedthesetwoexampleswell,becausetheyindicatetheambiguityof“post”inpost-digitality.Ontheonehand,thereisapositiveconnotationinwhichaprogressiveconceptundergoesarevisionwiththeintenttosustainit.Ontheotherhand,itshowsthenegativelyconnotedindicationthatacertainpowerstructuremaylast,evenifthepoliticalsystemaroundithaschanged.Inbothcases,thegoalisnottoarguethatacertainphenomenonnolongerexists,butthatthisphenomenonhaschangedsomuchthatreflectiononithastofindnewviewpoints:
“Post-digital”describesaperspectiveondigitalinformationtechnologywhichnolongerfocusesontechnicalinnovationorimprovement,butinsteadrejectsthekindoftechno-positivistinnovationnarratives
212 Beyond the Flow
exemplifiedbymediasuchasWiredmagazine,RayKurzweil’sGoogle-sponsored“singularity”movement,andofcourseSiliconValley.(Cramer2014,sec. Post-digital=hybridsof“old”and“new”media)
Itwasarguedatthebeginningofthischapterthatmostrecentpublicationconceptsaresomewhataimedatsuchadevelopmentinanunconsciousway,fullofinconsistenciesasaconsequenceofthetransitorymomentinwhichtheyemerged.However,atthispointananalysisthatturnstheobservationofapost-digitalmomentintoatheoreticalfoundationfordigitalpublicationsislacking.Suchafoundationmighthelptodevelopamorestrategicideaofpost-digitalpublications.AgoodstartingpointforthistaskisagainCramer’sdiscussionoftheterm“digital”in“post-digital.”
Thisdiscussionconsistsofnothingmorethanaclarificationofwhatpeopleactuallytalkaboutwhentheytalkaboutdigitality.Thisclarificationshowsthatthedistinctionbetweendigitalandanalogueisfarlessclearthanisoftenassumed.Forinstance,Cramergivestheexampleofana-loguecomputersthatfunctionwithwaterandmeasuringcupstocomputekeymathematicaloperations.Incontrast,a“digital”computerworksonthebasisofanalogueprocesses,morepreciselyvoltage-ranges,thatareartificiallydividedintoonesandzeros.Thescreenfunctionsthroughpixelsthatareclearlyseparatedfromeachother,butthepixelsthemselvesworkwithinrangesoflightintensity.Cramerthereforecallsthecomputerscreena“hybriddigital-analogue.”
Themeaningofdigitalandanalogueunderlyingthislineofargumentstresses that:
“Digital”simplymeansthatsomethingisdividedintodiscrete,count-ableunit—countableusingwhateversystemonechooses,whetherzeroesandones,decimalnumbers,tallymarksonascrapofpaper,orthefingers(digits)ofone’shand—whichiswheretheword“digital”comesfrominthefirstplace;inFrench,forexample,thewordis“numérique.”Consequently,theRomanalphabetisadigitalsystem;(Cramer2014,sec. Digression:whatisdigital,whatisanalog?)
Analogue,incontrast,referstosomethingthathasnotbeenmadeorrendereddiscreteandwhichtherefore:
…consistsofoneormoresignalswhichvaryonacontinuousscale,suchasasoundwave,alightwave,amagneticfield(forexampleonanaudiotape,butalsoonacomputerharddisk),....(Cramer2014,sec. Analog≠undivided;analognon-computational)
Post-Digital … 213
Inthisrespect,thedistinctionbetweendigitalandanalogueisneitheraresult of the invention of the Turing Machine(seebelow),noraredigitaltechnologiestodaypurelydigitalmachinery.ThisargumenthasalreadybeendiscussedinamorephilosophicalcontextbyBuckley(2011).1However,itisthefuzzyapplicationofsuchtermsthatstimulatesamongotherthingstheaforementioned“techno-positivistinnovationnarratives,”andthathasalsobeenfoundbehindavarietyofdigitalpublicationconcepts.Aswillbecomeclearlateron,thiscritiquecanbeappliedtobothe-SciencerelatedpublicationconceptsaswellastoconceptssuchasTPs,HPs,andUBs.Thereasonwhythisisthecaseisbetterunderstoodwhenlookingatthecon-sequencesofsuchterminologicalclarification.Cramercontinues:
Consequently,thereisnosuchthingasdigitalmedia,onlydigitalordigitizedinformation:chopped-upnumbers,letters,symbolsandanyotherabstractedunits,asopposedtocontinuous,wave-likesignalssuchasphysicalsoundsandvisiblelight.Most“digitalmedia”devicesareinfactanalog-to-digital-to-analogconverters.(Cramer2014,sec. Technically,thereisnosuchthingas“digitalmedia”or“digitalaesthetics”)
Thus,ifdigitaltechnologiesdonotjustquantifybutconvertbetweendifferentmodesofrepresentation,andarealsoconflationsofdigitalandanaloguecomponentsthemselves,thenitbecomeshighlyproblematictodemand“truedigitalpublications.”Theonlytruethingaboutdigitalpub-licationsinthispointofviewisatremendouspotentialtoturndifferenttypesandformsofresearchinputintomultipleoutputformats,undefinedinnumber.Infact,thisisexactlywhatthelastchaptershaveshown,awidevarietyofpublicationconceptsoftenreferredtowithinthefieldasheterogeneous.
Suchconceptsappearedsoverydifferentnotjustbecausedifferentopinionsexistaboutwhattheyshouldlooklikeandwhattheimpactofdigitaltechnologies2is.Theyappearedsodifferentbecausethesetechnologies,byvirtueoftheircapabilitiestoconvert,providesignificant
1 BuckleyshowsverywellthatthedistinctionisattheheartofaphilosophicalquestiongoingbacktothethirdaporiaofZenonofMeleaaboutthepossibilityofperceivingmovement.
2 Inthelightoftheargumentsabove,itwouldbemoreappropriatetouseanothertermsuchascomputationaltechnologies.Theterm“digitaltechnologies”,however,has become part of colloquial language when referring to technological innovation thattookplaceinthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury.Itwillthereforebeusedinthemissingpartofthepresentinquiryaswell.Thisseemslessproblematictogetherwiththeclarificationsinthelastfewparagraphs.
214 Beyond the Flow
supporttogivingtechnologicalshapetotheseopinions.Thisobservationmarksaclearcontrasttoargumentsine-Scienceoropenscience,arguingthatdigitaltechnologieshaveaclearlydefinedandpredictableimpactonscientificmethodology,aswellasontheformofscholarlypublications.Thispointwillbedevelopedingreaterdetailinthenextsections.
Furthermore,itcouldbearguedthatideasaboutthetruedigitalformatorthetruedigitalmethodfurtherstimulatetheproliferationofpublicationformats.Itdefinitelymotivatesfocusingonone’sownformatandspendingresourcesonitsdevelopment,insteadofrelatingformatstoeachotherandbuildingadigitalpublishingenvironment.
However,itisimportanttoemphasizeagainthattheargumentisnotthatwhatiscalleddigitaltechnologiesdoesnothaveasignificantimpactonscienceandpublishing.Thewholediscussionisnotaboutthelevelofimpactatall.Thecritiqueofthe“techno-positivisticinnovationnarrative”concernstheconfusionbetweensuchinnovationandspecifictypesofconversion.Itispartandparcelofthisconfusiontofurthermorethinkthatthesuccessofdigitaltechnologiesincludestheiralwaysbeingappropriateanditbeingefficienttoalwaysmediateeverythingbythem.Thus,eventhenotionof“digital”publicationssomehowdistortsthewholepicture.Itfollows that:
“Post-digital”referstoastateinwhichthedisruptionbroughtuponbydigitalinformationtechnologyhasalreadyoccurred.(Cramer2014,sec. Post-digital=anti-“newmedia”)
Thequestionofnewversusoldformatsturnsintoaquestionofthebestfitwithindifferentpublicationscenarios.Accordingly,therarecasesofresearchinpost-digitalitywhichdrawattentiononthetopicofpublishinghighlightstrengthandweaknessesofpublishingformats,regardlessoftheirrelationshiptodigitaltechnologies.Thefactthatsuchchoiceshavetobemadeistheveryoutcomeofthesuccessofdigitaltechnologies,andwouldbeimpossiblewithoutthem.
Inthepresentwork,contributionsintheareaofHPshaveweighedinmostsignificantlyinthisrespect.EspeciallyGaryHall,JoannaZylinska,andJannekeAdemasupportedtheideaofpublishinginformatsthatconvenewiththespecificneedsofpeculiarpublishingsituations,insteadofhuntingtheonenewformat.ThecontingentlistofpublicationformatsgatheredbyWorthingtonandFurter(2014)intheso-calledpublicationtaxonomyexplicitlyreferencesthetermpost-digitality.Infact,thetaxonomyispresentedasareactiontothe“parallelusageofdifferentmedia-types”and
Post-Digital … 215
the“proliferationoftools”forproduction,inconsequenceofthe“post-digitalcondition”(WorthingtonandFurter2014).
Whilesupportingtheideaofequalrightsfordifferentapproaches,thequotesbyWorthingtondonotcompletelyopenupaviewofthecon-sequencesoftheaforementionedlineofargumentinallitsdimensions.FollowingCramer’sclarificationofthedigitalandtheanalogue,itcannotjustbetheparalleluseofdifferentmedia-typeswhichdistinguishespost-digitalpublishing,butalsodifferentformattingsofonemedia-typeprovokedbyothermedia-types3.
ThispointwasalsothecoreofPettiferetal.(2011)argumentinfavorofthePDF.Moreprecisely,thefactthatthePDFisaformatthatispartiallydesignedbyapplyingprinciplesofpaperarticlesandmonographsisaweakargumentagainstitfromapost-digitalpointofview.ThePhotomediationsprojectisanotherillustratingexampleofthemoresubtledimensionofpost-digitalityinpublishing,althoughtheonlineversionofPhotomediationsincludesmanycomponentsthatexistbecauseofdigitaltechnologies.Italsoemphasizestheconceptofbindingwhich,asHallhasstressed,belongstothemonographworldandisbynomeansnecessaryfortheonlineversion.Inreverse,theonlineversioncontrolstheproductioncycleandcontentgenerationoftheprintedversionsofPhotomediations.
Suchexamplesillustratewellhowtheseintersectionsandinter-dependencies4 become invisible if one analyses publishing in the light of acommonunderstandingofthedigital.Moreprecisely,suchacarelessdefinitionofthedigitalonlymakessenseaslongasconvincingvisionsfordigitalpublicationsexist,visionswhichmakeitpossibletotrivializetheimpactofsuchinterdependencies.Thepreviouschaptershowedthatsuchvisionshavelostplausibilityeveninthefieldofdigitalpublicationsitself.Inconsequence,theimposedseparationbetweenbothworlds—thedigitalandtheanalogue—becomesproblematicandevenhindering.Inamoregeneralperspective,Berrythereforeproposes:
3 Thetermmedia-typeneedsaclarificationhere.InthecontextofthetaxonomyinwhichWorthingtonmakesthequote,itrefersmostlytowhathasbeencalledpub-licationconceptinthestudyathand.Nonetheless,thetermlacksprecisedefinitionwithinthetaxonomy.Whatismeantinthissentenceisthefactthatnewformatsalsopickuppropertiesofexistingformatsorredefinetheirproperties.
4 Forfurtherexplanationsandexamplesofthesephenomenainthecontextofpub-lishinginabroaderperspectiverefertoLudovico(2013)andLudovico(2015).
216 Beyond the Flow
Thus,thepost-digitalisrepresentedbyandindicativeofamomentwhenthecomputationalhasbecomehegemonic.…Wemightnolongertalkaboutdigitalversusanalogue,butinsteadmodulationsofthedigitalordifferentintensitiesofthecomputational.Weshouldthereforecriticallyanalyzethewayinwhichcadencesofthecomputationalaremadeandmaterialized.(Berry2013)
Thecritiqueofthediscourseondigitaltechnologycompliedwiththreelogicalsteps.First,itwasclearlydefinedwhatshouldbeconsidereddigitalandwhatanalogue.Second,itwasillustratedthatthisdistinctionassuchisnotalteredbydigitaltechnologies.Moregenerallyitdoesnotequatetothedistinctionbetweendigitaltechnologiesandothertechnologies.Finally,itwasdeducedthatthismeansthatthereisnoevenmoredigitalworldtocome,butthatdigitaltechnologieshavealreadyhappened,andinnovationtakesplaceelsewhere.
ThequotebyDavidBerry,however,mixesuptwothings,which,ashasbeenshownbefore,donotcategoricallybelongtogetherinthefirstplace:digitalityandcomputation.Obviously,theyappeartogetherinthisquotebecausetheequationbetweendigitalityandcomputationispartofthediscourseondigitaltechnologies.Therearerareenvironmentsinwhichthisfactiseasiertoobservethaninthefieldofdigitalscholarlypub-lications.Everything,frommakingpublicationsmoremachine-readable,tobreakingdownthescopeofpublicationtodata,uptothepublicationofalgorithmsincomputationworkflows,isaprocessofadaptingpublicationstoasupposedcomputationalparadigm.Allthesemodificationswereadditionallyframedindistinctideologicalcontexts.Fromtheendoftheoryuptoopenscience,itisarguedthatthewayknowledgeisproduced,andfunctionswillsignificantlychangeduetocomputation.Infact,inakindofcircularreasoningitwasestimatedthatcomputationwillbethedominantparadigmandarguedthatbecauseofthis,publicationsshouldresemblecomputationalproperties.
Topological, Typological and Mathematical Knowledge
Inthecasesinwhichdigitalpublicationsexplicitlyrefertocomputation,theyinfactmeanmathematicalevaluation.Itisaquestionoutsidethescopeofthecurrentresearchifthisequationbetweencomputationandmathematicsisactuallyvalid.Itishoweverworthconsideringinthiscontextthatbothapurelymathematicaldescription—theλ-calculus by
Post-Digital … 217
AlonzoChurch—aswellasamathematicalandtechnologicaldescription—theTuringMachinebyAlanTuring—marktheperceivedbeginningofwhatiscalleddigitaltechnologiestoday.Butevenifcomputationweretobasicallymeanoperationalizingmathematicsitself,andtheequationweretoturnouttobevalid,itispossibletochallengetheconsequencesdrawnontopofthisequation.Sinceindigitalpublications,thephenomenonofcomputationisusedtomakeclaimsabouthowtruthandevidenceisbestrepresentedanddiscovered,itseemsareasonablenextsteptotryandclarifywhichtypeofknowledgemathematicsengenders.
Amongmanyotherresearchers,JayLemkehascarriedoutthistaskbycomparingitinasophisticatedwaytoothertypesofknowledge.Whatthismeanswillbecomeclearerinthenextparagraphs.Hiscontribution“MathematicsintheMiddle”(Lemke2003)fitswellintothecurrentcontextbecauseheactivelylinkshisevaluationstodiscussionsofthedifferencebetweendigitalandanalogue.Lemkeelaborateshisanswertothequestionofwhichtypeofknowledgeisproducedbymathematicsfromaso-calledsocial semioticpointofview.SocialsemioticsisasubfieldoflinguisticsintroducedbyMichaelHallidayintheseventies(1978;1985).InordertounderstandLemke’sanalysisofmathematics,itisimportanttounderstandsomebasicideasofsocialsemiotics.
Halliday’sapproachtolanguagecompletelyrejectstheideaofspeakingasanapplicationoflanguageasithadbeenintroducedbythefoundingfatheroflinguistics,FerdinanddeSaussure(Saussure1959).Saussureconsid-eredacategoricaldifferencebetweentheuseoflanguagebypeopleinaspecificsituation(parole)andthelanguagesystemofaculturethispersonbelongsto(langue).Inhisviewtherelationbetweenthelanguageofthespeakerandtheactofspeakingisalwaysoneofapplication.Thesystemoflanguageexistsbeforehand.Furthermore,Saussureassumestheexistenceofalayerofrules—langage—whichrestrictsandenablesthecreationofconcretelanguagessuchasEnglishorGerman.
ForSaussure,thecoreoflanguageislangage,atimelessabstractformalsystemthatconditionsthepossibilitiesofconcretelanguages.Incon-trast,Hallidayprovidesapragmaticaldefinitionoflanguage,intendedtoworkcompletelyfromthebottomup(O’HalloranandLimFei2014,chap.Analysis).Moreprecisely,heclaimsthatwhenpeoplecommunicate,theywanttodothreebasicthings.First,theywanttorefertosomethingorsomestateintheoutsideworld.Languageisaboutsomething.Second,theywanttoengagewiththeouter,yetsocialworld.Peoplewanttotellsomebodysomething.Finally,languageisbuiltupasacompositionof
218 Beyond the Flow
signs,words,orsentences.Theseelementsoflanguagerefertoeachotherinsomeway.Hallidaycallsthesethreefunctionsideational,inter-personal,andtextualfunctions.ThebottomlineofHalliday’sargumentisthateverythingthatiscapableofdevelopingideational,interpersonal,andtextualfunctionscanpotentiallyserveasmeansforcommunication.
Consequently,thereexistsnorealmoflanguageoutsideofitsusage.Languageemergeswithincertainpractices.Thingsbelongtolanguagewhentheyfitthesebasicneedsandnotbecausetheyarerecognizableorpartofaformallygraspedlanguagesystembeingalwaystherebefore-hand.Language—whereobservableasasystem,asacognitivestructure,orinformoftheexperiencethatweunderstandeachother—isalwaysembeddedinconcretesituations,whichatthesametimechangeit(HallidayandMartin1996,122–25;Eggins1994,81–83).
Pushingthislineofargumentforward,vocalsoundsorlettersinanalphabetarealsonotderivedfromanunderlyingsystemoflanguagetowhichtheybothbelong.Theyaresignsreferringtodifferentresourcesforsignmaking—voiceandwriting—whichwerehistoricallyrelatedtoeachother.Onthewhole,signsareneitherpreconditionednorultimatelydefined.Theyarecreatedoutofappropriatematerialthroughthepracticeofpeoplewhowanttocommunicate.Toputitmoreformally,signsareentitiesrenderedintheprocessofsemiosis(Kress2010),orsigning(Kress2013),thetechnicaltermthatdefinesthehistoricalprocessofsignmaking.Signsmaycomeandgo,andaccordinglyitispossibletoreallystudythemintermsof“theirlifewithinsociety”asSaussurehadoriginallyplannedtodo.
Onthebasisofsocialsemiotics,Lemkeisabletoactuallyaskthequestionofwhatkindofknowledgemathematicsprovideandhowmathematicsrelatetothetypeofknowledgethatislanguage.Becauseofsocialsemi-otics,mathematicsdoesnotappearassomethingcompletelydifferentfromlanguage.Itistheoutcomeofthesamehumanprocesstoproducemeaningandtellsomethingthatengenderedlanguage.Socialsemioticssimilarlysuggestscarryingoutsuchacomparisonnotbymeansoflookingatthedifferenttypesofsymbolsandnotationsinmathematicsandinlanguage,butbyanalyzinghowbothdevelopedhistorically,thepurposesoftheirapplication,andwhichfactsareeasilyrepresentableandwhicharenot.
Lemke(2003,sec.2.1)highlightsthatuniquemathematicalsymbolsdevel-opedmuchlaterthanmathematicsitself.TheywereoriginallyderivedfromGreekwords.Alotofmathematicsexistedinrhetoricform,and
Post-Digital … 219
approachestomathematicslikegeometryrefrainfromusingalgebraicsymbols.Itisthereforemisleadingtoputacategorialdifferencebetweenmathematicsandlanguageatthestartingpointofacomparisonofitsrelationship.Instead,Lemkeclaimsthatmathematicshasevolvedhis-toricallyasanextensiontolanguageandoutoflanguageinordertorep-resentthingsthatcouldnotbewellrepresentedinlanguage.Heremarksthatthefirsthistoricalevidenceofwhatisconsideredmathematicsinresearcharelistsofdescriptionstosolvespecificproblems“withnotheory”(sec. 2.1):
Iwanttoarguethatthey(mathematicalmeanings,author’snote)haveevolvedhistoricallytoallowustointegratetwofundamentallydifferentkindsofmeaning-making:meaning-by-kindandmeaning-by-degree.Mathematicalmeaningenablesustomixandtomovesmoothlybackandforthbetweenmeaning-by-kind,inwhichnaturallanguagespecializes,andwhichIwillcallcategorialor“typological”meaning,andmeaning-by-degree,whichismoreeasilypresentedbymeansofmotorgesturesorvisualfigures—themeaningofcon-tinuousvariationor“topological”meaning(connotingthetopologyoftherealnumbers).(Lemke2003,sec.3)
Thedescriptionoftypologicalandtopologicalknowledgeisreminiscentofthedistinctionbetweendigitalandanalogue.AlthoughitisnotLemke’sprimaryintentiontorelatethesetwotopics,hementionstheirsimilarity.Inthecurrentresearch,theirrelationshipcanbedescribedasfollows:whilethetermsdigitalandanaloguetendtoaddressmaterialandtechnologicalaspects,topologicalandtypologicalrefertotwodifferentwaysofperceivingandrepresentingsomething.Ononehand,bitsaremechanismsinacomputerthatcanbeonoroff,andathermometervariescontinuouslyonascale.Ontheotherhand,itispossibletogivedifferentnamestothecoloroftheskyondifferentdays,ortocreateadiagramthatdrawsthesedifferencesonascale.
Itisimportanttodistinguishbetweenthosetwoperspectives,becausethisdistinctionisattheveryheartofdiscussionsabouttheepis-temologicalconsequencesofdigitaltechnologies.Asnodigitaltechnologyisfundamentallydigital,nophenomenonenforcesatopologicalortypologicalrepresentationofitself.Instead,itsrepresentationdependstoagreatextentonthetypeofmeaningpeoplewanttoproduceandthesocialpracticesinwhichitisinvolved.
AccordingtoLemke,mathematics,justlike“motorgesturesorvisualfigures”(above),isbetteratdescribingtopologicalknowledgecompared
220 Beyond the Flow
tolanguage.However,topreventanothersimplification,itisimportanttoremarkthatlanguageandmathematicsdonotexclusivelyrepresenttypologicalandtopologicalmeaning.Bothdomainsprovideexamplesforbothtypesofmeaning.Both,nevertheless,developedtheirparticularstrengthsinoneofthesetwoknowledgedomainsandarethereforebettersuitedtooneortheother.Althoughlanguage,forinstance,iscapableofrepresentingmuchmorethanthefactthatsomethingissomething,itisquitehardtopreciselydescribenuances,suchasincolorortemperature,withwords.
Thequestionnowis,whatdoesmathematicsdodifferentlyfromothertopologicalknowledgerepresentationsystemssuchasgraphs.Thedifferenceisthatmathematicsdescribessuchrelationshipsinacompletelydifferentwaythangraphsandothertopologicalknowledgesystemsdo.Mathematics,moreprecisely,uses“quasi-linguistic”elementswhichdenotediscretethingstorepresentcontinuousphenomenawithoutboundaries(Lemke2003,sec.3).AccordingtoLemke,thiskeystrengthofmathematicsisbestrepresentedinfractionsandfunctions:
Nevertheless,inafractionsuchquantitative-meaningsarerep-resentedquasi-linguisticallybytwonumbers,eachofwhichcanberegardedasadiscretecountingtypeorcategory(theintegersascardinals),andbytheinstructiontoconsidersomerelationbetweenthem(ratio,ormultipleofapart,tobeevaluatedbythealgorithmofdivision).Alloftheseelementsaretypological,butthemeaningswhichfractionsrepresentasratiosaretopological.IfIgiveyouasetoffractions:13/19,11/17,4/6,9/13;youknowthatthereisnosimplewaytotellfromthesetypologicalrepresentationsevenwhattheorderofsizesoftheseratiosis,withoutperformingcalculations.ButifIpresentedthesesameratiosvisually,youwouldhaveamuchbetterideaoftheirrelationships.(Lemke2003,sec.3)
Inthesameway,functionsareanalgebraicandquasi-linguisticwaytodescribecontinuousandsometimesunboundedcovariance“intermsoftypologicaloperationsontypologicalvariables.”Consequently,mostpartsofmathematicsarehybridsinthesensethattheirmeaningistopological,buttheirtacticsandmeansaretypological.ThisiswhatthetitleofLemke’sarticle“MathematicsintheMiddle”isintendedtoaddress.Bydoingso,mathematicsisabletorepresenttopologicalknowledgemorepreciselythanlanguage,butgivesmorecontroloversuchknowledgethanforexamplegraphsdo.
Post-Digital … 221
Asecondquestionnowisifmathematicsanditsdevelopmenthavethepowertofundamentallychangetheroleandrelationshipbetweentypologicalandtopologicalknowledgesystems.Isitabletounderminekeyaspectsof,forinstance,language,sothattheuseoflanguagebecomesarbitraryinthecontextofscientificknowledge?Ortheotherwayaround,doesmathematicshavethepotentialtominimizethevalueoftopologicalrepresentations?Thelasttwosentencesindicatealreadythatthisisnotthecase.Mathematicswillneverbeabletocommunicatetopologicalknowledgeinsuchadirectandclearwayasforinstancegraphsdo.Thisisnotduetomissingdevelopmentsinmathematics,butbecauseitwasdevel-opedtowardsadifferentstrategytorepresent.Itcandescribetopologicalknowledge,buthardlycommunicatetopologicalknowledge.Thisisnotonly the reason why visual communication became such an integral part in computationalresearchtoday—takethejupyternotebookasanexample—itisalsothereasonwhycomplicatedalgorithmsareexplainedandunderstoodbestbydiagrammaticexplanations.5
Lemkearguesfurtherthatevenourtopologicalunderstandingofpartsofmathematicscanbemostconvincinglyunderstoodbytopologicaldimensionsinusingmathematicsthanbyitscategorialcontent.Thefeelingforthemeaningofnumbersaccordinglyisaconsequenceofthetimethatpasseswhilecounting,bythelengthofthelineofnumberswhilewritingdownasequenceofnumbers,orbyanimageoftwelveapplesinabowl.Themorecomplicatedmattersare,andthemoremathematicalexpres-sionsabstractfromtopologicalrepresentations,themoreitsunder-standingreferstotheunderstandingofotherexpressionsofmathematicsitself(seetheexampleoffractions).
Similarly,onlylanguageoffersthenecessarymeanstoevaluatethegapbetweenmathematicsanditsapplicationinaconcretesituationaswellasbetweentheresultofamathematicaloperationsanditsinterpretation.
Afterallofthis,mathematicsderivesitsowndomainofapplicationfromthedistinctionoftopologicalandtypologicalknowledge,adistinctionwhichhistoricallybecameanissuewiththeadventoflanguageanditscodification.Inasmuchassuchcodificationbroadenedthegapbetweenthesetwotypesofknowledge,bettermediationbetweenthembecameamajorchallenge.Mathematics,accordingtoLemke,istheattempttocreatethemeansforthismediation.
5 Illustratingexamplesforthiscanbefoundinthedocumentationofthemachinelearningprograminglibraryscikit-learnhttp://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/clus-tering.htmlorinoneofthecountlessexamplesofalgorithmtutorialsonYouTube.
222 Beyond the Flow
Thediscussionofthisissuewascarriedoutinsuchgreatdetailbecauseoftheextentuptowhichadvocatesofcertainpublicationformatsmakereferencestothemessuchastheendoftheory,thefourthparadigm,bigdata,massivecomputation,andthesufficiencyofstatisticalcorrelation.InthelightofLemke’sresearchonmathematics,itcanbearguedthatmas-sivecomputationonthegroundsofbigdatawillneverbeabletoreplacetextualandnarrativepublications,asarguedbyDeRoureandothers.Thisincapacityresidesinthecategorialdifferencebetweenwhatmathematicsandlanguageweredevelopedfor.Articlesandmonographsarethere-forenotjustsupplementsofcomputationalresearchthathumansneedforeasierunderstanding.Theyoffertheirowntypeofaccesstowhattheydescribe,anaccessthatcreatesitsowntypeofunderstanding,whichmightbeinfluencedbymathematics,butwhichalsoinfluencestheapplicationofmathematics.
Thenotionthatbigdataallowsempiricalanalysisofthewholedomainofaproblem,wherebytheoreticaldescriptionsbecomeobsolete(seeDeRoureandAndersen)cannotchangethefactthatthedefinitionofthewhole—intermsofitsboundariesaswellasofitsparts—remainsatheoreticalissue.Thesameappliestodecisionsabouttheappropriatemathematicalmodelandalgorithmbestdescribingtheproblemdomainaswellastowhataresultingcorrelationdenotes.
Theargumentofthefourthparadigmisslightlymoreinterestinginthecurrentcontext.ItdoesacknowledgethatcomputationdealswiththerelationshipbetweentwotypesofknowledgesuchasthosespecifiedbyLemke.However,asfarascomputationisconcernedwithmathematics,thisrelationshipisnotnewinaparadigmaticway,itwasintroducedbymathematics.
Uptothispointitispossibletosummarizetheextendeddiscussionofapost-digitalperspectiveonscholarlypublishingbyemphasizingthat:
– digitaltechnologiesarenotonlydigital,andanaloguetechnologieshavedigitalaspects;
– computationisnotaprocessbywhicheverythingbecomesdigital.Itisabouttransformationsbetweenanalogueanddigitalaswellasviceversa.Thisbecomesmostobviousinareaslike3Dprinting,nano-technology,robotics,andbio-engineering;
– correspondingly,mathematicsandcomputationarenotreplacementsforlanguageinordertoeliminatetheflawsoftheformer.Theyarestrategiesthatprovidetheuniquepossibilityto
Post-Digital … 223
mediatebetweentwodifferentrepresentationstrategies,eachwithitsownuniqueadvantagesandflaws.
Still,thequestionremainswhycertaininnovationswithinthetechnologicallandscapecreatedsuchadominantandubiquitousdiscourseofdigitaltechnologies.Researchinpost-digitalitydoesnotdenythattheimpactofsuchinnovationsisfundamental.Post-digitalresearch,however,doesnotneedtorespondtothisquestionbecauseitreactstothefactthatthediscourseaboutdigitalityandthetermdigitaltechnologyisalreadyubiquitous6.Bychallengingthepremisesofthisdiscourse,post-digitalityreactstoasocialtruth,whichisthentoneddown,qualified,andputintocontext.Inconsequence,themajorityofpost-digitalresearchfollowstwodifferenttypesofanalysis.Thefirstoneanalysesthesimultaneoususageofobjectsthatareconsidereddigitalandthosethatarenot.Thesecondtypeofanalysisinvestigateshowsuchobjectsinfluenceeachother(seethePhotomediationsexampleabove).
Anotherargumentthatismadebymorecriticalresearchondigitaltechnologiesclaimsthatitistheactofaskingalonewhichkeepsaliveboththediscourseonnewtechnologiesaswellasthedynamicsoftechnologicalinnovation(Treusch-Dieter2001).Accordingly,everyhis-toricalepisodeofinnovationfunctionslikeaself-fulfillingprophecy,whichisliterallystimulatedbyoccultpowers(Andriopoulos2003).However,evenifeveryperiodoftechnologicalinnovationwererootedinquasi-propheticdynamics,interveningwithsuchdynamicswithinaspecificperiodofinnovationwouldrequireknowinghowsuchdynamicsworkinternally.Intheend,itcouldbearguedthatsuchcritiquesarepartofthedynamicsofinnovationindigitaltechnologiesthemselves,evenifclaimingtoquestiontechnologyassuch.Bytryingtoreacttotheimpactofdigitaltechnologiesinawaythataddressestechnologyassuch,theauthorsaredrawnintoesotericargumentsandstylesofwritingwhichrepeatthecharacteristicstheyattributetotheirresearchobjects.
Theargumentcantherebyalsobeturnedupsidedown.Thatmeansitisimportanttostrivetowardsapreciseunderstandingofthestructureofaspecificself-fulfillingprophecyinordertodealwithwhatseemsto
6 Arandomqueryfortheterm“digitalage”inaresearchliteraturesearchenginebringsuptitlesfrom“GovernmentintheDigitalAge”(Gosling1997)to“TheRoleofthePostalandDeliverySectorinaDigitalAge”(CrewandBrennan2014)upto“LearningQueerIdentityintheDigitalAge”(Siebler2016;firstpageofresultsinLIMO14.03.2017http://limo.libis.be/).Theexampleshowshoweachsectorinsocietyisreflectingitselfbasedonanepochalchange,constitutingthischangewithitsreflectionatthesametime.
224 Beyond the Flow
beproblematicfortheauthors,byreferringtoitintermsofprophecyandoccultism.Thecritiqueor,inthecontextofpost-digitalitylessharsh:qualification,hastocomefromwithin.Thus,boththemeta-technologicalreflectionsondigitaltechnologies,aswellasthepost-digitalreflections,cannotexplaintheemergenceofaproblematicbutubiquitousdiscourseondigitaltechnologiesordigitalpublications.Theyonlyprovidedifferentmeansofhighlightingitsproblematicfacets.
Thepresentstudyclaimsthatonlyfurtherattemptstodefinedigitaltechnologiesareabletotonedowntheproblematicconsequencesofthediscourseondigitaltechnologies,despitethefactthatthesenewdef-initionswillagainbelacking.Itispreciselybecausediscoursematterswhyneitherthe“deconstruction”ofdiscoursenorignoringitsuffice.Asetofconflictingdefinitionsthattakethemselvesseriouslyisthereforepreferabletoongoingattemptstoshowthatitishardlypossibletospeakofdigitaltechnologies.Similarly,computationalubiquitydoesnotmeanthatthesurfaceofpublicationsisstructuredbycomputationalprinciples,asitisoftensuggested(seethebeginningofthissection).Theremainingsectionsinthischapterwillthereforetrytodevelopadefinitionofdigitaltechnologiesthatisderivedfromtheissuesfoundinthediscussionofdigitalpublications.Itisadefinitiondrivenbytheattempttoexplainsuchissuesonthegroundsofthelineofthoughtthatwasrolledoutbythefieldofdigitalpublicationsitself.
Representation Strategies, Intermediality and Their Relationships
Ithasbeenarguedthatoneofthemainmotorsofthedynamicsofdigitalpublishingistheclaimthatdigitaltechnologieschangeallfieldsofresearchinanepistemologicalway.TheabovedigressiononLemkedemonstratedthatthewaythischangeisperceivedinmanyareascanbeeasilychallenged.Therefore,thequestionofwhatdigitaltechnologiesareintermsofdigitalpublicationsmustnowbesubstantiatedinawaythatexplainswhycertaintechnologicalinnovationshaveproducedtheimpression of a change in the epistemological environment of scholarly publications.Inthesamewayasthisexplanationrejectstheclaimsofcertainauthors,italsohastoleaveopenthepossibilityofepistemologicalchanges.
Post-Digital … 225
In“Textualität,VisualitätundEpisteme”7SybilleKrämer(2003)closelyanalyseshowtheformalizationofthemathematicalsystemofsigns,andthecreationofnewmathematicalobjects,makesuseofanddependsonsensoryaspectsofwritingandtext.Thisanalysisiscarriedoutagainstacertainhistoricalnotionthat,accordingtoKrämer,perceiveswritingprimarilyasacognitiveactivity.Textinthisrespectbelongstotheinnereyeofthemind,whichisgenuinelyblindintermsofthethingstheeyesofthebodymaysee.Itabstractsfromwhatthephysicaleyemightsee.
Withinmathematics,zeroisgivenasaparadigmaticexample,insofar,asitisanentitywithequalrightstoothernumbers,butonewhichcannotbeexperiencedinthesamewayastheothers.Similarclaimsarepossibleaboutinfinity.Krämerarguesthattheinfinitesimal calculusintroducedbyLeibnizwassuccessful,particularlybecauseitseparateditsmathematicalefficiencyfromthemetaphysicalnatureofthequestionofwhatinfinityisandhowourexperiencerelatesustoinfinity.
DerWitzderKalkülisierungistesalso,dasOperierenmitZahlenzurückzuführenaufeinOperierenmitZeichenfürdieZahlen,undzwarnachRegeln,dienichtmehraufdiemathematischenReferenzobjektederZeichen,sondernnurnochaufderensyntaktischeGestaltBezugnehmen.8(Krämer2003,18)
Inthisrespectthemathematicalsignforinfinityandthefactthatitispossibletooperatewithitinagrammatic-mathematicalsignsystemcon-structsinfinityasaconcreteentity.Boththere-introductionofzerointomathematicsinEurope,aswellasthedefinitionofinfinitywithinnumericoperationswenttogetherwiththeformalizationofmathematicalsignsandtheirgrammaticalrelationships.
Ifthisprocessconsistsofrationalizingmathematicalobjectsandstreamliningmathematicalcalculations,thequestionariseshowexactlysensoryaspectsplayakeyroleinit.Krämeremphasizesthatthisprocessis part of a general cultural practice of calculation9.Theculturalpracticeofcalculationinthecontextofmathematicsisapracticewhichseekstobetter
7 “Textuality,Visuality,andEpisteme”(author’stranslation)8 ItisthekeyaspectofCalculustoequateoperationswithnumberstooperations
withsignsfornumbers,whiletherulesforsuchoperationsnowmerelyreferencethesyntacticcontentofsuchsignsandnolongerwhatthesesignsreferto(author’stranslation).
9 InGermanlanguage,thephilosophicalmeaningofthetermcalculationisusedmoreoftenthanthemathematicalone,forwhichthereisanotherterm,“rechnen”.Inthiscontext,themeaningofcalculationreferstoawayofactingstrictlypurposefullyandfunctionally.Hencethedistinctionbetweencalculatingasdealingwithnumbers
226 Beyond the Flow
controltheprocessofmathematicalcalculation,i.e. tomakeiteasier,morereliable,andmoreefficient.Krämershowsthatinthefifteenthcenturythismeantturningthe“implicitknowledgeandingeniousknowinghow”ofsolvinganequationinto“Zeichenmanipulationsregelnbzw.Mustertrans-formationsregeln”10(Krämer2003,18).Thecalculateduseoftextualityasaresourceformathematicsengenderedatechnicalapplicationoflanguagewhichallowsdoingcomplicatedthingsinarelativelysimpleway.Inthisrespect,Krämercallstexta“symbolicmachine”(19)—symbolicbecauseitcreatesitsownmathematicalsignstotaketheplaceofsomethingtobecounted,andmechanicbecauseitrationalizestheprocessofcounting.
Atthepointofwriting,thetwomainsensoryaspectsbehindtheformal-izationofmathematicsintotextonlyneedtobemadeexplicitbecausetheywereimplicitalreadywithinitsdescription.Whilewritingisconceivedofasacognitiveprocess,andtextasanabstractionfromwhatisdescribed,theytakeplaceonatwo-dimensionalplane—mostlyasheetofpaper—thatconnectswithabody,witheyes,andthehandthatholdsthepen.Thegoalsofcalculatingactivitybehindtheformalizationofmathematicallanguagecanonlybeachievedbecausesuchmanipulationandtransformationruleshavelayoutandspatialrelationshipsatitsdisposal.Theintegrityofpurelytheoreticalobjectslikeinfinityorzerodependsfundamentallyonitsvisualpersistenceacrosssituations.Theirmeaningistheeffectoftheoperationsandtherulesoftheseoperationsinwhichtheyareoperationalized.However,theserules,asmentionedabove,arealsospatialrelationships,inwhichawritinghandhastomovebackandforthinarule-basedmanner.Bybringingabstractphenomenatotheeye,andoperationalrulestothehand,theculturalpracticeofcalculationalsotransformsmathematicsintoanewtypeofessentialbodyexperience.
TatsächlichistdieWissenschaftsentwicklungnichtumstandslosdemSchemaeinerAustreibungderSinnlichkeitihrerGegenständesub-sumierbar.VielmehrverdanktsichdieDynamikderWissenschaftgeradedemUmstand,daskognitivUnsichtbare,alsoabstrakteGegenständeundtheoretischeEntitäten,demRegisterderSicht-barkeitzuzuführen,sieinsinnlichwahrnehmbarenZeichenunsererAnschauungvorstelligzumachen.11(Krämer2003,25–26)
anddoingsomethinginacalculatedwayisstrongerthanintheEnglishlanguage.Calculatingwithnumbersisanexampleofcalculatorypractice.
10 “rulestomanipulatesignsandtotransformmodels.”(author’stranslation)11 “Infact,itisnotpossibletosimplysubsumethedevelopmentofscienceunderthe
themeofanexpulsionofsensualityfromitsobjectsofinterest.Thedynamicsofinnovationinsciencemorelikelyarearesultofthestrategytotransferabstract
Post-Digital … 227
Hence,thedescribedprocesshastwofacets.Ontheonehand,itisaprocessofrationalizationandabstraction,inwhichcertainengagementswiththeworldaretransferredtoasystemofself-referentialruleswhichcut most of the experiential relationship of this engagement with the world.Ontheotherhand,thisprocessrequiresexperienceableresourcesandmakesuseoftheminanewway.Itintroducesanewsensoryandexperientialrealmthattakestheplaceoftheformer.Boththestrategiestorefertotheworldaswellasthewayitreferstousshift.
Theseexaminationsprovideenoughinsightstodevelopahypothesisfortheepistemologicalimpactofdigitaltechnologies.Inmodernmathematics—signsystemsasdescribedbyKrämer—anepistemologicalimpactoccursontwolevels.Themostobviousimpactiscausedbyitsabilitytogiveoperationalrealitytophenomenalikeinfinity,ofwhichrealityisneitherphilosophicallynorempiricallycertain.Itisatrutheffectthatexistonlyduetothewaymodernmathematicalsignsystemsworktechnically.
Thesecondepistemologicalimpactunderliesthefirstone,butismoresubtle.Krämer’scritiqueofperceivingtheformalizationofthemath-ematicalsignsystemonlyasaprocessofrationalizationmadeonethingclear:differentstrategiesofrepresentingphenomenaintheworld(iconicanddiscursiveamongothers)arenotbecomingmoreorlessimportantintechnologicallymediateddevelopments.Instead,theyjustchangeplacewithinourculturalandepistemologicalenvironment.Sincesuchstrategiesprovidethemeansofhowtorefertoorinteractwiththeworld,aswellashowtheworldrefersback,changeswithinthisepistemologicalenviron-mentfundamentallyaffectpeople’sperceptionandexperienceofit.Con-sequently,Krämerasks:
Könnteessein,daßnahezualleepistemischenEffekte,diemitMedien-innovationenverbundensind,sichbeigenaueremHinsehenalseinSurpluserweisen,dasentsteht,wenneinMediumeinemanderenMediuminkorporiert,ineinanderesMediumübertragenwird?Undkönnteesdesweiterensein,daßMedienimmerschongenuinhybrideBildungensind,sodaßalsodieIdeedesEinzelmediumssich“nur”einemAktdertheoretischenStilisierungverdankt?EineStilisierung,dievielleichtgenauindemAugenblickmöglichwird,woeinMediumzum
thingsandtheoreticalentitiesintothedomainofthevisual,i.e. intosignsthatcanbeperceivedvisually”(author’stranslation).
228 Beyond the Flow
InhalteinesanderenMediumswirdunddadurchüberhaupterstalseinebestimmteFormzutagetritt?12(Krämer2003,26)
AsexplainedbyKrämerabove,innovationinwritingtookplacebyvirtueofareconfigurationofthevisualoriconicdimensionofwritingforthesakeofcountingandcalculation.Thishoweveralsomeansthattheroleofusingvisualcapacitiesinthecontextofmathematicsshifts.KrämerdemonstratesthesetypesofshiftsbyhighlightinghowtheRomanabacuscompensatedtheimpossibilityoftheRomansignsystemtoserveasaninstrumentforcounting(18).Hence,peoplehadtoliterallylooksomewhereelse—intotheworldortoatool—andvisualstrategiesinmathematicsfunctioneddifferently.ThesameshiftunderliesKrämer’sobservationthatscientificprogresssubstantiallyreliesonmakingabstractphenomenavisuallyexperienceable,insteadofjustabstractingfromwhatisexpe-riencedvisually.
TheimportantinsightforthesakeofthecurrentinquiryisKrämer’sobservationthatthereisnolinearhistoryofprogressinwhichonemediumsupersedestheother.Instead,therearerelocationsoftheusagesandpositionsofcertainmodesofexperiencingtheworld,i.e. capacitiestorepresenttheworld.Thisisimportanttokeepinmindwhileevaluatingphrasessuchas“show,don’ttell”andcritiquesofthetextualorganizationoftruth,commoninthefieldofdigitalpublications.ThehypothesisofKrämermay,however,explainverywellhowmediainnovationssuchasthoseofdigitaltechnologiesdisintegrateacertainepistemicenviron-ment,togetherwiththeirknownandtrustedpracticesofcreatingandverifyingknowledge.Itisthennotsurprisingthat,asshownbythepreviouschapters,digitalpublicationslooklikeapotpourriofexperimentsforthesakeoffindingconvincingmodesofcreatingandverifyingknowledgeinthe“digitalage.”
Krämer’sfinalquotealsocontainsahypothesisthatcanexplainwhy,inthefieldofdigitalpublications,claimsaboutdifferentmediatendtooverstresscertainchangessuchasthoseoutlinedinthesectionsonpost-digitalityandmathematicalknowledge.Moreprecisely,itispossibletotakethethemeof“epistemologicaleffects”andputitintothecontext
12 “Coulditbe,thatalltheepistemologicaleffectswhichemergeoutofchangesinmediaareinfactasurplusoftheincorporationofonemediumintoanother?Coulditfurthermorebethecasethatmediaarealwaysalreadyhybridconstructions,suchthattheideaofuniquemediaisjusttheconsequenceoftheoreticalcon-ventionalization,aconventionalizationthatseemspossibleattheverymomentinwhichonemediumbecomesthetopicofanothermedium,sothatithasthepos-sibilitytoappearasaspecificformofmediainthefirstplace?”(author’stranslation)
Post-Digital … 229
ofthediscourseondigitalpublicationstoday.Epistemologicaleffectsarecreatedwherecertaincapacitiesofrepresentingtheworldengagewitheachotherinnewways,duetoinnovationinmediaandmedia-technology.Intheauthor’sillustration,thisengagementistheiconicrestructuringofamediumthathasbeenperceivedasamostlydiscursivemediumbefore.Inthefieldofdigitalpublications,thesameprocessesareindicatedbyphraseslikethefourthparadigmortheendoftheory.Surplusisnotjusttheprocessofreorientationwithinanewepistemicenvironment(seeaboveparagraph).Itistheactofconstructingandre-definingtwomedia—theoldandthenew—inordertogainorientationwithinanepis-temologicallyfragilesituation.Itisanidealization,becauseforthepurposeoforientationitstressesfeaturesthathelptoseparatemediaandmedi-alitieswithinthissituation.
InKrämer’sanalysis,thisidealizationtakestheformofadisregardingattitudetowardsthevisualinformerevaluationsofthehistoryofscience.Hence,theiconicconditionwithinthishistoryremainedhiddenforacertainperiod.However,therearealsoexamplesofapositiveidealization.OneexampleisgivenbyBernardStieglerinhisrevisionofPlaton’scritiqueofwrittentextcomparedtospokenlanguage(Stiegler2006).AccordingtoStiegler,Platoconceivedofwrittentextasanartificialmemorywhichbuildsonatechnicalrelationshipwithlanguage.SpokenlanguageforPlatoisincontrastnotbasedonatechnicalrelationshipwithlanguage,whichprivilegesitforthetaskofphilosophicaltruthseeking.
BymakingsignificantuseoftheworkofDerrida(1982)ontherelationshipbetweenspokenlanguageandwrittentext,Stieglerillustrates,however,thatPlato’sdescriptionoflanguagefundamentallypresupposesatechnicaluseofvocality,whichisthesameheattributestotext.Thus,thedis-tinctionbetweenwrittentextandspokenlanguageappearsfuzzierthanconsideredbyPlato.UsingthewordsofKrämer,theemergingtext-basedcultureinAthenscreateda“surplus”whenreflectingonspokenandwrittenlanguage.
Theideaofsurplusmakesitpossibletoqualifysomeoftheclaimsaboutepistemologicalchangesprovokedbydigitaltechnology,likethoseabouttheendoftheoryorthetransgressionofbinariesthatbelongtothe“restrictive”cultureoftextuality.Atthesametime,itgivesevidenceofthefactthatchangesinrepresentationalstrategiestakeplaceintimesofmediainnovation,andthatthesechangesrequirere-orientationandintervention,aswillbediscussednow.
230 Beyond the Flow
Representing in Times of Calculated CalculationThe Computer as a Calculatedly Calculating Machine
Krämer(2003,21)describesinnovationintheusageoftextuality,leadingtowhatshecalls,“operationalscript.”ItremainsanopenquestionhowKrämer’slineofargumentmakesitpossibletoidentifysomethingspecificabouttheintermedialsituationofdigitaltechnologiestoday.Fromherpointofview,theusageofcalculation(seeabove)isresponsibleforthedevelopmentofoperationalscript.Arevisionofthisuseofcalculationthusmightalsohelptogaininsightsabouttoday’sintermedialsituation.
Ashasbeendescribedabove,theauthordefinescalculationasagoal-oriented,functional,andefficientprocess.Thisdefinitionissubstantiatedbytheexplanationthatsuchacalculatedprocessisoneinwhichknowing howandknowing thatdiverge:
DasWissen,wiewireineRechenoperationdurchzuführenhaben,trenntsichvomWissenwomitwirdabeieigentlichumgehenundwarumdieseOperationtatsächlichaufgeht.13(Krämer2003,21)
ThisdivergencealsounderliesKrämer’scomparisonbetweentheRomanandthemodernmathematicalsignsystem.Whiletheformerfocusedontherepresentationofmathematicalentities,thelatterfocusonfacilitatingcounting.Thefirstdepictsentities,theseconddepictsitsrelationshiptoothermathematicalsymbols.ForKrämer,suchdivergenceiscrucialforanykindofcalculativepracticerequiringatechnologicalrelationshiptoitsobjectofapplication.Thisagainclarifiestheapplicationoftheterm“machine”inherdefinitionofmathematicaltextasasymbolicmachine(above;Krämer2003,19).
Theterm“machine”indicatestherelationshiptothetopicofcomputation,sincemoderncomputationisfundamentallyaresultofcalculatorypractice.TheTuringMachine,thetheoreticalofmoderncomputation,wasaresponsetotheso-calledHilbert Program.Itaimedatprovingorrejectingthe“Entscheidbarkeit”(decidability)ofacalculus.Insimpleterms,thismeansthatittriestoprovethatanymathematicalstatement,builduponlogicalaxioms,willconcludeinafinitenumberofsteps.Inthecontextofcomputers this means the question of whether a computer will halt so that
13 “Theknowledgeabouttheprocedureandstepswhichwehavetotakeinordertocarryoutamathematicalcalculationisisolatedfromknowledgeabouttheissuewearedealingwith,aswellaswhythisprocedureactuallyleadstoacorrectresult.”(author’stranslation)
Post-Digital … 231
incomputerscienceterminologytheTuringMachineisconcernedwiththeHalting Problem.
AsinthescenariodescribedbyKrämer,theresultofthiscalculatorypracticedecouplesatypeofknowing-howfromitscorrespondingknowing-that.Knowinghowtomanipulateorprogramacomputerandwaitforitto“halt”doesnotrequireknowledgeaboutwhatmathematicaldecidabilitymeans.Furthermore,itispossibletoarguethatusingtheterminologyofKrämer,rulestomanipulatesignsturnintorulestomanipulateamachine.Intheearlyyearsofcomputationthiswasquiteamechanicalmatter.
However,thereisasignificantdifferencebetweentheoutcomeofcalculatorypracticeinthecreationoflistsforproblemsolving(Lemke),oroperationalwriting(Krämer),andtheTuringMachine.WiththeTuringMachine,forthefirsttimecalculatorypracticeisfullyconcernedwithitselfandthusself-reflective.Listsfacilitatethereproductionofstepsinordertosolveproblems.Operationalwritingfacilitatescountinginordertoenableitscolloquiallyubiquitousapplication.OnlyintheTuringMachinedoescalculatorypracticeevaluateitself.Itisnotjustamachine,butamachineinsymbolizingmachinery.Likewise,whatisoperationalizedwiththeTuringMachineisoperationalityitself.Operationalizedoperationality,finally,isnothingelsethanautomation.
Onceagain,itmustbehighlightedthatwhatisworthemphasizingabouttheimpactofcomputationisnotwhatitdoestomathematics,orhowitchangesourrelationshiptomathematics,asitisarguedine-Science,butthewayitsignificantlyaltersthestateandroleofcalculatorypractice.Stressingtheissueofautomationasauniversalizationofcalculatorypracticemakesitfurthermoredifficulttomaintaintheclaimthatmath-ematics,orafamiliarthoughnotidenticalthinglikeprogramming,isattheveryheartofdigitalpublications.Mathematicsisnotthegoalbutthemeansforgeneralizingthispractice.Automationmeansbenefitingfrommathematicswithouttheneedtodomath,justlikeoperationalscriptmeansbenefitingfromcountingwithoutdeeperknowledgeaboutmath-ematicalrules.Thebenefitistohavesomeinputandgetsomeoutput,preciselywithouthavingtounderstandwhatliesinbetween.Inaverydifferentcontext,thisobservationisarepetitionandconfirmationofCramer’sremarkthatifanything,digitaltechnologiesaretechnologiesoftransformation.
232 Beyond the Flow
Universalizing Symbolization Conversions
Itisnowpossibletophrasethequestionabouttheintermedialsituationofdigitaltechnologiesinamorepreciseway:thequestionishowautomationdoes—theabilityofamachinethatcalculatedlycalculates—affectpeople’srelationshipwiththeworldintermsofrepresentingandknowingit.MakinguseoftheinsightsgainedbytheinquiryofKrämer,thisquestionsplitsintotwoparts:first,howdoesautomationreorganizetherelationshipbetweencertainrepresentationstrategies,andsecond,howdoesitchangetheenvironmentinwhichthesestrategiesareapplied.
Infact,possibleanswers,derivedfromobservationsaboutthefieldofdigitalpublications,offersomeindicationsalready.Theseindicationscanverywellberelatedtosomeoftheconclusionsfromthecurrentchapter.Regardingthefirstquestion,examplesshowedthattheusageofdifferentwaystocommunicatesomethingmeaningfulsuchastext,images,orinTPsalsosound,weremoreandmoretreatedasequal.Representationstrategieswereusedforavarietyofpurposesandforasimilarpurposedifferentrepresentationstrategiesweremobilized.
Thisphenomenonconfirmstheprospectthatsocialsemioticslaidoutforthemakinganduseofsigns.Theepitomeofthisdevelopmentiswhattheresearchfieldofmultimodal analysis calls a process of increasing grammatizationofmeanstorepresentotherthanbylanguage.Multimodalanalysis(hereafterreferredtoasMuA)isasetofresearchfieldsthatemergedoutoftheprogramofsocialsemiotics( Jewitt2011;O’HalloranandSmith2011;O’Halloran2011;Jewitt2014).Whilesocialsemioticspredominantlycarriedoutanalysisoflanguage,MuAusesHalliday’scon-ceptualtoolstoanalyzetheuseandstatusofdifferent,i.e. multimodal,meansofrepresentinginaverysystematicway.Conceptssuchassemioticresource,multimodality,andgrammatizationarepartoftheoutcomeofthisattempt.
Inthisprocess,thetermgrammatizationreferstotwothings.First,itaddressestheprocessitself,inwhichmoreandmoreresourcesareusedineverydaycommunicationinordertoproducemeaningandtorepresentsomething,i.e. tobecomesemioticresources.Secondly,itreferstotheobservationthatthetypeofuseofthesesemioticresources,ontheirownandincombinationwitheachother,engenderscertainrulesthataresim-ilartogrammaticalrulesinlanguage(O’Halloran2011,126).Fromthispointofview,thingslikeimages,space,sound,color,andgestureamongotherthings become semiotic resourceswithinamultimodaldiscursivepractice(O’Halloran2011,120–21).Buildinguponsuchobservation,MuAtriesto
Post-Digital … 233
analyzethesegrammaticalstructures,theirdevelopment,theirapplicationincolloquialcommunication,andtranslationsofmeaningbetweensemioticresources.
Onedoesnotneedtoagreewiththeclaimthateachsemioticresourcecandevelopthesamelevelofgrammatizationorisequallysuitablefordiscourse.Itisfurthermorepossibletochallengetheideathatthereisahistoricaldrivetowardseverincreasinggrammatization,asissometimessuggested(Stiegler2010;Tinnell2015).However,suchcriticismsdonotinvalidatetheobservationthattheevaluationofthecapabilitiesofdifferentmeanstorepresentsomething,andtheparalleluseofdifferentstrategies,havesignificantlyincreasedinthecontextofdigitalpublicationsanditscorrespondingdiscourseondigitaltechnologies.
Bothphenomena,theincreaseduseofresourcesassemioticresources,aswellasaprocessofgrammatizationformanyoftheseresources,canbeexplicatedviathedefinitionofdigitaltechnologiesandcomputationinthischapter.Cramer’sobservationthatcomputersmostlyconvertbetweensignals,forinstanceanaloguesignalsintodigitalsignals,isjustanotherdescriptionofthesamephenomenon,aconversionofsomethingintoarepresentationofthesamething.Thesameappliestotheissueofgrammatization.Theculturalpracticeofcalculationformalized,nottosay,grammatizedtheiconographyofmathematicalsymbolsandthelayoutofthepaperonwhichtheyarewrittenorprinted.Itthereforegoeswithoutsayingthatamachinewhichmimicstheideaofcalculatorypracticeitselfhasalottoofferforconvertingbetweendifferentmodalitiesinacalculatorywayorusingsuchmodalitiespurposefully.
Itdoesnotsurprise,then,thatinMuAthephenomenonofmultimodalrep-resentationandcommunicationisexpectedtogrowsignificantlyasadirectconsequenceofdigitaltechnologies.ForO’Halloran(2008),theuniqueaspectofdigitaltechnologiesisthefactthattheyintroducewhatshecallsa universal symbolism,i.e. amechanismforomnipotentrepresentation.Regardlessofthequestionifitisreallyauniversalsymbolismthatthecomputerintroduces,orifitisbetterdescribedastheuniversalizationofpracticesofrepresentationandsymbolicconversionsasinthisstudy,thecrucial point remains the same: the increasing capability of using many differentsemioticresourcesinordertorepresentandtocommunicateissofundamentallyentangledwithdigitaltechnologiesthat,intheeyesofMuA,itmakessensetocallsuchpracticesa“digitalliteracy”(Rowsell2013).
Ashasbeenindicatedalready,itispossibletoobservetheimpactofthisuniversalizationofsymbolicpracticeinmanydigitalpublicationsdescribed
234 Beyond the Flow
intheprecedingchapters.ItunderliestheinclusionofdifferenttypesofmediawithequalrightsproposedbypublicationconceptsasdifferentasRIPs,UBs,orTPs.ThecaseofTPsstandsoutmostinthisrespectbecausetheyaimatthesameuniversallevelonwhichO’Halloran’scharacter-izationofdigitaltechnologiesislocated.Indeed,thepeculiarityofTPsisthepropositiontonotonlyadddifferentmediatypestoapublication,buttocreatesomethingthatismorethanitsparts:atransmedial,whichinthiscontextcouldbetranslatedtouniversal,modeofproducingmeaning.
Anargumentagainstthischaracterizationistheallegedprimacyofdata,advocatedine-Scienceapproachestodigitalpublications,inordertosupportmore“data-like”publications.However,thisargumentonlylookslikeacounter-argument.Therearetworeasonsforthisclaim.First,wheresuchapproachesadvocatethepublicationofdata,thisdataisnormallyaddressedinawaythatisfarfrombeingdatainthestrictestsense.Acsv filefortherepresentationoftabulardata,forinstance,isatextualrep-resentationoftheconceptofsequencedlistsofinformationinthefirstplace.ThesameappliestoSPs,inwhichmorethanbinarydataisproducedandpublishedastexts,includingcertaingrammaticalextensionsusefulforthecomputer.Theyarenotpublishedasbinaryfilesbutastextfiles,andforgoodreason,becauseasbinaryfilestheywouldbehardtouseintheirrespectiveenvironments.
Theconfusingpointaboutthetermdataanditsusageisthefactthatratherthanreferringtocertainpropertiesofthething,itdenoteswhatpeoplewanttodowithit.Whattheidealofdatareallyadvocatesisnottheprimacyofacertaintypeofrepresentationaboveallothers,butofprogramingastheultimateformofinquiry.Whatdistinguishesthetwoexamplesisacertainlevelofformalstructure,butthisdoesnotopposeitcompletelytotext,whichitselfhasformalstructureintermsofgrammar,styleconventionsandlayout.
Itcouldhoweverbearguedthatithasaspecifictypeanddegreeofformalstructurethatmakescomputationmoreefficient.Accordingly,somethingbecomesdatawhenitishighlystructuredandorganized.InrecordeddatasuchasthemusicfilesintheExecutableMusicDocumentsproject(DeRoure2014a)andothersensorydata,itbecomesclearthatthisdistinctiondoesnotholdeither.Thereisverylittlestructureinsuchdata,consideringthewaystructureisunderstoodabove.Inthiscontext,peoplemightspeakofrawdata.Nevertheless,nothingstopsthosesamemusicfilesfrombeingheardbysomeonethroughthemeansofanaudioplayerthatcomputes,meaningitconvertsthefileintosoundwaves,orfrombeingprocessedby
Post-Digital … 235
adataanalystthroughprogramming.Itcouldjustaseasilybedefinedasapieceofmusicasrawdata.
Theissueofformalityandstructure,again,refersmoretothecomputationalmodelbywhichacertainresourceisprocessedandtospecificcomputationalcapacitiesatacertainpointoftime,thantopropertiesoftheresourceitself.Theneedforstructureindatavaries,assuchmodelsandcapacitiesvary.
Havingsaidallthis,itisnotreasonabletoaimatmore“data-like”pub-lications,sinceitiswrongtointerpretthecorrespondingdiscourseaboutdataascounterargumentagainsttheclaimofanexpansionofthecapabilitiesofsymbolicorsemioticpractices.Everythingwithoutanyexceptionisdigitaldataifturnedintoarepresentationthatconsistsofbitsinacomputer.However,thisdataisnothingmorethanaself-descriptionofthecomputerasamachine.Noone,especiallynotinthecontextofscience,engagesdirectlywiththisrepresentation.Theyengagewithitasabinaryrepresentationofarepresentationofatext-documents—forinstanceTEI-XML—orasabinaryrepresentationofarepresentationofamusicfilesuch as RIFF WAVE.Consequently,dataisarepresentationwhichevokesrepresentations.This,however,isexactlywhatwasarguedaboutthecon-sequencesoftheideaofacalculatedly-calculatingmachineforthestatusofrepresentationabove.Asmachinesofconversions,digitaltechnologiesuniversalizethepracticeofsymbolization,meaningtherepresentationaluseofdifferentresourcesormodalitiesandtheperceptionofwhatrep-resentationsare.
The Difference between Representation and Intervention
Theimplementationofauniversalsymbolicsystemandthesimultaneoususeofdifferentmodalitiesfordifferentsemioticpurposesisonlyonehorizonofthecalculatedly-calculatingmachine.AnotheronecanbederivedfromKrämer’sobservationsthatthecalculatorypracticeofoperationalscriptturnsabstractandtheoreticalentitiesintoentitiesthatcanbesensedandexperienced.InKrämer’sexample,itistheeyethatseesmathematicalsymbolsonapaperandthehandthattouchesthispaperwhilewritingonit.Thus,thereisnotjustanextensionofsymbolicmeans,butalsoareconfigurationoftherolesensing.Krämeremphasizedthisaspectbecauseitisoftenforgotten,sothatnowthequestiontobeansweredis:whatisbeingoverlookedinthepictureabove?
236 Beyond the Flow
Uptothispoint,itisnotclearhowdigitaltechnologiesreconfiguretherealmofthingstobeexperienced.Theyappearedastechnologiescreatingnewmeansofwhatcanbesensedonly,justlikethetransformationoftopologicalintotypologicalknowledge,ortheconversionofanaloguephenomenaintodigital.Nonetheless,someindicationsintheworkofCramersuggestthatthisisonlypartoftheissue.Infact,universalizedconversioninthelightofthecalculatedly-calculatingmachinedoesnotjustmean analogue to digital or digital to analogue but … to analogue to digital to analogue to ….Itaddressestheabilitytosequencesuchconversionsinaninstantwithoutleavingthemachineitself,i.e. withoutanyone’sparticipation.
Lookingfromtheviewpointofrepresentingsomething,thissequenceofconversionsaddressesthecapabilityofdigitaltechnologiestocompletelydetachfromtherepresentationalcontextandthemotivationthatstartedthesequenceinthefirstplace.Thatmeansitcanproducediscreteobjectsforwhich,theoretically,itisnolongerreproduciblewhattheyrepresentandthattheyrepresent.Inconsequence,suchobjectshavetobeexpe-riencedandsensednotasameanstointerpretordecodethem,buttoopenupanypossibilityfordecodingandinterpretationinthefirstplace.
Inprinciple,asimulationisafirststepinthisdirectionbecausethetransformationstepsbetweenthedescriptionofaphenomenonandthesimulationarecomplextosuchanextentthatasimulationissensedmorethanitisread.Infact,itoftenistheverypurposeofcertaintypesofsimulationstoprovokesensingandaffection(Licastro2017).Nevertheless,asimulationisstillassociatedwiththedomainofdigitaltechnologies,thatmeanslikelytobeunderstoodasrepresentationofsomething,ratherthanbeingsomethingofitsown,becauseitremainsthescreenonwhichthephenomenonwasbothdescribedandturnedintoasimulation.Thepointbecomesclearerwhentheexampleofthe3Dprinteristaken,becausea3Dprinterproducesobjectsoutofrepresentationsthatarenotonlymeanttobesensed,butwhicharealsocompletelydetachedfromthetechnologicalapparatus.Itisanewautonomous“living”objectwhichisabletorelocateintimeandspaceandtherebybeginstospeakforitself.
Withinthisdescription,representationindigitaltechnologieswouldbebetterunderstoodasintervening.Thetransgressionofthisfrontierisarticulatedveryclearlywhereitisappliedasascientificmethodology.Accordingly,Sayersetal.(2015,4)quoteNeilGershenfeldin“BetweenBitsandAtoms,”acontributionfortheNew Companion to Digital Humanities (Schreibman,Siemens,andUnsworth2016),whentheyrefertothisfrontier
Post-Digital … 237
intermsof“’theprogrammabilityofthedigitalworldswe’veinvented’applied‘tothephysicalworldweinhabit’”.Thismethodologyconsistsof“creatingaconversationbetweenthephysicalworldandthevirtualworldofthecomputer”whichis“theconversionofoneformofenergyintoanother”(7).
Theconstructiveandtruth-creatingactKrämerdescribesinthecontextoftheinfiniteandthezeroinmathematicsneedsthereforetobeunderstoodmoreliterallyforthecaseofthecalculatedly-calculatingmachine.Whatisconstructedareobjectsthatfullybecomepartofwhatiscalledtherealworldandhenceexistliterally.
Asetofextremeexamplesforthisinterventionistdimensionisgivenbybio-engineering,nano-technology,androbotics,amongotherdisciplines—disciplineswhichquiteliterally“write”reality.Representationdoesthusnotonlyturnmoreeasilyintoaninterventionintherepresentedcontext,butalsointoanentiretransformationofthiscontext.Inametaphoricway,peoplelikeBernardStieglercoinedtheterm“ScienceFiction”incomparisonto“Science”inordertoemphasizethequalitativeshiftthatdigitaltechnologiescarryoutonthepracticeofrepresenting(Stiegler2011;Abbinnett2017,56).Intheareaofdigitalpublishing,phraseslike“ShowDon’tTell”ortheabundantevaluationsofthestatusoftextindigitalpub-lications gave testimony of this uncertainty about the status of the practice ofrepresentationassuch.Inafirmpleatoopenupthefieldofdigitalscholarlypublications,StephenRamsayandGeoffreyRockwellalsousetheterm“thingknowledge”asanewtypeofepistemology,andproclaimthat“accordingtothisview,weshouldbeopentocommunicatingscholarshipthroughartifacts,whetherdigitalornot”(RamsayandRockwell2012).
Again,andinamoretheoreticalcontext,aconstellationthatcanbereproducedbyatechnologythatsupposedlydeliversperfectconditionsforrepresentation,isopposedbyauseofthistechnologythatunderminesrepresentationassuch.Onlythistime,itisnotabouttheconceptofaggregationastheperfectrepresentationofpublications,andtheartif-actualisnotrepresentedbySCPs,butbytheconceptofrealityitself.Insummary,theimpactofthecalculatedly-calculatingmachineforthepracticeofrepresentingisnotjustasignificantextensionofitsmeans,butalsoacloserentanglementwithotherpracticesthatarecalledinter-ventionalortransformative.
238 Beyond the Flow
The Three Epistemological Effects of Calculated Calculation
The Omnipotence and Crisis of Representation
AfteranalyzingthechangesthatdigitaltechnologiescausedforthepracticeofrepresentationinthelightofKrämer’sconcepts,itisnowpos-sibletohaveacloserlookatwhatshecalledepistemologicaleffectsintheepistemicenvironmentofanintermedialsituation.Ashasbeenindicated,theterm“epistemologicaleffect”isintendedtodenotetheirritatingimpactthatchangeswithinthisenvironmenthaveonpeople’sstrategieswhenconceivingof,representing,andunderstandingtheworld,aswellasthewaysinwhichthisworldunfoldsforpeople.
Concerningtheissueofuniversalizedrepresentation,twoeffectscanbeidentifiedregardingtheideaofacalculatedly-calculatorymachine.Oneoftheseeffectscanbederivedfromananalysisofthelogicalendoftheideaofmultimodalanduniversalrepresentation,theotherfocusesontheconsequencesofmultimodalrepresentationpracticesforsystemsofrepresentation.
Theallegedlyuniversalabilitytousedifferentsemioticresourcesinordertorepresentcertainissues,tousesemioticresearchesindifferentways,andtousethematthesametimeinahybridandcomplexrepresentationsuggeststheideaofaperfectrepresentation.Wheresuchanideaisdis-qualifiedduetophilosophicalreasons,itstillintroducescriteriaofrep-resentationqualityintermsofmultimodaldensity,complexity,orplurality.PublicationsinjournalssuchasVectors,Kairos,orotherTPsareveryoftenbuiltaroundsuchanotion.
Thesecondeffectisbasedonthepossibilityofacontrastingperspectiveoftheaforementionedability.Theadvancementoftheseabilitiescansimilarlybeevaluatedasanincreaseofheterogeneity,contingency,andunsteadi-nessinthedomainofrepresentation.Representationaldisorientationisapossibleoutcomehere.Krämer’sdiscussionindicatedalreadythatinthepast,specificresourcestendtohavespecificfunctionsinparticularcon-texts.Notallpotentiallysemioticresourceswereusedinasemioticway.Thiswasalsopartofcertaintechnologicallymediatedlimitationsintheuseofresourcesforthesakeofrepresentation.Inthissense,shehighlightedthecorrespondencebetweeniconographicaspectsofRomannumbersandthingsthatcouldbecalledcountablebytheeye.Shealsoshowedthatsuchfunctionsmaychange,astheychangedintheshiftofthevisualfocusfrom
Post-Digital … 239
thingsthatarecountedtovisualaidstosupporttheprocessofcounting.Epistemologicaleffectswerealsodefinedasanirritationproducedbythisshift,meaningthedefamiliarizationoffamiliarusagesofacertainresourceinaspecificstrategyofrepresentingtheworld.
AmoreinsightfulandsystematicdescriptionofthisissueinthecontextofdigitaltechnologiescanbefoundbyreferringtotheconceptofmodeanditsdevelopmentinMuA.Ifmultimodalityisthegeneralpossibilityofusingdifferentresourcesforrepresentation,andgrammatizationindicatesthedevelopmentofruleswithinsuchusages,thequestionishowtoidentifyrule-basedmultimodalrepresentation.Multimodalanalysisdiscussesthisissueundertheconceptofmode.Accordingly,partofMuAistoaskthequestion:“WhatisMode?”(Kress2013),orbetter,whenismultimodalcommunicationcreatingcertainmodesthateachsharerecognizableapplicationpatternsacrosssituations?Chaptersixwillprovideanin-depthanalysisofmodethatgoesbeyondtheremarksinthefollowinglines.
Thereareanalyticalandpragmaticanswerstothisquestion.GuntherKress,whoprefersthetermmodetothetermresource,definesitasanentanglementbetweenmedia,semioticlogics,andsocialactions(Kress2013,61).Media,sometimescalledtechnologyordevice,meansphysicalmaterialordeviceinvolvedinmeaningproduction,suchaspaperorcomputerscreens.Semioticlogicsareconcernedwithsyntacticallimitationsandpotentialsofmedia.Instrumentsorspeakers,forinstance,cannotmakeuseofelementsofcolor,butoftimeandpitch.Additionally,modesaresocio-culturallyencoded.Amediumsuchasabookismostoftenasocio-culturalartifact.Theusagepatternsofsemioticlogicsandthesituationsinwhichamodeisusedaremoreorlesssocio-culturallydefined.
Inotherwords,specifictechnologiesconflatewithcertainmodalitiesandcorrespondingsemioticlogics.Theseareorganizedinahistoricalprocessbyvirtueofculturalnormsandpractices,inordertoformarelativelystableentanglement.Therelativestabilityandtherebytransparencyofthisentanglementexistsformembersofasocio-culturalenvironmentoveracertainperiodoftime.Withsomefuzzinessleft,itcouldbearguedthatKrämerdescribesaprocessinwhichaspecificmodeofrepresentation—thatofmathematicalwritingandarithmeticbooks—develops,exceptthatKrämer’sperspectivefocusesonaspecificprocessanddescribesthisprocessfromwithin,whilemodeisatop-downconceptualframeworkthatseekstobeapplicableacrossspecificexamples.
However,ithasjustbeenarguedthatdigitaltechnologiescantaketheformofmanydevicesandtomediatebetweendevicesindifferentways.
240 Beyond the Flow
Theaspectofautomation,furthermore,putsmuchmorecontrolovertheprocessoforganizingmodalitiesinthehandsofdomainsandindividuals.Inthelightoftheaforementionedheterogeneityandthevarietyoftheabundanceofdigitalpublicationformats,itcouldthereforebearguedthatintimesofdigitaltechnologies,thereisaconstanttensionbetweentheprocessestowardsestablishingsocialconventionsfortheusageofmodalitiesandtheirarrangementforthesakeofspecificsituationsorcontexts.
ThecomparisonbetweenKrämer’sanalysisandtheconceptofmodeallowsacloserlookathowdiscussionsofthestatusofmoderevealtheshapeofepistemologicaleffectscausedbydigitaltechnologies.WithinMuAitself,thewholeissueisanalyzedinaverypreciseway,whichbenefitsfromtheanalyticalinstrumentsdescribedabove.Thus,BoeriisandJohannessen(2015)arguethatthewholeconceptofmodebecomesproblematic,duetodigitaltechnologies.Theyassertthat:
…asaresultofnewtechnologies,logogeneticaction-perceptioncyclesinmultimodalarticulationhappenatanever-increasingrate,whichcausesbothontogeneticgrowthandphylogeneticconventionalizationdynamicstospeedupaswell.(BoeriisandJohannessen2015,13)
Insimplerterms,digitaltechnologiesunderminetheconditionsthatarenecessaryformodestoemerge.Alreadyin2005,Lemkeobservedthattheconceptofmultimodalgenre,atermthathasagreatsimilaritytomode,doesnotholdanylonger(Lemke2005).Lemkestatesthatduetotheproliferationofmodalandsemioticoptions,andthedissociationbetweenspecificdevicesandtheuseofsemioticresources,theideaofgenreissubstitutedbyso-called“traversals.”Withintraversals,thelinkbetweenmodalitiesandsemioticaspectsofsuchmodalitiesdoesnotexistindependentlyfromaspecificsituation,controlledveryoftenbyonlyafewindividuals.Hence,thereisno“grammatical”relationshipbeyondthe“cohesivechain”ofelements.
Ithasbeensaidthatepistemologicaleffectsinanintermedialsituationcon-sistofirritationstothecommonstrategiesofrepresentingandreferringtotheworld.Suchirritationscanalsobefoundtoday.AgoodexampleforillustratingtheshiftsandtheirritationstheyoftenprovokeisgivenbyMersch(2004).Inhisexamination,Merschtriestospecifytheuniquenessoficonographicdescriptionsoftheworldcomparedtothoseinlanguage.Atthesametime,however,heregretsthatthisuniquenessisslowlydis-appearingincontemporaryusagesofimages,whichthemselvesstarttoworklikelanguage.Heofferstheexampleofimagesinscience,which,
Post-Digital … 241
accordingtotheauthor,areusedasargumentsinsomethinghedenotesasaniconographicdiscourse.Merschregretsthesechangesbecauseheinter-pretsitasalossofaparticularmodeofmakingsenseoftheworld.Thisregretcanbeconsideredagoodexampleofoneoftheepistemiceffectsofintermediality.Additionally,theexamplesupportstheclaimthattherelationshipbetweencertainmodalitiesandwhattheymediatedependslessonaspecificlogicofthismodality,andmoreonthepracticesinwhichtheyareembedded,aswellasthewayspeopleconceiveofthem.
Howthencantheepistemiceffectsderivedfromtheuniversalizationofsymbolicpracticesbesummarized?Thefirstapproach,ashasbeenarguedatthebeginningofthissection,welcomesthefreedomandflexibilitybywhichsemioticresourcescannowbeusedforrepresentationpurposes.Itcelebratesmultimodalcomplexityasagoalinitself.Thesecond,however,indicatesthatthisflexibilitymightalsocomewiththelossofcertainsemi-oticcapabilities,ofuseandplaywithconventionsandtheemergenceofgenrenorms.
Topushthispointfurther,theavailabilityoftheaforementioneduniver-salization,andtheconcurrencyofmultiplerepresentationalmodesaswellasmultipleusagepatternsformodalities,maylikewisebeconceivedofasacrisisofthestrategicpracticeofrepresentingassuch.Examplesforsuchperceptiontodayaregivenabove.Thisisnotsurprising,sincefromanontologicalpointofviewaperfectrepresentationturnsintothethingitself,sothatanytypeofrepresentationalrelationshipdisappears.
Thesamecrisiscanbeobservedfromtheoppositeside.Ahypotheticaltraversal,inwhichtheuseofsemioticresourcesisgovernedsolelybythesituationofuse,couldnotbeconsideredpartofacollectiverep-resentationalsystemanylonger.Itwouldbecomedifficulttoidentifythesemioticuseofresourcesassuch,because,associalsemioticshasargued,beingasignisalreadyasocialconvention.Forthisreason,asubfieldofMuAemphasizesthatoneshouldnotdistinguishbetweenactsofrep-resentationandotheractionsanylonger.Inthisresearchfield,calledMulti-modal Interaction Analysis(hereafterreferredtoasMIA),everythingisanaction(Norris2011),andrepresentationasapracticebyitselfvanishes.
Omnipotence and Crisis Beyond Representation
Theconceptofactionresemblesthenotionofinterventionusedbefore.Whilethefirsttermfocusesontherelationshipbetweenanagentandanaction,thesecondaddressestherelationshipbetweenanaction
242 Beyond the Flow
anditseffectonitsenvironment.Inthelightofthissecondrelation-ship,anotherimportantepistemologicaleffectcanbeidentified:themorerepresentationandinterventionconflatewitheachother,themorethedistinctionbetweentheconceptsofnatureandculturebecomesinappropriate.
Inacertainway,Krämer’sdigressionontheconstructivistfacetofoperationalscriptdemonstratesthatsuchadistinctionwasalwaysproblematic.Nonetheless,theextenttowhichitappearsproblematicinthecontextofthecalculatedly-calculatingmachineseemstoposenewchallenges.Onceagain,ithelpstorememberthatthismachinedoesnotjustcauseanewsetofentitiestoappearasoperationalscriptdidinmath-ematics.Neitherdiditjustcauseashiftintherelationshipbetweennatureandculture.Itseekstocontroltherelationshipitself.
Avarietyoftheoreticaldiscussionsexistwhichgiveevidenceoftheimpactoftheresultingepistemologicaleffect.Thesediscussionsareattemptstoarrangeanewepistemicsetupundertheaforementionedconditions.OneofthesediscussionsisaddressedbythetermAnthropocene,aconceptthatraisedmuchattentionacrossvariousscientificdomainsinthelastfifteenyears.Itismostoftenassociatedwithgeologicalandclimate-relatedphenomena.Allofthesephenomena,likeforinstanceclimatechange,indicatetheimpactofpeopleonprocessesoftheearth’senvironment(Watersetal.2016).Hence,itaddressesasetupinwhichnoaspectofwhatiscallednaturecanbeconsideredoutofthereachofpeople.Likewise,theepochalwordingofthissetupasaphaseinthehistoryoftheearthreflectsthatthechangeisconceivedofasfundamental.Accordingly,BethanyNowviskiestatesin“DigitalHumanitiesandtheAnthropocene”that“itisageologicalageofourownmaking”(Nowviskie2015,6),usingaquotebyAndrewRevkin.Anotherquotethatisoftenre-usedinthisdebateisthatofVladimirVernadskij,whoinamuchearlierattempttoaddressthesameissue states:
Westudytheinfluenceofthescientificthoughtasageologicalforce,andinthiscaseoftenthethoughtandwillofaseparatepersonmaysuddenlychangenaturalprocessesandmanifestitselfthroughthischange.(Vernadskij1997)
Onamorefine-grainedlevel,thedistinctionbetweencultureandnatureequateswiththedistinctionbetweenhumanandnon-human.Consequently,contributionsexistwhichalsohighlightthefragilityofthisdistinctioninthelightofdigitaltechnologies.Inthisrespect,Bradley(2011)argues in Originary Technicitythattoday’stechnology,morethananything
Post-Digital … 243
else,revealsthetechnicityoftheideaofthehuman.Promotingtheconceptofthe“post-human,”heoffersaphilosophicalgeneralizationofideasthathavebeenintroducedalreadybyHaraway(1991)inherworkonSimians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature.Intheoppositedirection,DavidGunkelcallsforanethicbeyondhumanrights,whichincludeartificialintelligenceandrobots(Gunkel2007;Gunkel2012).
Thepointhereisnottoevaluatethecorrectnessofallthesecontributions.Thepointisthattheepistemologicaleffectsofdigitaltechnologiesaresuchthatasignificantnumberofresearchersfromallscientificdomainsfeelobligedtoquestionthedistinctionbetweencultureandnature,thesystemofrepresentation,andwhatisbeingrepresented.
Therelevanceforthetopicofdigitalpublicationsisdemonstratedbythefactthatpublicationformats,whichtendtobelongtothefieldofe-Science,aredefinedwithcomparableideasinmind.Accordingly,anepistemologicalsetupinwhichcorrelationsupersedesrepresentation,andempiricaldatasubstitutes theoretical inquiry resembles a situation in which there is an identitybetweentheworldanditsrepresentation.
Inthelightofthissection,however,thisclaimmustbeputintocontextcorrectly.Theonecrucialaspectitsuppressesisthefactthatanepis-temologicalsetup,inwhichtechnology“makesobsoleteascientificmethod”(Anderson2008)totheorizepeople’srelationshipwiththeworldisalsoaworldinwhichthecelebratedbenefitsofempiricalknowledgedisappear.Aftertheexamplesgivenbefore,andagainfromanontologicalpointofview,suchempiricalknowledgewouldjustcorrelatewithpeople’stheorizationsaboutpossibleworlds.Inthefinalanalysis,thisisanotherpossibleinterpretationofStiegler’sclaimthatsciencehasbecomesciencefiction.
Crisis and Surplus
InconsiderationofKrämer’sremarksonintermediality,athirdepis-temologicaleffectneedstobediscussed.ThiseffectbuildsuponthephenomenontranslatedfromKrämer’sworkwiththeterm“surplus.”Surplusdenotestheinsightthatinanintermedialsituation,propertiesofoldandnewmediaaredefinedinasimplifyingandcontrastingmanner,toachieveabettergrasponthechangesthattakeplaceinthissituation.Thecreationofsurplusgivesorientationandobscuresatthesametime.
Withtheinquiryintodigitaltechnologiesinmind,theareaofsur-plusisindicatedbythecharacterizationofsuchtechnologiesas
244 Beyond the Flow
calculatedly-calculatingtechnologies,andthecorrespondingnotionofautomation.Ashasbeenoutlinedpreviously,digitaltechnologiesonlyrepresenttheideaofgeneralizingcalculationasautomation.Theyareprettysuccessfulrepresentationsofthisidea,butremainrepresentationsnonetheless.Thisfactisunambiguouslypresentedbythehaltingproblemthathasbeendiscussedpreviously.Thestatusofthehaltingproblemproducesanirritatingspace.Itistheproblemofamachinethatrepresentsautomationsowellineverydaylifethatautomationturnsintoageneralprinciple,but,remainingarepresentation,producesitsownquotidianlifesituationsinwhichpeoplecannotbesureoftheimpactofthisproblem.14
Theconsequencesdescribedintheprevioustwosectionsthusonlydescribethemindsetproducedbytheconceptualframeworkofdigitaltechnologies,asthosetechnologiesthattrivializethetheoreticalrevolvearoundthecalculatedly-calculatingmachine.Theyaretheresultofover-stressingandontologizingcertainideasandconceptsofthismachine.Suchanontologicalpointofviewwas,however,necessary,becausedigitalpub-licationconcepts,asshownthroughoutthecurrentstudy,weredrivenbythesametendencies.Ithadtobeshownthatthinkingone’swaytotheendofthislaidoutpathleadstocontradictions,andthatthesecontradictionsareacrucialcomponentofthefieldofdigitalpublications.
The real epistemological irritation now is a consequence of the uncertain statusofsurplus.Ontheonehand,itisnecessarytoidentifythepropertiesofachangingepistemologicallandscapewithinanintermedialsituation,becausethislandscapeischanging.Ontheotherhand,itisonlypossibletoidentifydirectionsofthesechangesbycreatingasurplus.Theextentandthevalueofthissurpluscan,however,notbeknown,becausethereflectionsonitareinmotion,asistheprocessofthetransformationinstigatedbydigitaltechnologies.
Toputitdifferently,theissueisnotthatthetwotypesofeffectsdescribedabovearecompletelywrong.Itismoretheuncertaintythatexistscon-cerningwhattheyconceal,andinwhichsituationsthishasaliberatingimpactandwhereitposesnewproblems.Totaketheexampleofthefourthparadigm,theimpactofdigitaltechnologiesmightstillbesuchthattheoppositionbetweenempiricismandhermeneuticsbecomesifnotobsolete,thenatleastlessimportantinsomecircumstances.Inotherwords,itmightbemoreusefulnottopayattentiontothisoppositionthantoemphasize
14 Forexamplesoftherelevanceofthehaltingproblemforcolloquialissuesincomputerscience,pleaserefertothewonderfulexplanationathttps://cs.stack-exchange.com/questions/32845/why-really-is-the-halting-problem-so-important.
Post-Digital … 245
it.Inthesameway,theconflationofcultureandnaturesuggestedbythediscourseontheAnthropocenedoesnotactuallymakeaphilosophicalclaim,butarguesthatintheperceptionofcertainproblems,itwouldhelptoleavetheoppositionbehindinordertodealwithcurrentproblemsoftheenvironment.Inshort,ifthestartingpointistheperceptionofachangingepistemologicallandscape,asaddressedbymanydiscussionsaroundpub-licationconcepts,thentheissueofsurplusclearlyexpressesthatitisnotpossibletoanticipatewheretheepistemologicalsetupmightstabilize.
Publications Beyond Cold Technology and Pure Theory
Atthispoint,thepurelytheoreticaldiscussionofaspectsofdigitalpub-lishing,whichissorelymissinginliteratureondigitalpublicationscon-ceptsthemselves,demandslookingoutforanewstartingpointfortheengagementwithdigitalpublications.Thetheoreticaldiscussionofcertainleitmotifsfromthediscourseondigitalpublicationsfulfilledthetaskofshowingthatafocusonallegedintrinsiccapabilitiesofdigitaltechnologiesleadstoanuncertainandevencontradictoryposition.Duetotheresultsofthetheoreticalanalysisofdigitaltechnologies,suchananalysis,however,didnotlaythegroundworkforthisnewstartingpointeither,atleastnotexplicitly.Thisstartingpointneedstocomefromanothersource.Infact,thelastphaseofthegenealogyofdigitalpublicationsalreadypointedintoacertaindirection,adirectionthathighlightedtheneedtoreconsiderdigitalpublicationsassocialobjects.Thefinalpartofthischapterwilldem-onstratehowthisneedcanbederivedfromthelineofargumentsinthesectionsabove.
Thefollowingdiscussionofkeyideasindifferentapproachestodigitalpublishingshowedtheirintrinsiclogicalaporia.Inthecaseofthe“endoftheory,”thiscontradictionconsistsofthefactthataworldthathasnoneedfortheoreticalrepresentationislikewiseunabletohostempiricalknowledge.Sinceitishardlypossibletothinkthisthoughtoutsideoftherealmoflogicalreasoningandtheissueofsurplus,thesocialrealmistheonlyplacewherethedistinctionbetweenoneortheotherisconstantlynegotiatedandcontinuouslymodified.
Thesamediscussion,furthermore,showedthataworldinwhicheveryresourceisconsideredaresourceforcreatingandcommunicatingmeaninginamultimodalway,theconceptofmeaningitselfisatriskofbecomingmeaningless.
246 Beyond the Flow
Inahypotheticalscenario,theperfectmultimodalrepresentationbecomesthethingitself.Therelationshipsbetweensuchobjects,whicharebothrepresentationsofthemselvesandthemselves,donothaveanytypologicaldifferencesanymore.Theyarejustinter-operating,asitissometimeswritten in the context of Object-Oriented-Ontology(Bogost2012,38),withinaone-dimensionalspace.Thisspaceofobjectsthatdonotrelatetoeachother in other ways than by interaction is then another possible way to describetheperspectiveofthesocialworld.
Thesecondreasonbehindthedemandtoadoptamoresociallyorientedpointofviewturnstheperspectiveofthefirstoneupsidedown.Here,thequestionisnotwhathappensifcertainclaimsareradicallythoughtthrough.Theissueistorememberthefactthatthisendonlyexistsintheory.Asithasbecomeclearinthecourseoftheentirechapter,noneofthekeyfeaturesofdigitaltechnologiesareexclusivetodigitaltechnologies,andneitherhavetheyonlybecomecrucialbytheadventofdigitaltechnologies.Theoppositionbetweendigitalandanalogue,thetransfor-mationofpracticeintocalculations,andtheexpansionofsymbolicmeanshaveallbeenkeyaspectsintheculturalhistoryofhumankindforhundredsofyears,asCramer,Lemke,Krämer,andHallidayhaveargued.
Likewise,itneedstobeemphasizedthatalthoughtheideaofcalculatedcalculationisontheconceptuallevelqualitativelydifferent,digitaltechnologieswillneverembodythisideacompletely.Thereasonforthissituationwasdiscussedasthehaltingproblem.Curiouslyenough,inmath-ematicsthehaltingproblemhasbeenconvertedfrombeingatheoreticalproblemintoaprobabilisticproblembyGregoryChaitinandothers(Raatikainen2001).Insimplewords,thetheoreticalissuethatacomputermaynothaltwithcertaincomputationsistransformedintoaconcreteprobleminwhichtheprobabilitythatacomputermaynothaltiscalculatedforadefinedcomputation.Itmakesatheoreticalconceptuseful,becauseitsrisksandpotentialscanbeevaluatedforataskineachsituation.Inthesameway,itcouldbearguedthattheusefulnessofideasofdigitalpub-licationsdependsonthelevelonwhichitispossibletoevaluatetheminlightofconcretesocialsituationsandnotasvaluesassuch.Thechallengethatarisesistocreatebetterconditionsformediating,andsynchronizingbetweenprocessesoftechnologicalinnovationandsocialorganization,asbothhaveequalrights.
Finally,anevaluationoftechnologyitselfsuggestsrefrainingfromanyperspectivethatdistinguishesbetweentheengagementintospecifictechnologicalinnovationsandthesocialenvironmentinwhichthis
Post-Digital … 247
engagementtakesplace.Whilethelastparagraphsdealtwiththeimaginarypartoftheideaofdigitaltechnologies,thefollowingargumentsaddresstheimaginaryaspectsoftechnologyassuch.
LemkeaswellasKrämerdescribedthedevelopmentoftechnologiesasefficientproblem-solvingstrategies.Both,thedevelopmentoftechnologiesaswellastheirimplementationinapeculiarsituation,aremotivatedbysolvingaproblemefficiently.Theefficiencyofsuchstrategiescanbejeopardizedintwowaysiftheelementoftimeisconsidered,inwhichboththedevelopmentoftechnologyaswellasitsapplicationtakeplace.
Onthesideofdevelopmentandimplementationoftechnology,thismeansthatasituationinwhichadefinedtechnologicalsolutionappearstobemost appropriate is not the same anymore at the precise moment in which thissolutionisimplemented,orreadyathand.Theconditionsmighthavechanged,ornewtechnologiesmighthavebeenmadeavailablewhichrelativizetheefficiencyoftheinitialapproach.Hence,theefficiencyoftechnologicaldesignisatriskifnon-technologicaldevelopmentsarenotincluded.
Onthesiteofapplication,thesituationissimilar.Attheverymomentatechnologicalsolutionisavailable,itautomaticallyrelatestomuchmorethantotheoriginalproblem.Thismeansthatitmaybeusedinunintendedways,butalsothatitcausesunforeseeablechangestothewholeenviron-mentinwhichtheoriginalproblemresides.Bothanglesaddressthesocialadoptionandimpactoftechnology,andarecomprehensivelyanalyzedinresearchfieldslikeSocial Construction of Technology(Bijker2009,alsoreferredtoasSCOT).Thus,thepowerfuldecisionintechnology-makingtoisolateaproblem-solutionrelationshipbecomesitsmostvulnerableaspect,ifthereisnosensibilityforthefactthattheprocessofmakinganditsresultalsodonotexistinisolation.
Atfirstglance,theseargumentsmightappeartrivialandfamiliar.Nonetheless,thesummaryoftheirrelevancefordigitalpublications,dis-cussedinthenextsection,willdemonstratetheirsignificance.Additionally,theybecomelesstrivialwhentheyarere-evaluatedinthecontextofthecalculatedly-calculatingmachine,i.e. amachineofubiquitousandautomatedconversion.Here,suchconversioncapabilitiesdramaticallyincreasetheimpactoftheaforementionedphenomena,bothintheenvironmentinwhichtechnologicaldevelopmenttakesplace,aswellasfortheeffectsofitsresults.Thismeansthatthesocialenvironmentbecomespotentiallymoredynamicandvolatile,andthemeansofappropriationbypersonsandagentsincrease.Consequently,itseemsnecessarytoalso
248 Beyond the Flow
reconsiderthewayinwhichsocialaspectsareaddressedforthedesignofdigitalpublications.
Thebroaderinspectionoftheoreticalaspectsofdigitaltechnologies,astheyappearindigitalpublishing,haverevealedtheextenttowhichtheyhavetoberelativizedassociallyembeddedtechnologies.Indoingso,theorymostlyledtothesameconclusionsasinthefieldofpost-digitality,bydensifyingobservationslikethepartialfailureofclaimsaboutdigitaltechnology,ortheincreasinguseofdigitalandnon-digitalmediaatthesametime.
Oneofthebenefitsofthisinspectionisthefactthatnow,theimaginativepartofdigitaltechnologiescanbededucedandnotonlyassertedonthegroundsoftheaforementionedobservations.Havinginmindtheepis-temologicaleffectsofintermedialsituations,acertainnecessityforsuchimaginationexists.Thisnecessityisjustifiedbythetensionbetweenthecurrentimpacttechnologyhasontherelationshipbetweenpeopleandenvironment,anditsunnegotiatedscopeinthefuture.Sincethistensionneedsnegotiation,neithertheattempttosticktotheimaginativepartofdigitaltechnologiesasine-Science,northesupportofhybridapproachesassuch,asinpost-digitality,UBs,TPs,orHPsisenough.
Theprocessofnegotiatingtheaforementionedtensionisasocialprocess,andcannotbeshapedwithoutintervention.Thediscussioninthissectionofferedsomecluesinordertogetabetterideaofhowsuchinterventionsshouldlookandhowtechnologyandthesocialareconnected.Suchclueswillbeelaboratedfurtherintheremainingpartofthepresentstudy.
Atthispointitshouldbeclearthatthe:
…messystateofmedia,artsanddesignaftertheirdigitization(oratleastthedigitizationofcrucialaspectsofthechannelsthroughwhichtheyarecommunicated).(Cramer2014)
similarlyisanappropriatedescriptionforthesituationthescientificdomain,oratleastcrucialaspectsofthechannelsthroughwhichitcom-municatesitsknowledge.Therefore,aproductiveapproachcouldbetheonesketchedbyBerry:
Wemightnolongertalkaboutdigitalversusanalogue,butinsteadmodulationsofthedigitalordifferentintensitiesofthecomputational.Weshouldthereforecriticallyanalyzethewayinwhichcadencesofthecomputationalaremadeandmaterialized.(Berry2013)
Post-Digital … 249
Thesedifferenceshappenwithinthesocialappropriationandapplicationoftechnologies,whichthenextchapterwillmoveonto.
[ 6 ]
… Publishing
Concepts of Social Aspects in Digital Publications and What They Miss
Theturntopost-digitalityandthetheoreticalargumentsitprovokedwithintheprecedingsectionsfollowedashiftindigitalpublicationprojectstowardsnewwaystoconfrontthesocialdimensionofpublications.Nowthatthebackground,thefunction,and,evenmoreimportant,theneedforthisshifthasbecomeclearbyvirtueoftheoreticaldiscussion,adiscus-sionwhichrarelytookplaceinmostpublishinginitiatives,itisnecessaryto evaluate the concept of social aspects within such initiatives more systematically.
Threedifferentoutcomesofthisevaluationarepossible.First,theissuesalreadyindicatedinchapterfourandfivewillbesubstantiated.Itwillbeshownthatpublicationformatswhichreactdifferentlytosocialissuesofpublicationsarenotreflectingonsuchissuesinalltheirdimensions.Second,certainpatternsofrulingoutsocialaspectsofpublicationsagainstatechnologicalbackgroundwillarise.Finally,suchpatternswillprovideafirststeptowardsbringingorderintothe“messystateofpublicationsafterdigitization.”
From Technology as a Social Phenomenon to the Social as a Technological Feature
Thefirstpatternofneglectofsocialissuesofpublicationsconsistsof implicitly or explicitly creating a hierarchical relationship between technologyandthesocialdimensionoftechnology.Inthishierarchy,social
252 Beyond the Flow
tensionsofdigitalpublicationsareprojectedontoatechnologicalframe-work,sothattheframeworkitselfremainsuntouchedbysuchtensions.
ThemostobviousexampleofthisstrategyarecertainapproachesofNPs,morepreciselyKuhn’sattempttomakedigitalpublicationsatypeof“pub-lishingwithoutpublishers”(Kuhnetal.2015).Ithasbeendescribedinthechapterbeforethatthisattempttriestoconvertstakeholders,whocarryoutnecessarysocialfunctionsinpublishing,suchasqualitycontrol,intofunctionsoftechnologicalinfrastructure.
Theanti-socializationprocesshastwodimensions.Theapproachisdevel-opedbecauseoffrustrationaboutpublishers’rejectionofnewformsofpublishing.Theaforementionedconversionimpliesthattherearenoargumentsforthisrejection,apartfromthestakeholders’willtosecuretheirsocialposition.Consequently,theattemptrefrainsfromsolvingornegotiatingasocialconflictinordertocreateasolutionawayfromanyzoneofongoingconflict.Additionally,theapproachtakenbyNPsimpliesthatsocialpracticesassociatedwithscholarlypublicationsareaddressedsufficientlybysimplymodellingtheirworkflow,i.e. withoutrequiringtheirownsocialagentsinformofinstitutionsorcurators.Inotherwords,issuessuchasqualitycontrolaresufficientlydealtwithbyprovidingratingfunctionality.Kuhnandothersapplythisapproachnotjusttotheexampleofqualitycontrol,butdevelopitasageneralstrategy.
Theestablishedhierarchyissuchthattheexistenceofsocialstakeholders,whodealwithcertainpracticesaroundpublishing,istreatedasahistoricalcontingency.Accordingly,therearenoseriousobstaclestoreplacingsuchstakeholdersbytechnology.
Anotherstrategytoembedsocialissuesintotechnology,inordertoavoidtheanalysisofhowtechnologyisembeddedinthesocialrealm,isthecreationofcertainlinearnarrativesofprogress.Inlightofthequestiondiscussedinthissection,suchnarrativesprovidethemeanstoputstake-holderswithdifferenttechnologicalsetupsordifferentunderstandingsoftechnologyondifferentstepsofaladderthatleadstoanoverarchingknowntechnologicalsetup.
Thepresentworkhaspresentedseveralnarrativeswhichwereusedthisway.Theywerecreatedmostprominentlyinthecontextofe-Scienceandopenscience,whichcouldbeunderstoodasmeta-narratives.ItsmostoutstandingexampleisprobablyDeRoure’soutlookonthe“futureofscholarlycommunications”(DeRoure2014b).Inthiswork,thedevel-opmentofthewholefieldofscholarlypublicationsisperceivedina
… Publishing 253
two-dimensionalcoordinatesystemdefinedbyincreasingautomationandincreasingcollaboration.Thedegreeofinnovationofpublicationformatscanthenbecomparedbycalculatingtheirdistancefromthefurthestpointofthetoprightquadrant.ThestrategicadvantageofthisapproachisalsowellexpressedinrhetoricdecisionsmadebyDeRoure.Hedescribesthecurrentsituationinpasttenseandadoptstheroleofahistorianlookingbacktothepresentfromthefuture.
Thereformulationofconflictsbetweendifferentperceptionsofdigitalpublicationsintoissuesofdifferentpositionsofstakeholdersonaladdertoprogresshasasecondeffect.Itoftenleadstoanextremelysimplified,butalsosometimeslofty,conceptofthesocial.ThisphenomenoniscomparabletotheonethathasbeenexemplifiedbyNPs.Inthiscase,however,itismotivatednotbyfrustrationofstakeholders’behaviorbutbyfascinationwithtechnologicalcapacities.
Infact,DeRoureandotherauthorsverymuchaddressthetopicofsocialaspectsindigitalpublications.DeRoureusestermslike“socialmachines”(DeRoure2014b,237),or“scientificsocialobjects”(DeRoure,Bechhofer,andGoble2011).Thequestionisthuswhatimageofthesocialrealmisprojectedbehindtheuseoftheterm.Asocialmachineisdefinedas“processesinwhichthepeopledothecreativeworkandthemachinedoestheadministration”(237).AccordingtoDeRoure,machine-readablepub-licationsarenecessaryinordertoallowthisscenariotohappen.Machine-readablepublicationsarepublicationswhichfollowtheirownconceptofscientificsocialobjects.Thewholesetupofpublicationsandcorrespondinginfrastructureresultsinaninteractionbetweenhumansandmachinesthatturnsthecomputerintoasocialagent.
There are several reasons for why such a use of the term social is problem-atic.First,thedefinitionofasocialmachineaddsnothingtothedefinitionofcomputationascalculatedcalculatorypractice.Hence,everytypeofcomputationissocialinthesensethatithasaninputandanoutputthatrelatestohumans.Second,itshouldberecalledonceagainthattheargumentbuildsuponasimplisticdefinitionofmachine-readability,whichtautologicallydefinescomputationasthetypeofcomputationaddressedbyscientificsocialobjects.1Accordingly,computersdonotonlybecomesocialagentsbyfollowingDeRoure’sapproachtocomputation.Instead,
1 Obviously,textminingalgorithmsdonotreadaplaintextarticleanylessthanaSPARQLquerywhich“reads”theformallyannotatedentitiesexposedasRDF.However,itdoessodifferentlywithdifferentoutcomesandpurposes.
254 Beyond the Flow
theyarealwayssocialagents,butagentswithawholegamutofrelation-shipstohumansthatexistedandwillcontinuetoexistsidebyside.
Thefactthatsocialactivityisonlyperceivedassuchifittakesplacewithina technological frame that itself is no longer a social issue results in a purelyquantitativemeasureofwhatissocialactivity.Moreprecisely,themore interactivity is measurable among the highest possible number of agents,themoresocialactivitytakesplace.InDeRoure’sterms,thismeans“howbigiscomputation,”and“howdenseisanetwork.”Incontrast,theabsenceofinteractionisnotconsideredasocialrelationshipitself.Itisjustperceivedaslesssocialactivity.Inotherwords,missingmeasurableinter-actionisnotconsideredanactionitself,andwhatismeasurableisdefinedbytheonewhomeasures.Theideathatsuchabsencecouldaddresscrucialissuesofthesocialdimensionofdigitalpublicationsthereforebecomesimpossible.Consequently,thewholeproblemoftheabsenceofresearchersandstakeholdersfromdigitalpublicationconceptsisturnedintoanawarenessproblemwhenMatthewsetal.(2013,chap.6)writesthat:
…manyresearchers,datapractitioners,publishersandpolicymakersareunawareofthepotentialofResearchObjectsasintellectualentities.
Ithasbeensaidthate-Scienceandopensciencearemeta-narratives.Accordingly,theanti-socializationofdigitalpublicationsbymeansofnarrativesofprogressarenotjuststrategicalmeans.Indeed,theypropagate a set of antisocial elements in the theoretical setup of open scienceitself.Oneshouldkeepinmindthedefinitionofopenness,asgivenbytheOpenKnowledgeFoundation:“Openmeansanyonecanfreelyaccess,use,modify,andshareforanypurpose”(OpenKnowledgeFoundation2015).Thisdefinitionleadstoanethicalclaim,madebymostadvocatesofopennessandpreciselyarticulatedbyBrown:“Openscienceisthephilosophicalperspectivethatsharingisgoodandthatbarrierstosharingshouldbeloweredasmuchaspossible”(2016).Sincethisprincipleisrarelytoneddownwithintheopensciencecommunity,andispresentedasaphilosophicalandnotanempiricalargument,someofitsantisocialcomponentscanbeaddressedquickly:
– Itneglectsthecasewheretheconditionsunderwhicharesourceisopeneduparesuchthatcrucialaspectsoftheresourcecannotbeopenedupwithit.Thismightrelatetothelayersofpresentation,tometadata,butalsotoqualitativeaspectsofaresourcethatneedmorecontextthanagivenenvironmentcanoffer.Inthissituation,
… Publishing 255
opening up a resource with the explicit intent of letting it circulate acrosscontextsinfacthasanegativesocialimpact.
– It neglects that a resource usually represents only part of a theme oraspecificviewpointofthetheme,andthatthistypeofopen-nessinisolationcanviolatetheethicalgoalsofopenscienceitself.Inotherwords,opennessdoesnotautomaticallyagglomeratepositiveimpactonthesocialorscientificgoods,itcreatestimedependentimpulsesforaspecificsocialsetup,inwhichtheeffectsofthisimpulsearepotentiallyunique.Boyd(2017)gathersabunchofexamplesofthenegativeimpactofopendataresources,evenincaseswherethebiasofsuchresourcesisminimal.
– Itneglectsthefactualinequalityofdifferentsocialagentswhocreateresourcesthatcanbemadeopenunderanormativedef-initionofopenness.Thisinequalitydoesnotmeantechnologicalcapacityonly,itrelatesaswelltothesocialpositionandcontextofagentsthatmightgivethemtime,resources,publicattention,professionalliberty,oreventheoptiontoworkdigitallyinordertocreateopenresources.
– Similarly,differentsocialagentspossessdifferentcapacitiesofactuallymakinguseofopenresourcesfortheverysamereasons.Thequestionofhowfastandhowefficientdifferentpeopleandstakeholdersareabletoextractvaluefromopenresourcesmustbeanswereddifferentlyfordifferentstakeholders.Thisdifference,however,hasahugeimpactonthestatusoftheopennessoftheoutcome,aswellasforthestructureofthefieldofscienceassuchandbeyond.
– Finally,theopencirculationofresourcesacrosscontexts,asenvisionedbyopenscience,ignoresanyperspectiveofhowthewholesocialfieldofproductionandexchangeofscholarlyresourceschangeswhenaresourcecirculatesfromcontextatocontextb.Inconjunctionwiththelastpoint,thiscouldactuallymeantheoverallconditionsofopennessdecreasebecauseofopenness.Moreprecisely,high-potentialagentsmaybenefitfromtheavailabilityofopenresources,whilenotpublishingderivatesunderopenorsociallybeneficialprinciples.SomeexamplesfortheseissuesweregatheredbyJeffreyBeall(Beall2013;Beall2017).
Beyondtheexamples,theseargumentsaretheoreticalpossibilities.However,sincetheoriginalclaimbyTitusBrownandotherauthorsinthefieldofdigitalpublishingismostoftenonlytheoretical,nothingmoreisrequiredatthispoint.Thelinesofargumentsrevealasimplifiedconceptof
256 Beyond the Flow
thesocialwithinopensciencethat,ashasbeenstatedbefore,treatssocialaspectsonlyintermsofthelevelofconnectivity,withoutconsistentlyreflectingeitheronthespecificpositionoftheseagentsinthenetwork,noronhowtherealizationanduseofspecificconnectionschangethebalanceofanetwork.Inshort,thismeansthatthemoreconnectivity,thebetter,andthemoreanagentsupportsconnectivity,themoresheispositivelyseentoservethegreatergood.Littleresearchhasactuallybeencarriedouttoconfirmorqualifythesejudgements,especiallynotinthefieldofdigitalpublicationswithconnectionstotheopensciencedomain.Whilethisobservationsupportsthepresentcritique,thefirststudiesfromperipheralopensciencetopicssuchopenaccessmonographpublishing(MilloyandCollins2016;Ferwerda,Pinter,andStern2017)haverecentlyindicatedthatthingsareoftenmorecomplicated.LevinandLeonelli(2017,286),accordingly,concludeinasociologicalfieldstudyontheimplementationofopen science principles that:
…whetheropennessleadstoincreasedtransparencyandaccount-abilitydependsonhow,bywhom,andforwhichpurposesopennessisenacted.…specificinstantiationsofopennesscanfosterattitudesthatmanywouldregardasalientoopensciencemandates….Thus,wearguethatcurrentscientificandpoliticaldiscussionsshouldfocusonwhatpartsofresearchshouldbeopen,how,when,andforwhichpurposes.Thevariabilityofsituationsinwhichopennessisenacted,andtherelatedneedtoevaluateitsimplementationonacase-by-casebasis,needstobetakenintoaccountbyopensciencepolicies.
Asmuchastheemergenceofmoresubtleperspectivesintheperipheryofopenscienceandopenaccess—suchastheoneabove—mustbewelcomed,itsstrongabsencefromdigitalpublicationconceptsfromtheopensciencedomainneedstobestressed.Anevenmoreproblematicaspectoftheasocialattitudesinopenscienceistheethosthataslongastherearenoimmediatereasonsagainsttheopenpublicationofresource,themostopenoptionshouldbechosen.Inthiscontext,empiricalproofforpotentialrisksaredemanded,whiletheirownlineofargumentoftenrefrainsfromincludingcomprehensiveempiricaldataontheafore-mentionedissues.
Theanti-socializationofthetopicofdigitalpublicationsbymeansofnarrativesofprogress,anditscorrespondinglimitedconceptsofthesocialfield,literallyturnintoasocialbehaviorwherethetensionsthatsuchnarrativescreateisexplicitlyaddressed.Inthisrespect,thephrasesbyCameronNeylonthathavealreadybeenquotedneedtobere-interpreted.
… Publishing 257
The transformation of social conflict into heterogeneity
Afterseveralexamples,whereaspectsofthesocialdimensionoftechnologywereconvertedtosocialfacetswithinpeculiartechnologies,anothertransformationofsocialissuesrequiresattention.Thisisthetransformationofsocialconflictsintoissuesofheterogeneity.Whatismeantbythisterminologicalsubstitutionistheimplicitorexplicitideathatdifferencesneverexcludeeachother,butcanalwaysbeharmonizedormayexistsidebyside.Additionally,itmeanstheideathataharmonizedset-upisalwaysthepreferableoption.
OneexampleforsuchatransformationistheideaofScholarlyCom-municationInfrastructuresandtheOpenAIREapproach.Differentfromformerapproaches,OpenAIREacceptsthestateofheterogeneityinthefieldofdigitalpublications.However,thescaledapproachofOpenAIREshowedthatthisacceptanceisonlypreliminary.Thegoalofthisinfra-structureistograduallyimplementpolicyseekinginordertounifyscholarlypublishing,andatthesametimemaintaintheideathattheharmonizationofdomainspecificpublicationenvironmentisadesirableandachievablegoal.
Furthermore,domainrepositoriesasscience2.0repositoriesbuildontheideaofheterogeneityasagradualdeviationfromthenorm,perceivedofasgeneric,adeviationthatassuchcanthenbeincludedandexistsidebysidewithothers.Consequently,theOpenAIREprojectdefinesEnhanced Publication Meta-Modelsfromwhichso-called“domain-specific”Enhanced Publications Data Modelscanbederived,usingtheEnhanced Publications Data Model Definition Language(BardiandManghi2015a).Inanextstep,an Enhanced Publication Domain Specific Manipulation Language assures the mappingbetweenconcreteEPsinadomainanditsdomain-specificdatamodel.
Whatismostnotablewhenregardingthischainofstepsistheconvictionofaseamlessintegrationofdifferences.Thepossibilitythatthemeta-modelmightnotsuffice,orisjustnotmeaningfulenoughtodescribespecificpublicationtypes,doesnotoccur.Therelationshipsbetweendifferentpublication formats are therefore a hierarchy of subclassandsameAs relations.
TheOpenAIREprojectwasalreadyareactiontotheexperiencethatharmonizationofcrucialareasarounddigitalpublicationshadnotoccurredautomatically,orasaresultofabottomupapproachpursuedforSPs,andinthefieldofthesemanticwebingeneral.AsintheOpenAIREcontext,SPs
258 Beyond the Flow
advocatetheideathattheuseofsharedsemanticsinordertostructureapublicationisdesirableandusefulforanytypeofpublication.Likewise,itisbuiltontheideathattheprovisionofsufficientmeans(technologicalororganizational)willassurethatsuchsemanticswillappear.Therefur-thermoreisasimilaritybetweenthehierarchicalorderingofthelandscapeofpublicationsandthetaxonomiclogicsinthecoremodel,aswellasspiritofthesemanticweb.2Therefore,itcanbeunderstoodasanearlierversionofanunderstandingofsocialdifferencesintermsofheterogeneity,insteadoftensionorconflict.
Asignificantpropertyandnecessaryconsequenceofthislineofthoughtisthewayinwhichexistingdifferencesareanalyzed.Bourne,BuckinghamShum,etal.(2012)summarize:
Thesoftwaredeveloperswhobuildthecurrentresearchinformaticsinfrastructurearealsoveryawareoftheshortfallsandhindrancesgeneratedbytoday’sfragmenteddevelopmentefforts.Theproblemsherecanbeattributedtoanumberofelements.First,heterogeneoustechnologiesanddesigns,andthelack(orsometimesthesuper-fluity!)ofstandards,causeunnecessarytechnicaldifficultiesanddirectlyaffectintegrationcosts.…Third,researchsoftwaredevel-operstypicallyworkinacompetitiveenvironment,eitheracademicorcommercial,whereinnovationisrewardedmuchmorehighlythanevolutionaryandcollaborativesoftwarereuse.Thisisespeciallytrueinafundingenvironmentdrivenbytheneedforintensiveinnovation,wherereusingotherpeoples”codeisalikelysourceofcriticism.…Theimpactofthesetoolsis,fartoooften,solelybasedonhowimmediatelyusefultheywillbetoresearchersthemselves,withnothoughtforthewidercommunity.
Thus,theheterogeneityisdescribedasunnecessaryinthefirstplace.Althoughsocialreasonsaregiveninitially,thefollowinglinesturnthis
2 Itistruethatinthesemanticweb,manynon-taxonomicmodelsexisttoformallydescribesemanticrelationships,likeforinstancerule-basedorthesaurus-likemodels.Nevertheless,thecoremodelRDFSistaxonomic.Moreimportantly,themodellingculturearoundspecificdomainsemanticsofteninheritsataxonomicwayofthinking.AparadigmaticexampleforthissituationcanbefoundinthewaytheW3CWebAnnotationDataModeltreatsitspropertymotivation.Thetermswhichcanbeusedforthispropertyaremodelledbyusingrelationshipsofathesaurus.WebAnnotationallowsaddingandrelatingdomainspecificmotivationstermstotheseterms.Incontrasttothecomplexrelationshipsthatarepossiblebyusingrelationshipsofathesaurus,WebAnnotationdemandstreatingthegiventermsasgenerictermsallowingonlyspecification.Thatmeanstheformalpotentialtorelatetoamodelincomplexwaysisturnedintotaxonomicpractice.
… Publishing 259
explanationintoapersonalissueoffearofcritiqueandasocialbehavior.Byincludingnotonlydevelopersbutstakeholdersofdigitalpublicationsingeneral,Goble,DeRoure,andBechhofer(2012,14)bringitmoretothepointwhentheyusethetitle“OpenKnowledgeFlow:TheCommonGoodvs. Self-Interest.”
Themainpointbehindthecritiqueoftransformationofdifferencesintodeviationisnottosaythatanykindofdifferenceisnecessaryandneedstoberespected.Thepointisthatthistransformationresultsintheveryopposite.Ittreatsanykindofdifferenceaspotentiallyunnecessaryinthefirstplace.Thisfactisalsorepresentedbytheuseofthetermgenerictodescribethegoalsofmodelling,usedbymanyauthors.Forinstance,Shottonetal.(2015,7)calltheDocumentsComponentsModel(DoCO)“agenericmodelharmonizingalltheseaspects.”Incontrast,thegoalofmod-ellingcouldalsobedescribedasfindingastablemodel,oramodelthatrepresentsafunctional“contactzone”(Dallas2016)betweenstakeholders.Thedifferenceisthatsuchorientationscreateahighersensitivitytoques-tionssuchas:whatistherightlayerofabstractionamodeladdresses?whatisanefficientscopeforthemodel?andfinally,whatistheroleofmodellinginaspecificpublicationcontext?Thesequestionsareaddressedbytakingintoaccountthesocialenvironmentinwhichmodellingpracticestakeplaceandrespondingtothemdifferentlyineachsituation.
Incontrast,genericityandharmonizationhaveprivilegedanattitudeinwhichindividualsaremaderesponsiblefortheburdenoftremendouslyambitiousmodellinggoals.Hence,thelackofrespectforsocialstructureandstateofadomainturnsintotheimageofasocialagentsdrivenbyself-interest.Inthisrespect,theironyissignificantthatthesectiononSPsshowedthattheattempttoharmonizesemanticscreatednewheterogeneity.Incontrast,Assanteetal.(2016,7)remark,stillwithinthelogicalstructureofOpenAIRE,thatgenericsolutionsareoftenalsonotveryusefulsolutions.Unfortunately,theauthorsdonotthinktheirwaytotheendoftheentiresetofconsequencesofthisobservation.
A Theatrical Concept of Social Aspects
Ashasjustbeennoted,genericsolutionsmayofcourseexistinoneortheothersituation.Theymayalsobedesirableandsupportiveinothers.Withthat,anotherpatternofanti-socializationarises,stemmingfromapointofviewopposingtheoneinthelastsection.Whileinthelastsectionauthorsunderestimatedthequalitativedimensionofdifferences,itisaspossibletooveremphasizethisdimension.Theresultcouldbecalledatheatrical
260 Beyond the Flow
conceptofthesocialdimensionofpublications.Inthisconcept,theatricalmeansthateachdifferenceisequallyimportant,andthateachelementthatappearsinconsequenceofobservabledifferenceshasthesamevalueforscholarlypublications.Inconsequence,thereisalackofdesignofpub-lishingconcepts,afactthatcreatesitsownsetproblems.
The areas in which this pattern is observable concern the forms of representationinpublications,differentstrategiesofpublishingpub-lications,thesocialimpactofpublications,andfinallythecomponentsofpublications.
TheapproachofTPsistheoneapproachindigitalpublishingthatismostnotablybuiltontheextensionofsymbolicpracticesprovokedbydigitaltechnologies.Single-ResourcePublicationsaresomewhatapartofthesamedevelopment,becausetheyaresupposedtorepresentresearchinitsownright.Thefirstachievesmultimodalpublicationsasacombinationofdifferentsemioticresourceswithinonepublication,theseconddoesthesame by treating each semiotic resource as an equally useful publication environment.
Althoughtheseexamplesarethemostsignificantones,itbecameclearinthehistoryofdigitalpublicationsthatsemioticresourcesotherthantextalsogotsignificantattentioninconceptslikeSPsorEPs.Whilethisshortcompilationemphasizesasharedprinciple,asignificantdifferencestillexists.Itisimportanttodistinguishbetweenattemptingtosupportthegrowinginfluenceofavarietyofsemioticresourcesandaimingatthehighestlevelofmultimodalityinpublicationsthemselves.
ThesectiononTPsandsimilarlinesofargumentsshowedthatmultimodalcomplexitybecomesavalueinitself.Nevertheless,thereisanimportantgap between the theoretical insight that “there is no such thing as a perfectinterfacethatshowseverything”(Adema2014),andtointentionallypushtowardsmultimodality.Thispushisareactiontotheprecedingobservation,whichdoesnotfollowautomatically,butrequiresanotherstepofinterpretationanddecisionmaking.Thefactthatacombinationofsemioticresources—withinoracrosspublications—might“show”moredoesnotmeanthatanysemioticresourceoragreatlevelofmultimodalcomplexityisautomaticallyuseful.
In multiple places in this inquiry it became clear that the value of pub-licationsmuchdependsonissuessuchasthearchivabilityofpub-licationformats,andtheimplementabilityaswellasmaintainabilityoftechnologicalandorganizationalinfrastructurenecessarytorealizeit.
… Publishing 261
Followingthegoalto“show”much,italsodependsonthecapabilityofconsumerstoprocessandunderstandthatmuch.Inotherterms,rep-resentationsneedtoberead,notjustviewed.Adensemultimodaldescriptionsaysnothingaboutitsreadabilityandefficiency.
Alloftheaforementionedissuesaddresscertaincapabilitiesofdigitalpublicationsandtheirstakeholders.Theyhencedescribethesocialcon-stitutionofthisfield,whichhas,aswashighlightedbymanyauthors,limitedresourcesofthematerialandabstractkind.Incontrast,themainargumentonwhichthegoalofmaximalmultimodalcomplexityisbasedispurelytheoretical.ChapterthreepresentedasetofproblemswhichdoindeedreflectthistensiondiscussedamongauthorssuchasDiender(2010),orBallandEyman(2015).Accordingly,noteverythingthatentersthesocialsphereofpublishingissociallysustainable.Evenifitwilleventually,becomingsuchfurthermorerequiresqualifyingtheideaincorrespondencewiththesocialconstraintsofagivensituation.Significantly,McPherson(2010),asanexceptiontothislineofresearch,votedinfavorofmultimodaltemplates,afterhavingworkedwithTPs.
Theideaoftemplatesleadstoanotherproblematicnotionofsocialaspectsindigitalpublishing.Inprinciple,thismodelisjustarepetitionoftheissuediscussedinthelastparagraphs,butonthelevelofpublicationformats.Whiletransmedialityshowedatendencytonotdifferentiatethevalueofdifferentmodesofrepresentation,thisnotionoftendeniesadistinctionbetweenbeingpubliclyavailableandbeingapublication.Thisdistinctionhasindeedbecomeproblematic,astheabundanceofdigitalpublicationformatsexaminedherehasdemonstrated.Onceagain,thereisadifference,however,betweenobservingandrespectingthisprocess,andignoringthisdifferenceentirely.Similarly,acknowledgingthatthereisno“one-size-fits-all”approachdoesnotdirectlyleadtotheideathatwhatmakesapublicationcanonlybedefined“onaproject-to-projectbasis,”asHall,Kuc,andZylinska(2015)suggest.
Theapproachthateverythingthatispubliclyavailableshouldbeconsid-eredapublicationappearedinmostpublicationformatsindifferentslants.Oneofthose,whichisofparticularimportanceinthissection,istorefrainfromdistinguishingbetweenscholarlypublicationsbasedonthesocialenvironmentinwhicharesourceisavailable.OLBsandHPs,forinstance,promotedtheuseofGooglespreadsheets,imagesfromFlickr,orinfra-structuresuchasGoDaddyor1&1.SomeUBshavebeenpublishedusingcommercialservicessuchasPBworks.Thequestionofhowfarcommercial
262 Beyond the Flow
servicesorproprietaryformatscomplywiththerequirementsofacademicpublishingdidnotaffecttheirinclusionintoapproachestopublishing.
WhileinthecaseofOLBsthisdecisionwaspragmatic,itappearsstrategicinHPs.ThemakersofHPswanttotransfertherightofdecidingwhatapublicationistotheresearchprojectandtoresearchers.Correspondingly,whatapublicationactuallyiswouldnolongerbetheresultofaconsensusbetweenagentsinthesocialsphereofpublishing.Eachagentgetstherighttodefinesomethingasapublication,andthuseverythingthatispubliclyavailablecanbepotentiallyconsideredapublication.Asbefore,thesocialaspectisnolongerthesphereinwhichthestatusandcontextofpub-licationsisnegotiated.
Thislineofthoughtisalsowellreflectedintheso-calledpublicationtaxonomymentionedearlier.Apartfromthefactthatitcontains“pub-lications”rangingfrome-mailtorapid SMS,itdoesnothaveataxonomicstructure.Ataxonomyorganizestermsinahierarchicalstructure,i.e. itprioritizesonthegroundsoforganizingprinciples.Thepublicationtaxonomyjustcontainstwolists.Itrefrainsfromorganizinginordertoindex.
HybridPublicationsbuildontheideaofthepost-digital.Theaforemen-tionedlistappearstoanalyzepublishinginthelightofthe“post-digitalcondition.”Ashasbeenoutlined,akeyaspectofthepost-digitalconditionistheimportanceofcontextinordertodecidewhatismostsuitableoutofasetofoptionsinahybridenvironment.Notably,publishingitselfisnotexplicitlyaddressedintheseexamplesasasocialcontext,aframethatcreatesitsownsetofcriteriainordertodistinguishbetweensuitableandunsuitableformats.
Cramerconcludesthat“theterm‘post-digital’”initssimplestsensedescribesthemessystateofmedia,arts,anddesignaftertheirdigitization”(Cramer2014).Hetherebyconfirmstheresultsofchapterfive,namelythatthecreationofmessinessisaneffect,althoughnotanecessaryone,oftheintroductionofwhatiscalleddigitaltechnologies.Similarly,Adema(2015,6)referstotheissueofmessinessbutinadifferentwaywhenshewritesabout her attempt of:
…reimaginingadifferent,moreethicalhumanities,albeitahumanitiesthatismessyandprocessual,contingent,unboundandunfinished.(Adema2015,6)
Whatsomeauthors,thus,trytodoistomultiplytheeffectsofdigitaltechnologiesinsteadofbuildingasocialenvironmentaroundsucheffects.
… Publishing 263
Withoutseeingitthatway,theseauthorsprobablyactmuchmoreinlinewiththelogicsofdigitaltechnologiesthanwithaprocessthatsocializesthesetechnologies.
Asisclearfromthelastquote,someoftheauthorsbehindthistypeofanti-socializationfollowacertaintypeofethic.QuotingAlanO’Shea,Ademaarguesthatpublishingisapracticethat“constitute[s]usasparticularkindsofsubjectsandexclude[s]otherkinds.Themoreroutinisedourpractices,themorepowerfullythisclosureworks”(Adema2015,26).Apublication,andthehistoricalmonographinparticular,then,isthenexusthatorches-tratesandstabilizessuchpractices.
Acompletediscussionofsuchethicsisoutsideofthescopeofthepresentstudy.Nevertheless,itisnecessarytoquicklyhighlightinwhichwaysuchethicsmightcontainasimplisticnotionofthesocialdomain.Thisneces-sityderivesnotonlyfromitsimpactonthedesignofmanypublications,but also from the fact that it will reveal familiarity with some issues of openness.
ThefirstofAdema’stwoquotesshowedthathere,hermaincritiqueisdirectedagainstanykindoffixation.Thesecondquoteshowsthatpub-lications—historicallythemonographs—appeartobethekeyfixationsofacademia.Theunethicaldimensionoffixationsisthefactthattheyintroducebipolardistinctions.Ascholarlypublicationdefineswhatiscon-sideredscienceandwhatisnot.Relatedpracticesandtheenvironmentinwhichtheytakeplacedividestakeholdersintothosewhoareabletopar-ticipateinscience,andthosewhoarenot.ThecriticalconcernwithbipolardistinctionshasbeensimilarlyhighlightedinTaraMcPherson’scommentsonthemediationbetweenbinaries.
Accordingly,approachesfollowingthislineofargumenttopublicationspretendtodesignpublicationformatsthatavoidfixations.Mostnotably,thisideaismanifestsingreatpartsofUBs.Itsintendedincompletenesshasbeencoinedasameasureagainstdogmatization.Similarly,itscrowd-sourcedandauthor-lessproductionformisunderstoodassocialinclusive-ness.InPosthumanities: The Dark Side of “The Dark Side of the Digital” AdemaandHall(2016sec. DisruptiveHumanities)UBsarepresentedasthemeansfor:
…affirmativelydisruptingthehumanitiesbyseeingthethreattohumanismandthehumanassociatedwiththeemergenceofthesenew“posthuman”technologiesasofferingusachance….
264 Beyond the Flow
Whatremainsunreflectedinsuchdesigns,however,istheextenduptowhichtheycreatetheirownfixations,especiallythatofunboundness.Toputitdifferently,suchdesignsdonotonlyrepresentthevolatileandcontingentfacetofpeople’sworldsthattheformattriestorespect,theyalsohaveamultiplyingeffectonit.Whetherthiseffectisnecessarilygood,understoodethically,isnotdiscussedanywhere.Apartfromanyresponsetothisquestion,thisformat,followingitsownlineofargument,becomesaforcethatproduceswhatitrepresents,andinthisrespectdoesnotdis-tinguishfromwhatitcriticizes.
Incorrespondencewiththemainthemeofthissection,thisambivalenceisbasedonaselectiveawarenessofthesocialdimensionofpublications.Theyareselectiveinsofarastheydonotincludeagent’scapacitytoplaywithbipolardistinctionsthemselves,andtosubvertthembyusingthem.Itfurthermoreignoresaspectsofempowermentthataremediatedbyfixationsanddistinctions,aspectsthatwerevisiblethroughoutthewholediscussiononcalculatorypractice.3Toputitdifferently,fixationsarenotjustmechanismsofexclusion.Theyalsoofferamoretrans-subjectivepointoforientationfortheexcluded,toatleastbecomingawareaboutwhatneedstobeincluded,asourcethatatitsbestcanalsodenotearesourcethatcanbeusedinordertolegallydemandinclusion.Inshort,thistypeofcritiqueofbipolardistinctionsintroducesanewbipolardistinctioninthesocialdomain,thatbetweeninclusivenessandexclusiveness.4
AdemaherselfremarksthatO’Sheawarnsagainstattributingtoomuchpowertotheaforementionedpracticesandthefixationsonwhichtheyrely.Shealsoconductsacomplexdiscussiononwhatiscritiqueinthisrespect.However,asfollowsfromthelastparagraphs,suchrelativizationsremainwithoutconsequencesforcorrespondingformatsofpublicationsandstatementsliketheonesabove.Theseformats,thus,arethosewhichintendtodisturbtheallegedlyintrinsiclogicofthesocialspaceofpub-lishingtowardsvictimizationanddogmatization,andwhichcelebratethe“messiness”towhichtheseformatsseemwillingtocontribute.Althoughframedinanintellectuallymoresophisticatedtheory,theseformatsproduceadeterministicmodelofvictimsanddogmas,insteadofsocialagentsandpragmasinthefieldofpublishing.
3 Theissueisnotthattherelationshipbetweenpowerandempowermentisnotaddressedwithinthetheoreticalbackgroundofthesepublications,butthatwhenitcomestothedesignofpublicationformats,theambivalenceisneglected.
4 Theproblematicdimensionofthisissueisveryoftendiscussedinthecontextofdebatesonthetheoreticalschoolofconstructivism(seeCollin2008).
… Publishing 265
Likewise,fewexamplesexistinwhichthesocialimpact—repressiveaswellasprogressive—ofconcretedistinctionsmadeinhistoricalandnewpublicationformatsareevaluatedinthecontextofsuchapproaches.Thereareonlyfewattemptsofrealdesignofnewpublicationsthatorganizethefieldofpost-digitalpublishing—besidestheambiguoussingle-sourceapproach—usingnew,old,andmodifiedfixations.Thepublicationiscon-ceivedofasachannelinsteadofasanobject,regardlessofthefactthatachannelisalsoprovidedbyanobject,i.e. theapplication.Itisamatterofperspective:theperspectivepresentedinthissectionattemptstobringtheinteractionsofasocialfield(science),organizedaroundandthroughpub-lications,intothepublicationsinorderto“hypercyberdemocrize”(Adema2015,164)thisfield.Thisrelationshipshowsthattheseformats,despitetheircritiqueoftheregulatoryeffectofpublications,haveastrongintenttoregulateandcontrol.Itcouldfurthermorebearguedthatbytryingtorelocatesocialinteractionsaroundpublicationsintopublications,thisaspectisstrengthened.Again,itisarguedthatthisattempt“isnotonethatshouldbeconceptualizedasaprojectoramodel”(ibid.).Amodelnever-thelessitis,insofarasitmakesapointandcreatesprojectslikeLiquid-,Living-,andothertypesofBooksthatareaproductofitsargument.Asmuchascorrespondingauthorsdenythistension,theydiscursivelyrefertoastructureinthesocialspaceofpublishingthatceasestoexist.Thisstructureincreasinglyturnsintoanavatar,asituationinwhichitbecomesmoreandmoredifficulttoreacttonewsocialpatternsinthefield.
ThisproblemisnotablyreflectedbythefactthatmanyLivingBooksarenotlivingatall.Theroleoftheauthorisreproducedbythefactthatfewactorscontributetothem,sothattheinitiatoroftheprojectbecomesatraditionalauthorwithoutintent.Similarly,theformallyunboundedbookbecomeseffectivelyboundbythescarcityofupdatesafterbeingputonline.AnexceptionworthmentioningwastheAiMEproject.Ithasbeenhighlighted,however,thatthemaindifferencebetweenthisprojectandotherUBsistheenormouseffortitputsintothedesign,organization,andsustainabilityofthesocialspacearoundtheAiMEUnboundBook.Theaforementionedethicsdiscouragesuchadegreeofintendedorganizationandcontrolusedinatacticalmanner.Onceagain,theironyliesinthefactthattheAiMEUnboundBookbecameeffectivelyinclusive,insteadofjustenablinginclusiveness.
It has been written that some overlap exists between the ethics of this sectionandthetopicofopenness.Obviously,openscienceisanethic.Moreimportantisthefactthatbothethicsareethicsmaintainingthesameideaofinclusion.Inthesameway,asoneseekstoaddressanabstract
266 Beyond the Flow
anyone(agents),theotheraimsatincludinganabstracteverything(resources).Itisimportanttoemphasizethissimilarity,becauseitshowsthatotherwisecompletelydisconnectedpublicationformatsarepartofacomparableethicaldevelopment,adevelopmentthatappearscloselyrelatedtotheeffectsofdigitaltechnologiesthemselves.ItshowsthatinacertainperspectivethereisindeedacommongroundbehindpublicationformatslikeUBsontheonehandandSCPsontheother.
Self-ContainedPublicationscarrythesameethicstowardstheresearchprocessasUBsapplytosocialagents.Theyseektopreventanyexclusionofdigitalelementsinthedesignoftheirformat,inordersupportalikewiseabstractideaofreproducibility.Curiously,similarexperiencesaremadeinthisareaofresearchaswereaddressedbytheAiMEproject.Tremendouseffortisnecessarytoturnsuchformatsintoreal,i.e. sociallyeffective,pub-lications.Sucheffortsquestiontheoriginalidea.Thereasonisnotonlythedimensionofthecosts.ThecostsforrealizingSCPshavebeendiscussedindepth.Thereasonisratherthattheseeffortscontradicttheoriginalidea.InthecaseofAiME,thisisthecasebecausetheintensivedesignofworkflows,thedefinitionofrolessuchasformoderatorsabletoapproveandrejectcontentisexactlywhatAdemaproblematizesinthecontextofthebook.InthecaseofSCPs,thediscussionshowedthatthemoreradicallyreproduci-bilityispursued,themoreitrequiresmakingdecisionsthatcouldhavebeenmadeotherwisewhileproducingareproduciblepublication.
Threedifferenttypesofde-socializationofthefieldofdigitalpublicationshavebeendiscussed.Thefirstshowedhowsocialissuesaretranslatedintoissuesframedbypeculiartechnologies,andhowthistranslationobscuresthereflectiononthesocialstatusofsuchtechnologiesthemselves.Theseconddescribedapproacheswhichperceivesocialprocessasprocessesofstandardizationandharmonizationonly.Thelasttypeaddressedanall-inclusiveideaofsocialaspectsandthecontradictionstheyruninto.
Theevaluationofsuchtypesofanti-socializationpermitsarguingthatdifferentapproachesarelinkedindifferentwaystothesethreetypes.Onamoregenerallevel,itisevenpossibletoclaimthatapproachesdrivenbydisciplinesfromtheartsandhumanitiesrelatetothemdifferentlythanapproachesdrivenbythesciences.Forobviousreasons,examplesfortypeoneandtwoareoftenpublicationformatsfromthesciences,whiletypethree,withsomeexceptions,isshowcasedbyformatsfromthehumanities.
Asinthecaseofepistemologicalclaims,theattitudetowardssocialaspectsinpublicationformatscanbeinterpretedinthecontextoftheepistemologicaleffectsofdigitaltechnologiesandtheirsurplus.Thus,itis
… Publishing 267
notdifficulttorelatethesecondtypetothesupposedconflationbetweenrepresentationandintervention.Claimsconcerningtheendoftheory,anddataastheonlyandubiquitousmodeofrepresentationthatisnolongerrepresentation,permitthebeliefthattherearefewsourcesofepis-temologicalconflictleft.Dataisconceivedofasprecise,anditsformofproductionisnecessary.Inconsequence,differenceshavetobedifferencesofmisunderstanding,ajudgmentquotedseveraltimesinpartone.Thismeansthatitisanissuethatcanbesolvedincrementally.Inthesamewayelementsofthethirdtypeofde-socializationcan,andhavebeen,relatedtotheideaofauniversalsymbolism.
However,itisthenotionofasurplusofdigitaltechnologieswhichexplainswhyageneralnegationofcertainaspectsofthesociallifearoundpub-licationsunderminesthesocialintegrityofsuchpublications,asindicatedbysomeoftheexamplesinthischapter.Inaccordancewiththeconceptofepistemologicaleffectsandpost-digitality,itwouldalsobewrongtoarguethatthesethreenegationscomewithoutreason.Instead,theinterestingrelationshipbetweentypeoneandtwoontheoneside,andtypethreeontheother,revealstherealproblem.Whilethefirsttwotrytocontrolandengineerthesocialspacetoomuch,thelasttriestobeaslittleofaninfluenceaspossible.Thequestionofdigitalpublicationsthereforeisalsothequestionofthetypeofsocialrelationshipsthatneedtobedesignedtoletdigitalpublicationsbesustainedandbecomevaluable.
The Ambiguous Issue of HeterogeneityThepresentinquiryintodigitalpublicationswasdrivenbythemotivationtoexplaintheconjunctionbetweeneffortsincreatingdigitalpublicationsandcomplaintsabouttheirimpact.Itwasclaimedthatsuchanexplanationisnecessarybecausethisconjunctionappearstobemorestableandprofoundthanexpectedinthedynamicsofinnovation.Farfrombeingabandoned,asDenningandRous(1995,72)havepredictedforthecaseoffailingadaptation,scientificpublishingcarrieditsallegedbreakdownuntiltodayandextendeditintosomethingthathassimplybeencalleditsmessystateafterdigitization.
Suchmessiness,moreover,mightappeartobeaproductoftheverysameprocessthatinmostcasesismeanttosolveit.Thereareatleasttwoindicatorsthatjustifycontinuingananalysisinthisdirection.Thefirstindicatorisaquantitativemeasure,thesecondoneisqualitative,tobediscussedfurtherbelow.Thedegreeofactivityaroundthecreationofnewpublicationformatsanditsincreaseovertimeoffernoreasontobelieve
268 Beyond the Flow
thatithascontributedtothestabilizationofthepublishinglandscape.Thisfirstmeasurealonedependsoninterpretation;onepossibilitywasofferedwithintheoutlineofpartone,structuringtheseactivitiesinitsownnarrative,supportingtheaforementionedhypothesis.Itwillfurthermorebecometransparentthroughouttherestofthestudyhowtheresultsofthesemeasuresreflecttheproblematicrelationshipbetweendigitalpub-licationsandtheirsocialenvironment.
Quantitative Indicators for the Lack of Sustainability of Digital Publications
Aquantitativemeasureofresearchactivityondigitalpublicationsisrep-resentedinfigure6.1.Itshowstheamountofresearchpublicationscon-cernedwithdigitalpublicationformats(y-axis)andtherebyitsdistributionwithinthetimespanofanalysis(x-axis).Theselectionofresearchpub-licationsmostlymatchestheapproachtothetopicofdigitalpublicationsinthisinquiry(seeIntroduction).
Accordingly,twotypesofpublicationswereconsidered.Thefirsttypedescribesthedesignorimplementationofpeculiarformatsenvisionedorimplementedbytheauthorsthemselves.Thesecondtypeconsistsofpublicationsinwhichauthorsdescribeformatsdescribedbyothers.Thesepublicationspromoteaparticularpublicationformatinacertainfield,orargueinfavorofdoingso.Inotherwords,theyattempttopositionaformatinafieldorresearchdomain.Anothernecessarycriterionfortheinclusionintothemeasuredcorpus,alsohighlightedalready,istheconditionthatthepublicationexplicitlyneedstoreferencetheoverarchingthemeofdigitalpublications.
Theresultingdatasetcontains413researchpublicationsondigitalpub-licationformats.Theresearchpublicationswereallpublishedbetween1995and2017andcanbeseenasacomprehensiveselectionforthisperiod.Ashasbeendiscussedintheintroduction,therearequiteafewreasonstodefine1995asastartingpointforthetopicofdigitalpublications.Mostofthesepublications,althoughnotallofthem,arementionedanddiscussedthroughoutthisinvestigation.
Thediagramshowsanincreaseintheoverallnumberofpublicationsuntil1998,followedbyaperiodofstagnationthatrapidlyendsaround2008.Themostactiveyearintermsofpublicationsaboutdigitalpublicationformatssofarwas2014.Thecurvecorrespondsingreatdetailwiththesequencingofcorrespondingresearchintothephasesinpartone.Accordingtothis,
…Publishing 269
thetopicwasgenerallyintroduceduntilthemillennium,followedbyaperiodofinvestmentintosocialandtechnologicalinfrastructure.Thisinfra-structuregaverisetoanimmensedynamicofactivitiesthatyetagainslowdownoverthelastthreeyears.Figure6.2makesthispatternclearerbyapplying a kernel density estimation(alsoreferredtoasKDE)withgaussiankerneltothesamedataaswasusedforthefigureabove.
[Figure6.1]Researchliteratureaboutdigitalpublicationformatsbetween1995and2017
[Figure6.2]KDEappliedtothedatausedinfigure6.1
270 Beyond the Flow
Twointerpretationsofthediagramsaregenerallypossible.Thefirstonewouldbetoreadtheincreaseofpublicationsasasignoftheirsuccess.Accordingly,thediagramswouldgivetestimonyofthefactthatmoreisinvestedintothedevelopmentofdigitalpublicationformatsuntil2014becausetheyarebecomingapartofscholarlypublishing.
However,suchinterpretationwouldinterpretinabiasedwaywhatthepublicationsinthecollectionrepresent.Aswasjustmentioned,pub-licationswerechosenthatrepresentactivitiesofdesign,implementation,andpromotionofdigitalpublicationformats.Hencetheincreaseofactivitydoesnotautomaticallyrepresentthestabilizationandsettlingofdigitalpublications,butonlytheincreaseofefforts.5Itshowsthatmoreandmoreisinvestedwiththeaimofarrivingatastabledigitalpublishingfield.Additionally,itisproblematictointerpretthesmalldecreaseafter2014infavorofsuchstabilization.Theintroductionandchapterfoursuggestedthatitmorelikelyreflectsthedisillusionofdigitalpublicationadvocatesand,accordingly,theslowdownofnewengagements.Inanycaseitisimportanttorememberofwhatsuchactivitiesexactlystandforineachofthefourphases.
Qualitative Indicators for the Lack of Sustainability of Digital Publications
Overwhelmingevidencefortheclaimthattheincreaseofeffortdoesnotcorrespondwithastabilizationofthefieldemergeswhenattemptingtogroupactivitiesaroundcomparableapproaches.Differentapproachestodigitalpublicationshavebeenthekeyaspectofpartone.Theviolinplotinfigure6.3gathersalltheapproachesthathavebeendiscussed(y-axis)andalignsthemonatimeaxis(x-axis).Thisalignmentisagainmadebyreferringtothepublicationdatesofpublicationsthatciteacertainapproachwithintheabovecollection.Thewidthofeachviolinrepresentsthenumberofpublicationsofacorrespondingpublicationformatataspecificpointintime.Thisbeingsaid,disappearancedoesnotnecessarilymeanthattheapproachesareabandoned.However,inmostcases,suchasMAs,itmaybeinterpretedthisway.
5 Inordertovalidatetheformer,itwouldbenecessarytoevaluatetheusageofformatsitself.Inordertoobtaincomprehensiveresults,suchanalysiswouldofcourse require not only counting the number of publications for each format but alsofindingqualitativecriteriaforeachimplementation.Suchaneffortisoutsidethescopeofthepresentinquiry.However,itisalsonotnecessary,duetothecomplaintsaboutthelackofadoptionrelatedstakeholdersthemselvesexpress.Additionally,thelackofadoptionwasillustratedmorecloselyacrosstheentiretextwhereverpossible.
…Publishing 271
Whatisshowninthediagramisdoubtlesslyagoodmeasurefortheprolif-erationinthefieldofdigitalpublications,whichappearedalloveranduptotherecentpast,asdescribedinthepresentinquiry.Infact,itsincreaseseemstocorrelatewiththeincreaseofeffortscarriedoutinordertodecreaseit.Thisreflectionontheheterogeneityofdigitalpublicationsis
[Figure6.3]Researchliteratureondigitalpublicationformatsorderedbyformatandtime
272 Beyond the Flow
notsomethingmerelymentionedorconceivedofbythecorrespondingresearchfield.Bydoingso,itoffersempiricalevidenceforwhatistobeexpectedfromthetheoreticaldiscussionofdigitaltechnologies.Itconfirmsthatdigitaltechnologiesdonotforceacertainpathforthedigitalpub-licationtocome.Instead,astechnologiesofconversion,theymultiplythesetofpossiblepathstowardsdigitalpublications.
Heterogeneity as a Consequence of Contradictory Patterns around Digital Publications
Thedescriptionofpublicationformatsinpartone,aswellasthesectionsontheconceptofsocialaspectswithintheseformats,werefullofexam-plesfortheparadoxicalpatternrenderedinanempiricalmannerabove.Thecreationofbetterconditionsforformalsemantics,combinedwithhighereffortsforstandardization,ledtoformalsemanticheterogeneityinmanyareas.Thecallfordeconstructingpublicationsinto“atomic”infor-mationunits,combinedwithbettertechnologicalconditionsforsuchdeconstructions,sparkedavarietyofsuchapproaches.Eachapproach,additionally,createditsowntypeof“atomic”informationunit.
Nonetheless,therearetwoscenariosthatillustratethisparadoxinaparadigmaticway.Thefirstscenariohasonlyappearedincidentallyasonemotivationbehindmanyformats:thedatadeluge.Theotherscenariowasintroducedasasignificantparadox,buthasnotbeensystematizedfurtheruntilnow.Thisscenarioisprovidedbytheobservationthatrecentapproachessuchasemulationandself-containednessopposetheearlythemeofdecomposabilityandmodularity.
In2001,Kellerpresentedtheresultsofasurveyoftheimpactofdigitalpub-licationsonthefieldofscholarlypublishing.Thestudyitselfwasconductedin1999.Oneofthekeyresultswastheclaimthatdigitalpublicationshavethepotential,ifnottosolve,thenatleasttoalleviatetheserialcrisis.Sim-ilarclaimshadbeenmadeintheACMElectronicPublishingPlan.AsAdema(2015,135)pointsout,theserialcrisisisamonographcrisisaswell.
Asitturnsoutinthegenealogyofdigitalpublications,thiscrisisisfarfromover.Authorsreferenceiteventoday.Furthermore,theproblempermutatesandtransformsintonewversions,versionswhichcorrespondwithconceptsoftheenvironmentsofnewpublicationformats.Accordingly,theserialcrisisspreadsintoan“ageofinformationoverload”(Shottonetal.2009,13),whereinformationistheunitofchoice.Itbecamethe“datadeluge”thatpredicatedthee-Scienceprogram(DeRoure2011,10).
… Publishing 273
Hence,itcouldbearguedthatinsteadofmakingstep-by-stepprogressintheprocessofsolvingthisissue,theissuere-appearsinawaythatfitsthesteps’mostimportantcharacteristics.Asbefore,itispossibletoobserveadynamicinwhichtheattemptstosolvecertainproblemsofdigitalpub-licationsgohandinhandwiththeirproduction.
TheissueofSCPsoffersanevenmoreillustrativeexamplefortheparadoxicalsituationofheterogeneityinthedevelopmentofdigitalpublicationformats.Chapterfourconcludedbydrawingattentiontotheparadoxicalfactthatadevelopmentthatstartedwiththeideaofmodularityengendersthethemeofself-containednessatitspreliminaryend.ItwasindicatedthatafactionwithinthisfieldofresearchhasrecentlystartedtoworkontheformaldescriptionofthestructureofSCPs.Uptothispoint,nofurtherattentionwaspaidtothisnewtwist.
Acloserlookrevealsthedynamicsofdigitaltechnologiesaroundthetopicofheterogeneity—ifnosocialviewpointisaddedthatqualifiesandinter-ruptsthislogic.Thepointisthatbothapproaches,theinfrastructuralandthesemanticapproachtoharmonizationandstandardization,arenotmerelycoexisting.Atleastforthecaseofdigitalpublications,theyreacttoeachother.Modularization—inthiscontexttheuseofformalvocabularyinordertoisolatecomponentsorconnectresourcesofanobjectofinter-est—appearedasareactiontoearlier,so-calledelectronicpublications.Theseexistedinformofdigitizedimagesofpublicationsor,attheirbest,asplaintext.Intheeyesofmodularization,these“monolithic”articleswereamajorsourceofheterogeneityinpublishing,aheterogeneityofobjectsandlanguagewithallegedlyredundantinformation(seesectionsonNPs).Technologicalinnovationpermittedthesemanticmarkupofelements,ortheirrelationshipsinpublications,incaseswheretheyhadalreadybeenpublishedindependently.Theharmonizingofheterogeneitywassupposedtobeachievedbyaligningorre-usingelementsinaconnectedpublicationspace.
Self-ContainedPublications,again,wereamongotherthingsareactiontotheheterogeneityproducedbytheaforementionedprocess.SCPsrespondtoanewtypeofheterogeneityofmodulesandsemantics,byofferingatechnicalplatform,thecontainer,thatallowstoabstractfromtheissueofmodulesandsemanticsandprovidesaunifyinglayeraroundanytypeofheterogeneity.Especiallytheapproachofemulationmakesitpossibleto ignore the question of what the elements of a publication are that are formallydescribed,andwhatmeansareusedinordertodescribethem.Afterthissuccessionofshifts,itisnotsurprisingthatthisapproach,once
274 Beyond the Flow
more,createsitsowntypeofheterogeneity,thatofemulationtechniques,whichispromisedtobesolvedbydevelopingtechnologicalmeansto“semantically”abstractfromsuchheterogeneityoftechniques(Santana-Perezetal.2017).This,however,isashiftbacktotheformal-descriptiveapproachthatwasalreadyofferedbymodularity.
Eachturntriestoapplyatechnicalsolutiontoatechnicalproblem,insteadofaddressingitssocialstatus.Itneglectsthefactthatdigitaltechnologiescanbethemeansofasolution,butneverthesolutionthemselves.Incon-sequence,theproblemofheterogeneitycascadesupstream.
Publication Formats as Domain Driven Discourse Objects
Confrontedwiththedynamicsofheterogeneityarounddigitalpublications,the question arises whether such heterogeneity has a certain structure thatgoesbeyondthepatternfoundinthelastsection.Inotherwords,isthisstructureinfactcontingent,ordoesapatternexistthatwouldallowtoseeinitnotheterogeneity,butmoreofaconfiguration?
Sinceapproachestodigitalpublicationsmaintainasimpleviewofheterogeneity,thistaskhasnotreallybeencarriedoutyet.Ashasbeenarguedonseveraloccasions,attemptstoanalyzetheheterogeneityofdigitalpublicationslookforagenericcorewithinthisheterogeneity(EPs,LPs,ROsandothers),ortheytakeanearlyall-inclusivedirection(TPs,HPs,DPsandothers).
Sincethelimitedevaluationofheterogeneityisbasedonanarrowconceptofsocialaspects,itappearsconsistenttostarttheprocessofstructuringbyanalyzingthedependencybetweensocialdomainsandthecreationofdigitalpublicationsthatbeginsinfigure6.4.
Contributions of Research Domains to Digital Publication Concepts
Inthecaseofscience,usingresearchdomainsasakeyunittoanalyzescience’ssocialstructureisalikelyidea.Onvariousoccasionsthroughoutthestudyathand,particularresearchdomains,furthermore,seemtohaveplayedacrucialroleinthedevelopmentofpublicationformats.Inordertocreateanoverviewoftheimpactofspecificresearchdomains,self-descriptionsbyauthorsinthecollectionusedabovewereextractedfromthepapers.Theseself-descriptionsmostlyconsistintheirinstitutionalaffiliationsasmentionedinthefrontorbackofapaper.Ifthepublications
…Publishing 275
useaspecificshowcaseortargetgroup,thedomainnamesofsuchshowcasesandgroupswerealsotakenintoaccount.
Domaininformationoftenaddressesdifferentlevelsofgranularityandcontainssubjectrelatedoverlaps,forinstanceforthecasebetweentermssuchasatmosphericresearchandclimatescience.Someauthorsrefertotheirresearchdomainasbiology,otherspreferamoreprecisedescriptionoftheirfield,suchasbiodiversity.Asthishappensinmanyfields,theoverallresultisaparticipationoffifty-sixdomains,sub-domainsandresearchareascontributingtoresearchliteratureondigitalpublicationformats.Figure6.4showsthefifteenmostmentioneddisciplinesorderedbythenumberoftheirappearancesinresearchpublicationsaboutdigitalpublicationformats.
[Figure6.4]Thetopfifteendisciplinesinvolvedinresearchliteratureaboutdigital
publication formats
Inordertoincreasecompatibilityandconsistency,thesetermswerethenalignedinatwo-dimensionaltaxonomy.ThistaxonomyisbasedontheDewey Decimal Classifi cation scheme6(alsoreferredtoasDDC).However,somemodificationstotheDDCapproachwerealsomade,sothatthedataismoresuitabletothesubjectofthecurrentinquiry.Themostoutstandingchangeconsistintheintroductionoftheclasse-Researchatthefirstlevelofthehierarchy.E-Researchhasthetwosubclassese-Scienceanddigitalhumanities.Incontrast,termssuchasbioinformaticsweremergedwiththeirareaofapplication(biology).
6 https://www.oclc.org/dewey.en.html
276 BeyondtheFlow
AnothersignificantdifferencetoDDCisthewaythedatasethandlesthefieldofinformationscience.Informationscience,aswellascomputerscience,aresubclassedunderanewlyintroduceddomaingroupcalledinformation-and-technology.Thisseemsreasonable,sinceonlyafractionofinformationscienceisinvolvedinthedesignofdigitalpublicationformats,andthisfractionisheavilyleaningtowardsdesigningtechnologicalinfra-structure.ExamplesincludetheworkofHerbertVandeSompel(2010),ortheDRIVERproject(Sierman,Schmidt,andLudwig2009).
Finally,thedomaingroupbusinesswasintroduced,torepresenttheinvolvementofcommercialpublisherslikeElsevierorSpringer,aswellascommercialprovidersofpublishingservices.Thisdomainisnotaresearchdomain,butobviouslycomprisesanimportantgroupofsocialactorsforthecurrenttopic.Figure6.5liststheresultingtendomaingroupsandvisualizestheirrelativesharesregardingresearchliteratureondigitalpub-licationformats.
Finally,thedomaingroupbusinesswasintroduced,torepresenttheinvolvementofcommercialpublisherslikeElsevierorSpringer,aswellascommercialprovidersofpublishingservices.Thisdomainisnotaresearchdomain,butobviouslycomprisesanimportantgroupofsocialactorsforthecurrenttopic.Figure6.5liststheresultingtendomaingroupsandvisualizestheirrelativesharesregardingresearchliteratureondigitalpub-licationformats.
[Figure6.5]Domaingroupsinthedatasetondigitalpublicationformats
Thedomaingroupwhichbyfardominatesresearchliteratureonnewpublicationformats,evenwiththeaforementionedmodificationsmadetotheDDCscheme,isthedomaingroupinformation-and-technology(seefigure6.5).Thisdominanceincreasesfurtherifthedomainofe-Researchisadded.Thismeansthattheresearchfieldofdigitalpublicationsismostnotablyshapedbydisciplineswhichdonotjustapplytechnologyto scholarly publications but of which its primary research interest is technology.
Atafirstglancethehumanitiesseemtobeequallyrepresentedasscience.However,thereisasignificantpredominanceofmostlyempiricaldomains.Similarly,socialsciencesarelessrepresented.
Onewaytointerpretthisresultistofollowthemodelofalinearhistoryofthedigitizationofresearch,asoutlinedatthebeginningofthischapter.Inthiscase,itwouldjustreflectthedelaybywhichsomedomainsintegratedigitaltechnologies.Inthisview,computersciencerepresentsthepathofprogressitself,whilecertaindisciplinescanadopttheprinciplesof
… Publishing 277
thisprogressmoreeasilythanothers.The“endoftheory”debatewouldprovidetheexplanatorybackgroundforsuchanargument.Accordingly,theory-baseddisciplinesneedmoretimetoadapttoaworldwithouttheorythanempiricaldisciplines.
Ashasbeendiscussedinthelastchapter,thisassumptionwould,however,misinterprettheconceptofdigitaltechnologiesbyequatingsuchtechnologieswithaspecificpracticeandaspecificapplicationmodelofsuchtechnologies.Similarly,theresultsfromthedatadonotrelatetothe fact that there always must be computer scientists to implement a publicationformat.Inmostoftheliteratureontheconceptualizationofdigitalpublications,asinthecaseofHPsorTPs,computerscientistsdonotappearasauthorsatall.Additionally,computerscientistsoftenappeartogetherwithauthorsfromnon-computer-sciencedomains.Disciplinesthatonlyappearasshowcaseswithoutbeingrepresentedasauthorshavefurthermorebeenincludedashasbeenmentioned.Thedominanceofinformation-and-technologydomainscanthusnotbededucedfromthewaythepresentstudydefinesdigitalpublications.Whatthissituationmeansexactlywillbecomeclearerwhendomainsarerelatedtopublicationformatsbelow.
Anotherobservationcanbemadethatlikewisediscouragestheafore-mentionedexplanation.Thebyfarmostoutstandingdisciplinefromthesciencedomainisbiology.Ifoneweretoaddtheintersectionbetweenbiologyandlifesciencesorbiologyandchemistry,thesharewouldbecomeevenmoredominant.Suchahighnumbershowsthatinthesciencesaswellthereareareaswhichengagesignificantlydifferentlywiththetopicofdigitalpublicationsthanothersdo.Thisobservationprecludesjustexplainingtheresultswithinthesimplifyingframeworkofempiricalsciences,theoreticalsciencesandtechnology.
The Relationship Between Scientific Domains and Digital Publication Concepts
Thewholepicturebecomesclearerwhendifferentconceptsofdigitalpublicationsaretakenintoaccount.Figure6.6showstheparticipationofresearchdomainsintenpublicationformats.Theseformatsare:
– HybridPublications(hp) – ElectronicNotebooks(en) – UnboundBooks(ub) – OpenLaboratoryBooks(olb) – DataPapers(dp) – TransmediaPublications(tp)
278 Beyond the Flow
– EnhancedPublications(ep) – ResearchObjects(ro) – NanoPublications(np) – SemanticPublications(sp)
Onediagramcorrespondswithonedomaingroup.They-axisoneachdiagramshowsthenumberofcontributionsforeachformat.
OneaspectwhichshowsupimmediatelyisthedominanceofhumanitiesdisciplinesinHPs,TPsandUBswhiletheirinfluenceisloworcompletelyabsentinotherformats.Thearts—notgenerallywellrepresented—con-tributemosttoTPs.WhilenotdominatingSPs,businessismostpresentinSPs.SciencedisciplinesdominateOLBswhilee-ResearchisthemostprominentdomaininROs.Information-and-technologyfinallyshapestheapproachofEPs.IfonelooksdeeperintothedisciplinesbehindthedomaincontributionsitwillshowthatscienceinNPsisalmostexclusivelyrepresentedbythedisciplineofbiology.InthecaseofOLBsitischem-istry.Similarly,aroundeighty-fivepercentofinformation-and-technologydisciplinesbehindEPsreferstoinformationscience.InthecaseofROsitistheotherwayaround.Inthisapproachseventy-ninepercentofthisdomaincomesfromthefieldofcomputerscience.
Itisthereforepossibletosummarizethatinmostcasesidentifiabledomainclustersexistwhichtendtocontributetooneformatoveranother.Afirstattempttoexplainthissituationcanbemadebyreviewingwhateachformatstandsfor.
ThebiggestshareoflibraryandinformationscienceexistsinEPsandSPs.Bothformatsareorganizedaroundtheconceptofinformationresourcesandinformation.Accordingly,theyareshapedbyanabstractentitycon-stitutivetothisspecificdomain.EnhancedPublicationswithitsunderlyingconceptofaggregationsinherittheideaofcollectionsasconstitutiveelementsinresearchfromthisdomain.Thepreferencefortheintensiveuseofhighlyformalizedsemanticsresemblesthepracticeofcataloguingandthecreationoftoolssuchasauthorityfiles.
Computerscience,incontrast,dominatestheROconcept.ResearchObjectsareself-describedasformaldescriptionsofcomputationalworkflows,usingdigitalresourcesinawaythatis“native”tothewebarchitecture.Suchadescriptiondefineswhichresources,suchasdataorsoftware,areused,byidentifyingthemwithURIs.Afterwards,itdefineshowtheyarelinkedtogetherbyrepresentinghowandwhentheywereprocessedtogeneratearesearchresult.ThegoalofResearchObjectsis
…Publishing 279
[Figure6.6]Theinfluenceofdifferentdomainsinspecificpublicationformats
280 Beyond the Flow
toenableautomatedreproducibleexperimentationandautomationofscience.ThethemeofautomationandthenetworkednatureofResearchObjectsaslivinginthewebdirectlyreproduceskeytopicsincomputerscience.Theideologicalframeworkofe-Sciencetranslatessuchprinciplesintoaspectsofscience.Forinstance,itequatesreproducibilitywiththeinput-outputmodelofcomputation.
NanoPublicationsarelargelydesignedandinfluencedbybiologyandthelifesciences,inparticularpharmacology,medicine,andresearchonproteins.ThetwokeyfeaturesofNPsarethecentralthemeofassertions,andthewaytheyorganizeevidence.Theybuilduponaspecificconflationofthreeaspects,whichadequatelydescribesthesituationoftheafore-mentionedresearchcluster.Thefirsttwoaspectsaddressthecentralityoffactualknowledge,bothforrepresentingresearchresultsandorganizingtheresearchdomain.TheexampleofROsdemonstratesthatthisisnotnecessarily true for all environments with a strong empirical research context.Thethirdaspectreflectstheactualavailabilityofmanydatabaseswhichcontainfactualdataaboutmanysimilarthings,i.e. proteins.
Indeed,examplesgivenforNPsfromsuchfieldscenteraroundpiecesofknowledgesuchasthatproteinXhaspropertyY(Chichesteretal.2014),orsubstanceXinteractswithsubstanceY(Schneider,Ciccarese,etal.2014).Thepointisnottosaythatotherdisciplinesdonotworkwithfactualknowledge.Thepointisthattheshareoffactualknowledge,aswellastheusefulnessofitsrepresentationasassertions,isspecifictoafieldwhichcollectsinformationaboutthousandsofproteinchainsandothersub-stances.Thecorrespondingresearchliteraturealsogivesevidenceofthesituationofhowtheavailabilityofafewclearlydefinableresearchobjects(proteins,pharmaceuticalsubstances,etc.)facilitatestheavailabilityofmanydatabasescontainingsuchdata.Finally,thedescriptionsofmedicalusecasesofNPsaccentuatethespecializeddemandsofsomedisciplinespromotingNPs.Accordingly,Rodriguez-Gonzalezetal.(2014)outlinetheusageofNPsindecisionmakingprocessesinmedicine.Inthoseprocesses,thereuseofpartsofexperimentsthatledtofactualknowledgeastargetedbyROsisnotmeaningful.Instead,thereisademandtoquicklyhaveanoverviewofhowmuchresearchfavorsoneortheotherassertion,sothataquickdecisioncanbemade.Consequently,NPsfocusnotonfactsandassertions,butonaspecificpracticeofusingfactsandassertionsthatseemstobeinherentintheresearchdomainssupportingNPs.
TransmediaPublicationsareanoutstandingexampleofstronginterestintheissuesofrepresentationandmediationoftheentanglementbetween
… Publishing 281
representationandsocio-culturalprocesses.Sincesuchquestionsarekeyquestionsofthehumanities,itdoesnotsurprisethathumanitiesdis-ciplineslargelysustainthispublicationconcept.Moreover,itistheoneapproachwheredisciplinesfromtheartscontributemost.Thesedis-ciplinesarebasedarounddifferentnotionsofdesign.Thus,itdoesnotsurprise that they relate to the one format by which they “might formally be broughtintoacademicknowledgesystemsintheactualmodalitiesoftheirpractice”(Ball2016,53).
BusinessisnotdominatinginSPs,yetthereareconvincingargumentswhyitengagesmostintothisformat.SPsdonotaimatalteringtheexistingformatofarticlessubstantially.Theyextenditbyaddingannotationstothefileofthearticle,bymeansofformalsemanticsinthemarkup,ormicrodataformat.Theseannotationsmakearticleseasilymachine-readable.Theytherebyfacilitatetheimplementationofadditionalservices,whichneedtoprocessthearticleasdata.Forbusinessstakeholders,thesequalitiesentailthattheyareabletomaintaintheirproductformwhilebeingsupportedinthecreationofnewproducts(seechap.3).Althoughthereisnoresearchobjectorscientificmethodologyguidingthesestake-holders,theirgoals,keyinterestsinstead,carryacertainlogiccomparabletothosedisciplinarylogicsdiscussedabove.Thequestionofhowtomaximizeprofitisnodifferentfromthequestionofhowtobestsupportdiscoveryinthisrespect.
Acloserlookattheheterogeneityofpublicationformatsrevealedthatitisnotjustdefinedbycontingency.Onthecontrary,thepatternsandtheirexplanationssuggestthatthefieldofdigitalpublishing,insteadoffos-teringanewecologyofdigitalpublications,isastageforongoingdebateaboutthenatureofscientifictruthandthepresupposedessenceofdigitaltechnologies.Itisastageonwhich“epistemiccultures”(Knorr-Cetina1999)andculturesoftechnologiesmeetandcontinuetoadvocatetheircon-victions,notonlybyargument,butmoreimportantlybydesign.Thepub-licationdesignbecomestheargument.
Thepossibilityofdoingsoisoneofthemostfundamentalconsequencesofdigitaltechnologyforthefieldofscholarlypublishing.Itisaconsequenceofthefactthatdigitaltechnologiesaretechnologiesofconversion,andnottechnologiesinfavorofparticularideas.Inthiscontext,conversionmeansthatdigitaltechnologiesdonotprivilegeaspecificformat.Instead,theyfacilitatethedesignofformattingoptionsassemioticresourcesforcreationofmeaninginconcretepublications.Onseveraloccasions,authorshavearguedthatdigitaltechnologiesreconfiguretherelationshipbetween
282 Beyond the Flow
formandcontent.Atthispoint,itseemsappropriatetoarguethatsuchreconfigurationisnotsomuchaclearerseparationbetweenformandcon-tentasitisadiscontinuationofthedistinctionitself.
Accepting and Challenging Heterogeneity
Inthelightofthisconflation,theheterogeneityindigitalpublishingappearstobeconsistentandunrevertable.Nevertheless,therearetwofactorswhichmultiplyitsdimensions.Ashasbeenargued,theepistemiceffectsofdigitaltechnologiesrequireareconfigurationoftheepistemicsetup.Publicationsbelongtothissetupandaremeansofreconfiguringit.Sincesuchreconfigurationisnotpredefined,broadexperimentationisnotjustobvious,butalsonecessaryinordertogaininsightsintothenewsituation.Likewise,itwillbenecessarytostepbackfromexperimentationtoletreconfigurationtakeplace.Thus,thefirstfactorsarethetransitionalphaseofepistemicirritationandtheattemptstofindappropriatemeansforreconfiguration.
Thesecondfactoristhelackofawarenessofsocialdimensionsofscholarlypublications,discussedinseveralplaces.Inthecontextofthecurrentsection,thisproblemshowsupasamismatchbetweentheawarenessofthedesigncontextofapeculiarpublicationformatanditsintendedtargetgroups.Thiswastheresultoftheempiricalanalysisabove:thatformatsarestronglylinkedtoresearchdomains,andresearchersasdesignersofpublicationconceptspropagatetheuniversalityoftheirformats.Bechhoferetal.(2012,2)accordinglyarguethatROsaresuitedfor“scientistsfromvirtuallyanydiscipline.”Sometimes,domainspecificdemandsareexplicitlymentioned.DeRoure(2014b,235)definestheabilityofpublicationstofunctionacrossdisciplinesasakeyfactorofpublications.However,suchdemandsneverinvalidatetheformatitself.Instead,theyareconsideredmodifiersofminoraspectswithintheformat,suchasthetermsthatareusedtomarkupcontentinMAsandSPs.
Suchattitudesmultiplyheterogeneity,becausetheyhinderthenegotiationandsituationofformats.Theyleadtodemonstrationsofhowaspecificformatisgenerallycapableofrepresentingresearchfromuninvolveddis-ciplines,insteadofcomparingdifferentpracticesofrepresentingresearchandusingresearchresults.Theconsequenceisasituationwithmany“generic”formats,insteadoffewer,butsustainableandmaintainable,formats.
… Publishing 283
Arguing Science Through Designing Publications
Itwassaidinthelastsectionthatthefieldofdigitalpublishingisanongoingargumentabouttechnologyandtheproductionofscientifictruth,carriedoutbymeansofdesign.Ifthisisthecase,thenthequestionariseswhattheelementsofthisargumentarebywhichtheseconflictingopinionsarerepresented.Inotherwords,whatarethebasesonwhichdifferenthypothesizesarebuilt?Asfaraspublicationformatsrepresentanentirelineofargument,theyarenotsuitableforthiskindofanalysis.Asatriggerforvariation,theseaspectsneedtobeaspectsappearinginanyformat,buthandleddifferentlyacrossformats.Thedescriptionofpub-licationformatswithinchapteronealreadygaveafirstimpressionoftheseaspects,butcomparisonsweremadefromagenealogicalangleandnotinasystematicway.Accordingly,theaspectswhichareofinterestatthispointareamoresystematicextractionofcomparablefeatures.Thefollowinglistcontainsaselectionofthoseaspects.Itoutlinesthemostfundamentalareasofdebate,aswellasthewholescopeoftheongoingargumentassuch.Itcomprisesthepublications:
– scale – architectural integrity – logical cohesion – secularization – attitudetowardsresearch – intendedresidencetime – synchronizationwithresearch – structural rigor – modalcomplexity – intermodalrelationshiptypes
Theaspectsinthislistarenotcompletelyisolatedfromeachotherinthesensethatanykindofcombinationispossible.Sometimes,achoiceforoneaspectrestrictspossiblechoicesforanotheraspect.Additionally,choicesfortwoaspectsmaylinktothesamefeatureinapublicationformat,becausethisfeaturerepresentsseveralwaystolookatpublications.Theexact meaning of this will become more obvious after these aspects have beendescribedingreaterdetailoverthenextparagraphs.
The aspect of scaleaddressestheportionoftheresearchprocessisolatedfromthisprocessinordertoformapublicationinaspecificformat.Insingle-resourcepublishing,thescalecanbeextremelycoarse-grainedandoftencontainsonlytheoutputofaparticularaction,suchasadiagram.InOLBs,thepublicationmostlyrepresentsalogicalstepwithintheresearch
284 Beyond the Flow
process.ResearchObjects,SPPs,orEPsbundleentireresearchprocesses,whileLPsconsistofrepositoriesthatgrowandchangewitharesearcherorresearchgroup,beyondresearchprojects.Thequestionatstakeis:whatisameaningfulindependentunitofresearch?
The term architectural integritycomprisesconceptswhichdescribehowproducersandconsumersarelinkedbythepublication.Mostformatsbelong to one of platform,channel,orobject.Whenapublicationisaplat-form,asinthecaseofUBs,itdoesnotdistinguishbetweenproducersandconsumersoutsideofthepublicationitself.Instead,agentsconnecttothepublicationtobecomeproducersandconsumers.Channel-publicationssuchasOLBsdesignafixedproducer-consumerrelationshipinwhichthepublicationestablishesapotentiallyongoingconnectionbetweenboth.Object-publicationsarepublicationsinahistoricalsense.Theydonotbindproducerstoconsumers,butfloatindependentlybetweenthem.Architec-turalintegritymodelsthedistancebetweenproducerandconsumerroles.Itmakesastatementaboutwhichmodelbestrepresentstheideaofknowledgecreationasaresultofthecirculationofexistingknowledge.
Logic cohesionaddressesthekeyideathatlinkstheelementsinapub-licationformat.InROs,thecohesionisgivenbytheworkflowidea.HybridPublicationscreatecohesionbytheconceptoftranslation.Toputitdifferently,aHPisanabstract,ideationalpublicationthatreferencesdifferentexpressions,orrathermaterializations.Thesematerializationsareindeedmaterializations,becausetheircreationisperceivedasatrans-lationoftheabstractpublication.NanoPublicationscreatecohesiononthegroundsoftheconceptofevidence.ElementsinNPsaregroupedbythepropertyofcontainingproofforoneandthesameclaim.InTPs,itistheideaofmodalqualityofelementsthatjoinsandorganizesthemintopub-lications.Thus,inTPs,cohesioniscreatedbymeaningpotentials.InSelf-ContainedPublications,thegoaltomaintaintheintegrityofpublicationsistheuttermostaspectofcohesion.Inacertainway,SCPsrepresentthethemeofcohesionitself.
The aspect of secularizationisaconsequenceoftheform-contentdebate.Inrelationtowhathasbeenarguedthroughouttheentiresecondchapter,thisaspectobviouslydoesnotdescribehowmuchcontentandformareseparatedfromeachother.Instead,itrepresentshowmeaningfulandcrucialthedistinctionisforthedesignoftheformat.WhileinTPs,andwithsomerestrictionsalsoinSCPs,thisdifferenceisnotmadeatall,insingle-sourcepublishingittakesitsmostradicalform.Likewise,itisakeyelementofSPs.
… Publishing 285
The aspect attitude towards researchdefinesthefunctionalrelationshipbetweenresearchasaprocessofknowledgeproductionandapublication.Forinstance,theprimaryattitudeofLivingBooksisqualificationinthenameofdemocratization.Theformatensuresthatwhateverispublishedoutofapeculiarresearchprocesscanonlybepublishedinawayinwhichthe structure of the format automatically presents this process as one besidesothers.Itunderminesfinalityanddogmatizationofresearchprocesses.Thisholdstrueevenifotherresearchprocessesdonotcon-tribute,becauseitistheformatthatframesresearchinthisrespect.ResearchObjects’primaryfunctionalrelationshipisthatofrecordingtheresearchprocess.Themainfunctionalrelationshipofhistoricalarticlesmayincontrastbedescribedassystematization,atleastsomeauthorsindigitalpublishingunderstanditthisway(Bradleyetal.2010).Thosepublicationssummarize,contextualize,andgeneralizetheresearchprocess.Theydis-tinguishbetweensignificantandinsignificantpartsofit.OpenLaboratoryBookstakeadocumentaryattitude,whileSPs’attitudeandthescaledapproachofOpenAIREisthatofharmonization.Intwodifferentways,thelast two formats relate to the research process in a way that favors those propertiesofresearchthataresharedwithothers.Obviously,publicationformatshavemorethanonefunctionalrelationship.Nonetheless,itispossibleinmostcasestoidentify,bytheformatitself,orbythewaytheauthorspresentit,onerelationshipthatismoreimportantthanothers.
Digitalpublicationsstartedtoconceiveoftheresidence time of a pub-lication,meaningthetimespanapublicationshouldbeavailable,asoneofitsdesignableelements.Accordingly,SPPsandLPsdiscussedthepossibilityofa“decay”factor.HPstakeupamorepragmaticalbutneverthelesshighlydecisiveapproach.Sinceintimesofdigitaltechnologies,“remixing”andtransformingpublicationsbetweenformatsisafrequentphenomenon,takingcareoflong-termavailabilityofpublicationsbecomeslessimportantthanbefore.“Allpublishingbecomesvanitypublishing”(Hall2013,497;seealsoMcPherson2010,4).
Similarlylinkedtotheissuesoftimearedifferentapproachestothesyn-chronizationbetweenresearchprocessandpublication.Thecorrespondingquestionisthequestionabouttherightmomenttoexternalizeresearchintopublications.OpenLaboratoryBookscarryoutanapproachthatcanbecalledparallel-successive.Thepublicationprocessadvancesinparalleltotheresearchprocessbypublishingparts,whichcombinedinturnformtheentirepublication.LivingandUnboundBookssynchronizewithresearchin a parallel- or trans-incrementalway.Thismeanspublishingisaprocesswhichadds,deletes,ormodifiesthecontentofapublication.Thisprocess
286 Beyond the Flow
isarrangedparalleltoresearchprocessesoracrossresearchprocesses,butbelongstoasharedresearchendeavor.Finally,thepublicationofROs,SPPs,orSCPstendstomarktheendofaresearchprocess.
Structural rigorisanotheraspectbywhichpublicationformatscanbedis-tinguished.Infact,MAsintroducedanewlevelofformalandstructuralrigortopublications,bydefiningexactlywhichcomponentsofpublicationsshouldbeclearlyseparablefromeachotherandhowtheyrelatetoeachother.Structuralrigordoesnotincludethelevel of formalityandformal complexityoftheunderlyingtechnologicalmodel.Itonlyaddressesthequestionofhowdetailed,precise,andcomplexapublicationconceptpre-scribescomponentsofpublicationsandtheirinterplay,regardlessoftheirtechnologicalimplementation.NPsandMPs,forinstance,haveahigherlevelofrigorthanEPs.Theyaresignificantlymorerestrictiveandpreciseintermsofthequestionofwhatapublicationisallowedtocontainandwhatitisnot.ThecaseofSCPsisinterestinginsofar,as,similartoTPsandHPs,theytrytominimizestructuralrigor.Theyturnthediscussionofstructuralrigorupsidedown.
Modal complexityandtypes of intermodal relationshipsaddressthequestionofhowmanydifferentresourcesforrepresentationliketext,diagrams,photos,andvideo-audioarecombinedbyaformat,andhowtheirmodalqualitiesareaddressed.Animagecanexplainatextualnarrative,asisoftenthecaseinDPs.Itcanalsobeintendedtocreatemeaning,togetherwithtextthatcannotbereducedtooneortheother.ThisisthecaseforTPs.Finally,animagecanbestoredforcomputationalanalysiswithouteverlookingatit.Itmightalsobepackagedwithotherresourcesinordertoofferoptionalsupplementalmaterial,asitiscalledinROs.7
Ashasbeenmentionedabove,thislistofaspectsorideasisjustaselection.Itcontainsaspectswhichintendtoclarifytheextenduptowhichthedesignofpublicationformatsispartofascientificdiscourseaboutscienceandtechnology.Similarpatternscouldalsobedescribedforaspectsthataremuchsimpler,forinstancetheroleanduseoflayout.Suchanalysisiscarriedoutonbroadtermsinmultimodalanalysis,forinstancebyGuo(2006).Whilespecifictechnologicalmeansofpublicationconceptscannotberelatedtoparticularopinionsontheaforementionedaspectsassuch,theynonethelesstendtosupportspecificopinionsbetterthanothers.Moreimportantisthefact,however,thatpartoneshowedthatthedevelopmentofthesemeansisinanycasecloselylinkedtocertain
7 Rowsell(2013)offersacomprehensiveoverviewofrelationshipsofmeaningbetweendifferenttypesofresourcesformeaningproduction.
… Publishing 287
opinions.Bothsideshaveinfluencedeachotherwhilenotdeterminingeachother,andthisentanglementisexactlywhatisintendedtobedem-onstratedthroughoutthisinquiry.
Manyattitudestowardsthemajorityofaspectsofdigitalpublicationslistedabovecanbedistributedonanaxisbetweentwoextremes.Inotherwords,possiblechoicesrelatingtooneaspectaremostoftenorganizedaroundabipolarstructure.Thetwoexamplesintable6.1andtable6.2illustratethisdimension.
action step project cluster
SRPs OLBs,UBs SPs ROs,SPPs,EPs LPs,LBs
[Table6.1]Axisforthescaleaspectofdigitalpublications
Differentattitudestowardsscaleareorderedalonganaxisbetweenoneactioninaresearchprocessandaclusterofresearchprocesses.Thispolarityallocatesotherattitudesintheorder:stepandprocess.
determined contingent
NPs,ROs EPs OLBs,DPs HPs,TPs
[Table6.2]Progressionoftheaspectofstructuralrigorindigitalpublications
Thepolaritythatformstheshapeofattitudestowardsstructuralrigorcanbedescribedasapolaritybetweenfulldeterminationandstructuralcon-tingency.Althoughdistinctionsonsuchaxesresembledistinctionsbetweeninformation,informationunits,andcomplexinformationunitsinMAs,animportantdifferenceexists.Theyarenotmeanttoplayanormativerole,buttoofferorientationbetweendifferentformats.Theirmainfunctionistogiveevidenceofthefactthattheyexistasinfluentialaxesindigitalpublicationconcepts.Theyarenotintendedtopreciselydefinewhateachsegmentlookslike,asMAstrytodowithneurologicalarguments.Thedistinctionsareofarelationalnatureandifnecessary,couldbedefinedbycomparison,ashasbeendoneforthearrangementsinthetables.
Furthermore,theallocationofapproachesonsuchaxesareapprox-imations.Partonehasshownthatthereisalwaysvariationaroundspecificapproaches.Forinstance,DPsexistwhicharecompletelydetermined.Nevertheless,ithasalsobeenarguedthatthisvariationdoesnotmakeitimpossibletospeakofuniqueapproaches.Allinall,DataPapersshowverydifferentapproachestotheissueofstructuralrigor.Itistheconsistencyofthesedifferencesthatmakeitblindtotheissueofstructuralrigorandnot
288 Beyond the Flow
questionhowmanyDPsexistthataredeterminedincomparisontothosethatarenot.
Someaspectscannotberenderedonaxeslikethoseabovebecausetheyaremorecategorialinnature.Oftheaspectsdiscussed,thesearelogiccohesionandattitudetowardsresearch.Thefewexamplesgivenforsuchaspects show that they reference a complex space of possibilities that is potentiallyopen.
Sincedigitaltechnologiesaretechnologiesofconversion,theydonotenforceanypeculiardecisiononcertainoptionsforaspects.Infact,theindividualityofpathstakenbydifferentformatsisanotherindicationofthelevelofimpactofthisclaim.This,andthepluralityofpublicationformatsthathavebeencreatedontopofit,startedaprocessinwhichanysuchaspectsarealreadyautomaticallyinterpretedasastatementabouttechnologyoraboutscience.Therearenobetterexamplesforthisfactthanthedifferentnotionstowardsnarrativitythathavebeenoutlinedinpartone.Asmuchasnarrativitybecomeslessnecessarybymeansoftechnology,publicationconceptsreconsideritsoverallnecessity.Asfarasthisreconsiderationleadstoacontinuationoftheextensiveuseofnarrativity,itisautomaticallyperceivedofasastatement.Thisholdstrueregardlessofthefactofwhetherthisstatementisreallymadeornot,becauseitistheenvironmentthathaschangedinsuchawaythatitcon-stitutesastatement.ThecritiquebyCandelaetal.(2015)thatDPsarenotsufficientlydata-likeisagoodexampleforthisfact.
Contradictory Patterns in the Development of Digital Publications
Asmentionedpreviously,theextremesandrangesofaspectdonotexistassuchandthusarenotstatic.ThisremarkwasmadenotonlytopreventnewsimplificationscomparabletothosethatweremadeinMAs.8 The fact thattheextentofsuchranges,andtheexactchoicestheyoffer,istheout-comeofahistoricalprocess,drawstheattentiontoparticularfacetsofthathistory.Asintheexampleoftherelationshipbetweeninfrastructuralanddescriptiveapproachestodealwithheterogeneity,developmentsarounddigitalpublicationaspectsgointodifferentdirectionsatthesametime.Thesedevelopmentscreatethespaceofpossiblechoiceswithinbipolar
8 ModularArticlesrandomlyreferencedphysicsandneuroscienceinordertoempiricallydefinedifferencesbetweeninformation,informationunits,andcomposedinformationunitsonanon-theoreticalinformationcomplexityvectorthatcannottakeintoaccountthecontext-dependencyofwhatformsacompositionandwhatformsawhole.
… Publishing 289
rangesofaspectsofpublicationsinthefirstplace.Activitiesthattakepartinthefieldofdigitalpublishingoftensharecommongoals,butthestrategieschosentogettherefrequentlyopposeeachother.Itshowsthatthegeneaologyofdigitalpublicationsrevealsanaporeticcorestructure.Thisstructureisbestdemonstratedbythegeneralobservationthatallprojectstrytodefinethefuturepublication,buteachcontributionaddsnewfeaturesthatinpartscontrastthoseofotheractivities.
Partonecontainsmanysuchcontradictions,andtherangesabovecanallbereadasopposites.Contradictionsappearalloverdigitalpublications:someabstractasmuchaspossiblefrommodesofrepresentation,andsomearecombinationsofallkindsofrepresentationstrategies;theyareatomicinformationunits,butalsocontainersthatcontainanyresourceusedinresearch;theyaremeanttobeaggregationsandimagesforemulationaswell;theyshouldcontainaninternalformalstructure(microdata),butalsobebuiltoutofanexternalformalstructure(OAI-ORE);theychangewiththeflowoftime,butarerecordedordesignedversionsoftimeflowsatthesametime;theyareconceivedofasaderivationofapublicationmeta-model,butemphasizeahistoricalstateofpublishing,inwhichitisallegedlynolongerreasonabletothinkaboutpublishingasamodel-basedapproachatall(seenextsection).
Thenotionofcontradictionsradicalizesthediscussionofheterogeneityarounddigitalpublications.Itshowsthatdigitalpublicationshavenotjustproducedalotofheterogeneityinsteadofharmonizingit,butthatthisproductionissystematic.Digitalpublicationssystematicallyproducerepresentationsforanyoptionthatcanbeperceivedofasafeatureofpublicationstoday.Fromtheangleofthetwodebatesontruth-makingandtechnology,thismeanstwothings.First,withinthedevelopmentofdigitalpublications,anyscientificknowledgeculturetriestoberepresentedintheformofpublicationformats.Second,thisdevelopmentisoneinwhichconvertibilityasthedominantfeatureofdigitaltechnologiesisrealizedbycomprehensivelytestingconversionsbetweenscientificactionsandmultimodalrepresentationsandviceversa.UsingtheterminologyofMAs,thesetwoanglescanbecombinedbysayingthatbotharecon-tributionstoaprocessinwhichmoreandmoreresourcesareturnedintosemioticmaterial,i.e. materialthatbecomessuitableforthecreationofmeaningandtherepresentationofknowledgefordigitalpublications.Thisdescription,however,alsomeansthatmorethandesigningnewscholarlypublications,formerdevelopmentshaveonlypreparedthegroundforsuchpublications.
290 Beyond the Flow
Thenotionofcontradictionscametolightwhenthedifferentdevel-opmentsbehinddigitalpublicationsweresubsumedunderthecommongoalofcreatingthefuturescholarlypublication.Thisviewpointeliminatesthetemporaldynamicofthephenomenon,inordertohighlightitsfictionalvanishingpoint.Whenthedevelopmentitselfisperceivedofassuch,thecontradictionturnsintoadialecticprocess.Moreprecisely,whenthedevelopmentofdigitalpublicationsisobservedwhilekeepinginmindthegeneralphenomenonofcontradiction,thisdevelopmentrevealsdialecticalpatternssuchastherelationshipbetweenmodelingandengineeringindigitalpublishing,highlightedinthesectionheterogeneity.Itisthepatternofsemanticsolutionstoinfrastructuralissueswhichengenderproblemsthatinturnrequireinfrastructuralsolutionsandsoforth.Likewise,thecon-tainerizationandemulationapproachtopublicationsdidnotjustdevelopinparalleltoothers.Itgotattentioninreactiontomodularizationandatomizationapproaches.Suchapproachesfirstreceivedthetechnologicalinfrastructurenecessaryforitsrealization9,butbydoingsocreatedanew set of problems10.Inthesamefashion,explorationsintomultimodalstrategiesofrepresentationandthevolatilenatureoftheformataspectofpublicationstemporallyappearasaresponsetotheadvancementsofapproachesthatfocusontechnologyandinformation.ThisresponseisevenspokenofexplicitlybyAdema(2015,sec.1.1.2),whensheoutlinesthenecessitytohighlight“genealogicalmodes”ofdigitalpublicationsagainstthesuccessof“teleologicalschemes.”
Fundamental Tensions between Publication and Communication
Ifdigitalpublicationsuntiltodaymainlysemiotizetheenvironmentofpub-lications,i.e. comprehensivelypreparethespaceofoptions,fornewtypesofscholarlypublications,thequestionishowthissituationaffectsthenotionofpublicationsassuch.Inordertoevaluatethisquestion,itseemspromisingtohaveacloserlookattheoverarchingleitmotifintheresearchondigitalpublications:communication.
9 RDFaandOAI-OREamongothers.10 Theefforttorepresentapublicationinamodularwayasasetofatomicparts,
maintainingtheintegrityofapublicationsthepartsofwhichexistinadistributedenvironment.
… Publishing 291
Communication, the Leitmotif of Digital Publications
Thebyfardominantframeinwhichdigitalpublicationsarediscussedacrosscontexts,time,andconceptsconcernsitsfunctioninscholarlycom-munication.Thevastmajorityofauthorsregardtheissueofpublicationsasthatofresearchcommunication.Whenthequestionisraisedhowtomakeuseofdigitaltechnologyinthecontextofpublications,itisgenerallyinter-pretedtobeaskinghowtoimprovescholarlycommunication.
Obviously,publicationshavemorefunctionsthantheenablingofcom-municationinacademia.Thefewexceptionstothisnorm,aswellasissuesdiscussedinpassing,bearwitnesstothisargument.Adema(2015)dis-cussespublicationsasanorganizationalmeansforstructuringthesocialfieldofacademia.ThepublishingtoolkitbyPensoft,whichusedDPsinawaythatenableddistributionoftheeffortsnecessaryfortheircreationamongdifferentstakeholders,wasalsointroduced.Self-ContainedPub-licationsshowedthatthequestionofpublicationsisnotjustoneof“moreeffectivescholarlycommunication”(Bourne,Shotton,etal.2012,46),butalsooneofeffectiveresourcemanagement.TransmediaPublicationsraisedtheissueofappropriaterepresentations.McPherson(2010,10–11)offersthemost comprehensive overview of functions publications must carry out in orderworkproperly.
Thesefacetsandtheirdiscussion,nevertheless,dobynomeansmatchtheattentionthegeneralthemeofresearchcommunicationreceives,especiallywherethediscussionreflectsdigitalpublicationsonabroaderandsometimestheoreticalscale.Accordingly,Candelaetal.(2015,1748)callpublications“custodians,yettheyneedtoreconsidertheirmissioninmodernscientificcommunication.”EvenMcPhersonsubsumesheroverviewunderthebasicthemeof“ThoughtsontheFutureofScholarlyCommunication.”ForHall(2013),writinganarticleistheactof“performingscholarlycommunication.”Healsoemphasizesthatthehistoricalarticledidinfactnotreallyaccomplishcommunication,andthatthisfailureisaconsequenceoftheprintenvironment.Thekeypointbehindthisandrelateddescriptionsisalwaysthesame:digitaltechnologieshaveinitiatedaprogressiontowardsscholarlypublicationsthataremorecommunication-likethanbefore.Assuch,theypromisetofulfillagoalofpublicationsthathadalwaysbeentheirprimaryaim,butonethatcouldnotbesupportedproperlyduetotechnologicalrestrictions,whicharenowoutdated.
Still,thedevelopmentfrompublicationstodigitalpublicationsisadevel-opment“fromscholarlypublicationtoscholarlycommunication”(Hogenaar2009),atransformationinwhichpublicationsare“abouttobereplacedby
292 Beyond the Flow
whathasbeencoinedresearchcommunications”(Nentwich2003,304),toform“thefutureofscholarlycommunications”(DeRoure2014b).Evidently,the term communications replaces the term publication on many occasions (Bourne,Shotton,etal.2012;Clark,Ciccarese,andGoble2014)inordertocomplywiththe“revolutionizedscholarlycommunicationparadigm”(VandeSompelandLagoze2007,1).
Thepublication-formatpointofviewindicatesthattheparadigmofcommunicationislessdefinedbyconcretespecification,butmore,indirectly,byremovingasmuchaspossibleofwhateverisconceivedofastechnologicallyconditionedconstraintsofhistoricalformsofpublishing.Topushthingsfurther,focusingonthethemeofcommunicationleadstothephenomenonofhistoricalconstraintsbeingnearlyalwaysonlydis-cussedastechnologicallymotivatedconstraints.Otherpossiblesourcesforconstrainingpublicationsrarelyappearasexplanations.Aimingfordigitalpublications that are worthy of scholarly communication means removing constraintsfrompublications.
Theoverarchingthemeofcommunicationintheresearchfieldofdigitalpublicationsdoesnotaddmuchtoageneraldefinitionofscholarlypub-licationsaftertheintroductionofdigitaltechnologies.Fromthisper-spective,publicationsarejust“unitsofcommunication”(VandeSompelandLagoze2007,1).Morethanbeingsomething,theyarewhatremainsafterapurelyformaldistinctionhasbeenmade—whichisnecessaryinordertobeabletotalkaboutcommunication:obviouslynocommunicationcantakeplacewhenthereisnothingtocommunicate.Whatthephraseallows,however,istotalkaboutcommunicationwithouttheneedtospecifyfurtherwhatthissomethingis,oratleasthowmuchspecification11 itrequires.
Theimpressionthattheuseofthetermcommunicationinthemajorityofcasessimplysignalstheurgetodevelopanall-inclusiveandless-restrictivenotionofpublicationismadeexplicitwhenHogenaar(2009,para.5)remarksthat“scienceisflourishingthankstocommunication,amuchbroaderconceptthanpublishing,”andCandelaetal.(2015,1761)claimthat“itisaresponsibilityofscientiststoassisttherestofthescientificcom-municationrealmtoremovethebarriersaffectingit.”
11 ItistruethatthecontributionquotedhereintroducestheOAI-OREmodel.However,thismodelisonlyatechnicalone.Itscontentbydefinitionstatesthatitisnothingmorethan“aggregatesofmultipledistinctcomponents”(VandeSompelandLagoze2007,2).
… Publishing 293
Andonceagain,thereisaparadoxicalsituationintheresearchintodigitalpublications.Thistime,itconsistsoftheobservationthatitsmainentity—thepublication—isonlyaddressedimplicitlyandinanegativeway.Digitalpublicationsappearasthosepublicationsthatneedtobedefinedlessaspublicationscomparedtocommunication.Thisisthesetup,atleastsinceKirczputtheissueofdigitalpublicationsunderGarvey’sclaimthatcom-municationistheessenceofscience.
Authenticity and Presence: How Digital Publications Conceive of Communication
Anotherinterestingquestioniswhethersuchbarriershavesomethingmoreincommonthanbeingbarriersand,correspondingly,ifthisurge,emphasizedsomuchinthediscussionofthecommunicationtheme,aimsatsomethingthatcouldbemademorespecific.Hence,whataresuchbarriersinthefirstplace?Candelaetal.(2015,1761)arerel-ativelyclearintheiransweronthisquestion.Fromtheirpointofview,commonpublicationsare“no,slow,incomplete,inaccurate,orunmod-ifiablecommunication.”Bourne,Shotton,etal.(2012)addtothesefourpropertiesthepropertyof“outdatedcommunication”(47),and“expensivecommunication”(54),whichaddressessimilarissuesasefficientcommunication.
No,incomplete,andinaccuratecommunicationdescribesdifferentscenariosinwhichinformationconsideredtoberelevantismissing.Slowcommunicationaddressesthetimelapsebetweenthecreationofthecontentofapublicationbyaresearcheranditsconsumptionbyanotherresearcher.Expensivecommunicationdoesindeedmeanbothfinancialcostsofpublicationsandtheeffortsnecessarytocreatethem.Con-sequently,thesecostscanblockoragaindelaycommunication.
Fromthisperspective,thethemeofcommunicationisindeedthekeydriverforthevastmajorityofpublicationformats.Thisissobecausemostissuesthatcreatorsofdigitalpublicationshighlightandseektosolvewithnewformatswereandcanbeexpressedasaformofrestrictedcommunication.Thewholeaspectofinformationredundancyandefficiencyispartofthenarrativeofincomplete,inaccurate,orineffectivecommunication.
Asdiscussedintheabovementionedsectionandelsewhere,com-municationisconceivedofasrestrictedbyredundancyonthegroundsoftheclaimthatitisevidentwhattheinformationis,thatitisthesameinformationasinotherpublications.Itisconceivedofthus,becauseitis
294 Beyond the Flow
consideredpossibleanddesirabletogiveformalrepresentationsofthatinformationforanykindofknowledge.Withthoseclaims,certainaspectsofhistoricalpublications,suchastheirnarrativestructure,becomeanobstacle.Severalarguments,amongthemtheendoftheorydebateorthereferencestoGärdenfors,haveshownthattheformalizationofstructureandinformationinapproacheslikeMAs,SPs,MPs,NPs,andsoforthisnotmeanttobeaconcretizationoranegotiationaboutthecontentofpublications.Instead,itisconceivedofascomingtotherealthing.Con-sequently,thestepfrompublicationstocommunicationisthestepofleavingbehindanythingallegedlycontingent.Seekingcommunicationwithinthisnarrativethusdoesnotrolloutadifferentstrategyforscholarlycommunication,butpretendstoeliminatethedistinctionbetweeninfor-mationandrepresentation.Ittargetsthedirectandunfilteredavailabilityofmeaning.
Immediateavailabilityofmeaningisonesideoftheend-of-theoryargument.Asmentionedpreviously,theotheroneisimmediateaccesstotruth.Asmuchastruthisconceivedofassomethingtowhichdirectaccessexists,theburdenofpublishingandacquiringresearchresultscountsmorethantheeffortofdoingresearch.Atleastthisiswhattheaccelerationistmotifbehindmanydigitalpublicationssuggests.ForGoble,DeRoure,andBechhofer(2012),“acceleratingscientists'knowledgeturns”istheprimarygoaloftheROsformat.Similarly,DeRoureetal.(2009,2336)seekto“accel-eratethetimetodiscoveryofnewresearchresults”byintroducingdigitalpublications.In2005,Marcondes(2005,119)alreadywantedtobring“infor-mationtechnologyin[to]thescientificcommunicationprocessinordertoacceleratetheembodyingofnewresearchresults.”Thisconflationbetweenpublishingofresearchresultsanddoingresearchasscholarlycom-municationstandsoutmostinKuhn(2015)andSofronijević(2012).Insuchapproaches,“real-timepublications”(Kuhn2015,1)preparethegroundforcommunicationofautonomousalgorithms,whichthenimmediatelycarryoutfurtherresearch.Insummary,communicationmeansacceleratingtheproductionofpublicationsuptothepointofreal-time,inwhichthenotionofresearchresultsvanishes,becausethedistinctionbetweendiscoveryandpublication,markedbytheconceptofresearchresults,conflatesintoundisturbed,ongoingcommunication.
Communicationintheformofreal-timepublicationsindicatesthataccelerationofresearchobviouslysimilarlybuildsontheaccelerationofpublishing,uptothepointofno-time-at-all:“communicationbecomesinstantaneous”(Bourne,Shotton,etal.2012,44).Severalbarriersexistforinstantaneouscommunication,andtheaspectoftimeisonlyanaspectin
… Publishing 295
whichsuchbarriersbecomevisible.Bourneetal.alsohighlightthattheybecomeinstantaneous“acrossgeographicboundaries.”Consequently,theuseofthetermcommunicationfordigitalpublicationsseekstoinvalidatethecategoryplaceforthedesignofpublicationformats.Thisismorethansayingthatpublicationsbridgegeographicalboundaries.Inthelightofcommunication,suchboundariesceasetoexist.
AradicalizationofthisaspectistheintentofROs,OLBs,and,withsomeexceptions,SCPstoentirelyreproducetheoriginalresearchprocess.Theytrytobreakdownthebarrierofdifferentrangesofexperiencebetweenthecreationofpublicationsandtheirconsumption.Inthiscontext,theturnfrom publications in science to scholarly communication means putting the consumerinthesamepositionasifshehadgonetothelab(OLBs),orasifshehadexperiencedtheexperimentinperson(ROs).Directavailabilityofsharedspacesofexperienceislikewisepursuedbyapproacheswhichapplythetermcommunicationtocollaborationpractices(seeseebeginningofthissection).Accordingly,“thefutureofscholarlycommunications”isafutureof“hybridphysical-digitalsociotechnicalsystems”(DeRoure2014b,1).Theideaofsuchsystems,therefore,istheideaofexperiencesthatareshared,aswellassharedexperiences.
Anentirelyquantitativeandlessradicalvariationoftheideathatcom-municationmeansthedeliveryofthefullresearchexperienceisthedemandthatanythingproducedduringresearchshouldbeconsideredworthyofpublishing.Bourne(2010,2)supportsthisclaimbyarguing:
Somewouldsaythatmuchofwhatispublishedtodayshouldnotbe,sowhyaddmoresuperfluousinformationtotherecordofscience?Theresponseisthatoneperson’strashisanotherperson’streasure.
Likewise,Castelli,Manghi,andThanos(2013)arguethatcurrentcom-munication infrastructure is infrastructure where all results from the researchprocessformpublicationsinterlinkedinmanydifferentways.Dis-regardingsuchstandardswouldleadto“knowledgeburying”(DeRoureetal.2009,10)ina“digitaldarkage”(Choudhuryetal.2008,21).Inthiscontext,thetermcommunicationmarkstheshiftfromatimewherepublicationswerecuratedtoavisionofabsolutetransparencybeyondanycurationalfilterorintervention.
Amuchmoreabstractandthereforemoreprofoundbarrierforcom-municationwasintroducedbyHall’scritiqueontheformaspectofthebook.ForHall,formisthematerializationofanytypeofreification,mayitbetriggeredbysemantic,political,economic,orsocialprocesses.
296 Beyond the Flow
Communication,incontrasttothebook,referstotheattempttoallowanyplaywithmeaningandcontentinamultiplicityof“channels”withoutdis-turbances.IfthehighnumberofreferencestoDerridamadeinresearchliteratureonLiquidBooks,UBs,andothersareserious,thoseapproacheshavetobeawarethatcontentonlycomesbyform.SomeremarksintheworkofHallandAdemagiveevidenceofthisassumption.However,fortheseauthors,formhasandshouldhavesituationalmeaningonly.Theapplicationofthemeofcommunication,accordingly,aimsatdecon-structingformbypushingtheutmostpluralityofforms.Itisthusnotwrongtoarguethatdespitetheacknowledgmentoftheform,dependencyofmeaning,andcommunication,themeofcommunicationisusedtoestablishtheidealofformlesspublishing.
Itwasfurthermoredescribedthatthebackgroundofthisidealispoliticalinthefirstplace.Formlesspublishing,similarly,addressestheeliminationofunevennarratives,disparatesocialpositionsofparticipantsinresearch,andasynchronousinformationflows.Thethemeofcommunicationthereforealsorepresentstheethicsofdirectcontactbetweenpeople,unfilteredbysocialinstitutionsorrelationssuchashierarchiesconceivedofasdamagingtosocietyandresearchalike.Itisthemodelofcolleagueswithequalrights,doingresearchtogether,insteadofaninstitutionalizedorganizationalbodyofstakeholderswithspecificrolesandaparticularrelationshipinthesystemofscience,thatthoseapproachestrytoadvocate.
Afinal,andindeed,extremelysimplevariationofthenotionofpresenceisthealreadydiscussedphenomenonthatputtingsomethingonlineisoftenconceivedofasmakingapublicationoutofit.WorthingtonandFurter(2014),accordingly,arguethatputtinganitemonlineisenoughtocon-sideritapublication.Thetaxonomyincludes“conventional”and“uncon-ventional”publications.Infact,formostunconventionalpublicationsthisjustmeansthattheyaresomewhereavailableonline.Theenvironment,andthecontextofsuchanonlinepresence,isofnofurtherimportance.Similarly,acertainnumberofRIPsandWebtextsarejustHTMLwebsites,uploadedonsomeserverintheweb.Often,thewebitselfisconsideredapublicationenvironment,sothatanythingonitautomaticallybecomesapublication.
Thisviewpointcorrespondswithfamiliarandmoregeneralthoughtsonthestatusoftheweb.AuthorslikeStiegler(2012),forinstance,definethewhole“digitaltechnicalsystem”asa“globalandcontributorypublicationandeditorializationsystem”(4).Similarly,resourcesthatareputona
… Publishing 297
websitewithoutanyadditionalrestrictionareconsideredpublicationsinOLBs.Meeks(2012)carriesoutabroaderanalysisofthisequationbetweenputtingsomethingonlineandconsideringitapublication.
Thedescriptionofgoalsbehindthethemeofcommunication,asgiveninthelastsection,isthereforeincomplete,asitfocusesonlyontheremovalofbarriers.Theemphasiswhichisputonterminologyanddiscourse,nexttocertainarguments,revealsamuchstrongeraim.Inaplethoraofcases,thisaimcorrespondswiththenotiontonotonlyremoveconcretebarriers,buttoinvalidateentiredistinctionsthatmakeroomforpossiblebarriers.Inconclusion,itseemsmoremeaningfultoarguethatdigitalpublications are not so much about publications than about the transfer of allegedpropertiesofcommunication—presence,purity,immediacy,andauthenticity—intodigitalenvironmentsofacademia.Theyareaboutcom-municatingdigitally.
What Lies Beyond: Exclusion and Persistence
Ifmostoftheattentionisgiventotheaforementionedaspects,itisurgedinthischaptertolookforelementsandtopicsthatarequitedifficulttoincludehere.Whataretheseelements,howaretheydiscussed,andinwhichstatearethey?Inthecontextofdigitalpublicationformats,thesequestionsaddresstwothings.Thenotionofauthenticityandpresenceindigitalpublicationsderivesfromthefactthatsuchpublicationformats,eachwithitsownstrategy,seektoextractandhostpartsoftheresearchprocess,insteadofonlyrepresentingit.Ifthetermpresenceisdefinedas the presence of authentic research — as thought of by the particular logicoftheformat—thenexclusionreferstothosepartsofresearchandtheresearchprocessthatdonotappearinsuchalogic.Thesecondangleaddressesthegapbetweenapublicationasanobjectandallpotentialsitu-ationsinwhichsuchanobjectshouldcount,withouthavinghappenedyet.DeRoure(2014b,235)andothersremarkthatthekeycriterionofsuccessofthearticleformatwasitscapacity“tocrossboundariesoftime,place,anddiscipline.”Inthisrespect,thesecondanglefocusonthewaybywhichpublicationformatsaddress,anticipate,andtreattheissueoftheirownpersistencewithinthesedimensions.
Acomparisonbetweendifferentpublicationformatsandtheirrespectivestrategiestokeeptheresearchprocesspresentinpublicationsshowsthatitisnotenoughtojustidentifydifferencesbetweenthem.Suchdifferenceshaveamorecomplexrelationshipwitheachother.ForOLBs,forinstance,thepresenceoftheresearchprocessmeanstemporal
298 Beyond the Flow
synchronicitybetweenthemomentinwhichcertainresultsaremadeandthemomenttheyarepublished.Theformatstressesthattheauthenticityoftheresearchprocessisreplicatedinthepublicationbysuppressinganypossibilityforfinalityontheleveloftheformat.Incontrast,ROs,intermsofreplayabilityandrepeatability,aimatthisauthenticitybyretrievingthewholeresearchsetupthatledtoresults.Inordertoachievethis,ROsrequireastart-andanendpoint.Itisnotpossibletoreplayaworkflowthathasnobeginningandwillneverhaveanend.Hence,oneconceptofpresencerenderstheotheroneimpossible.
TherelationshipbetweenOLBsontheonehandandUBsandLPsontheotherisasimilarone.UnboundBooksandLPsallowcontinuousmod-ificationstowardsapresupposedwholeofapublication,whileOLBspre-scribecontinuousadditions.Suchadditionsarestepswhichlayoutapath,insteadofworkingonanobject.Bothapproachesproblematizethestate-fulnessofpublicationsaswellasofresearch,andattempttoconstantlybeuptodate.WhileUBsandLPstrytoresemblesomethingthatcouldbe—andinsomecasesindeedwas—calledthestateoftheart,OLBstrytoresemblemovementofscientificprogress.Modificationsmakethemod-ifiedelementdisappear,whileadditionspileup.
Inthesameway,SPs’attempttoperpetuatethefactualcontentofresearchprocesses,apartfromtheirdistortingrepresentationintextualpublications,isincompatiblewiththeextensionofmodalmeansinTPs.Bothapproachesseektopreserve“therealthing.”WhereasSPsdosobyreducingrepresentationalmeanstoformalstructures,TPsmultiplythesemeansinordertopreventtherepresentedthingfromreification.Bothstrategieshaveopposingnotionsofpresenceandauthenticitytowardstheresearchobjectand,consequently,choosedifferentoptionsfromthesetavailable,inordertodesigndigitalpublications.Thedecisioninfavorofonestrategyautomaticallychallengestheother,andviceversa.
Therearemanyotherexamplesfollowingthesamepatternasthoseabove.Inordertokeepcertainaspectsoftheresearchprocessalive,othersneedtobecutoutofthepublicationformat.Authenticityandexclusioninpub-licationformatsdependoneachother.Whiledigitaltechnologiesimprovemediationofthepresenceofcertainaspectsoftheresearchprocess,theyareeverythingbuttechnologiesofpresenceandauthenticity.Toresearch,publicationsremainjustinterfaces.Thedesigndecisionsthatneedtobemadeinordertocreatetheseinterfacesarefarmorenumerousthantheywerebefore,anditisthenecessityofthesedecisionsthatmakeapub-licationconceptaninterfacebesidesothers.
… Publishing 299
Inthelightofcommunicationaspurepresencethislogicisrarelyreflectedopenlyinthediscourseondigitalpublications,assummarizedinthisinquiry.Inconsequence,theleitmotifofscholarlycommunicationmakestheimpressionthattheadventureofdigitalpublicationsisaboutmoreauthenticityandlessexclusionwhileitcouldbearguedthatitisaboutmore(granular)decisionsofinclusionandexclusion.
Thesecondanglewascalledpersistence.Itaddressestheforminwhichdigitalpublicationformatsconfronttheissueoftime,place,anddiscipline.Therearetwodimensionsofthisaspect.Thefirstdimensionistheforminwhichdesignersofdigitalpublicationconceptsperceiveanddescribeissuesoftime,place,anddisciplineforpublications.Theseconddimensionistherelationshipbetweenthisperceptionandthestatusoftheseissuesforimplementationandexistingdigitalpublications.Asshown,designersofdigitalpublicationformatshaveagreatamountoffreedomtomakedecisionsabouttheseissues.Itispossibletodecide,forinstance,howlongthelifecycleofpublicationsisexpectedtolast,orinwhichcontextsitissupposedtoappear.Thetypeofimplementation,andthetechnologyused,significantlyinfluencedwhenpublicationsofitskindarepresentandwheretheyareabsent.Thelevelofpersistencerelateschoicesthatcanbemadebyconceptdesigners.JaneHunter’sproposition,tothinkaboutadecayfactorforSPPs,isanexampleofchoiceregardingthetimedimension.
Despitethetremendousgrowthofmeansforthepurposeofdefiningandmodellingthebehaviorofpublicationsacrosstheaforementionedboundaries,eachconcretepublicationstillremainsanautonomousinstantiationofmodels.Hence,whiledigitaltechnologiesallowmorefine-graineddecisionsabouthowaspecificpublicationofitskindshoulddealwithsuchboundaries,itisstillpossible—andinthecontextofthecurrentanalysisabsolutelynecessary—toanalyzetowhatextentprinciplesofpublicationconceptsandthesituationofconcretepublicationsmatch.
Havingsaidthatontheleveloftheformat,publicationformatsareabletochoosetheirlevelofrelativestability,itishighlysignificantthatfewreflectedchoicessuchastheonebyHunteretal.havebeenmadeinthisrespect.FromKirczintheearlyyearsuptoDeRoureinrecentyears,thenotionofabsolutestabilityisthedominantgoalofdigitalpublications.Accordingly,DeRoure(2014b,235)arguesthatthecapabilityofhistoricalpublicationstocrosstime,place,anddisciplinesistheonefeaturethatshouldbetransferredtodigitalpublicationswithoutanymodification.Infact,heconceivesofthisfeatureasakindoftranscendentalcoreofpublications.Itwaswrittenthatonthelevelofdiscipline,whichcanbe
300 Beyond the Flow
interpretedasamoresociallygroundedwaytorefertoplaceandtime,thesameabsolutenessofsuchgoalsprevailed.Itwasoutlinedhowtermssuchas“knowledgeburying”or“digitaldarkage”furthermorecallforastateofemergencytoarchiveeverything.Considerationslikethedecayfactor,forinstance,wereleftasideas.ThisissuewasthoroughlyreflectedanddiscussedforHPs,butnotmadepartofadecision-makingprocessontheleveloftheformat.
InlinewithDeRoure,Kircz(2001a,271)remarks:
Theconclusionoftheabovediscussionisthatthescientificarticlewillchangeitsformconsiderablybutthat,initsnewmorecompositeformasanensembleofvarioustextualandnon-textualcomponents,itwillretaintheculturalandscientificdemandswithregardtoeditorial,qualityandintegrity.
Allthreepropertiesarepropertiesofreliabilityandthusstability.Whilethefirstconcernsthesocialperceptionandstatusofthepublication,thelastonemoreclearlyrepresentstheconsistencyofthepublicationasanobjectacrossdifferenttypesofboundaries.ThelistoftendemandsthatKirczprovidesconfirmsthisequation.Itcontainsdemandssuchaslong-term-preservation,persistence,authenticity,publicavailability,permanence,andsimilar.Consequently,whatKirczarguedforintheearlyyearsofdigitalpublications,andDeRoureetal.re-confirminrecenttimes,isthatforaspectsofstability,nothingshouldchange,whileeverythingelseshould.
Theparadoxicalsituationofdigitalpublications,moredrastically,isthefactthatdiscoursedemandsadaptationofnearlyallpropertiesofpublicationstothesituationalandeventfulfacetsofresearch,withtheoneexceptionbeingthestatusofconcretepublicationsinspaceandtime.Whileeveryaspectofpublicationsisconsideredaquestionofdesign,thisoneisnot.Ifpublicationsshouldbedesignedaroundthenotionthatscientists’knowledgeturnsaccelerate(Goble,DeRoure,andBechhofer2012),asROsdemand,whythenisalessstablepublicationnotlikewiseacceptable?Itcouldbearguedthatifdigitalpublicationsareapproachedasunitsinscholarlycommunication,thenotionofcommunicationhasnotbeendevel-opedradicallyenough.Thus,aunitincommunicationmaynotonlylookverydifferent,itmayalsobehaveverydifferently.Itgoeswithoutsayingthatthegoalofthisandother,previouslymentionedargumentsisnottogiveuponstabilityandpersistence.Instead,thewholeprocessmakesitplausibletoreflectondifferenttypesofstabilitythatcorrespondwiththewaycommunicationisrenderedinspecificformats.Sincethefieldofdigitalpublicationshasnotprovidedacoherentdefinitionofpublicationsinthe
… Publishing 301
aforementionedlogicofcommunication,andpublicationsasmere“units”ofcommunicationdonotgobeyondapureformalism,thewaythisfieldsdealswiththeissueofstabilityislikewiseinmoreofanabstractoride-alisticway.
Stability and Sustainability as Infrastructure
Thishasconsequencesfortheactualstabilityofconcretedigitalpub-licationsandtheirinfrastructure.Thehighlyproblematicstateoftheintegrityofdigitalpublicationsisanissuewhichhasaccompaniedthefielduptonow.Asshownintherespectivesections,itismentionedinthecontextofEPs,RO,SCPs,TPs(Webtexts),andothers.Similarobservationsprovetoberight,evenwheretheyarenotdiscussedopenly.Accordingly,theintegrityofScalarTPsdependsheavilyontheScalarwebplatform,becausenotalltheinformationthatconstitutesaScalarpublicationasatransmediaobjectisexportableintotheRDFbasedrepresentation.Sufficientintegrityofpublicationsinnewpublicationformatsthereforeremainsafundamentalissue,eveninrelativeterms.
Thereareotherissueswhichfollowthesamepattern.Creditandrewardaretwoofthose.Theyregardnecessaryconditionsforthesocialstabilityofdigitalpublicationformats,i.e. thedegreetowhichsuchformatsareacceptedandrespectedwithintheresearchcommunity.Obviously,theiracceptancedependsonthefactthatanauthorcanexpectacknowledg-mentofausedformat,anacknowledgmentwhichissupportedbyasharedvaluesystemthatcorrespondswiththisformat.Asearlyas2010,Bechhofer,Ainsworth,etal.(2010)remarkinthecontextofROsthatacreditandrewardsystemisakeyfactorforthesuccessofROs.Thisremark,however,remainedjustthatandisstillanopenissuetoday.Nüstetal.(2017),currently,refertothesameissuesashavingtobedealtwithinthefuture.AlthoughitseemsthatawarenessexistsfortheseissuesintheROscommunity,theymostlyconceiveofthemasissuesthatwillbesolvedbyothers.Thisattitudemakesiteasytoletthepublicationformatfocusontechnicalorepistemologicalaspects,andtreatissuesofstabilityassomethingpertainingsolelytotheenvironmentandthesurroundinginfrastructure.
Beyondproblemssuchasthoseabove,thereareotherissuesregardingthestabilityofdigitalpublicationsthatarerarelymentioned,forwhichnoempiricalbasisexists( Jankowskietal.2012),orforwhichexistinginsightsareseldomconsideredinthedesignofpublicationformats.Thepersistentidentificationofdigitalpublications,partsofdigitalpublications,and
302 Beyond the Flow
micro-contributionsofdifferenttypesofcontributors(Stäckeretal.2016,sec2.1),forexample,isnotjustatechnicalissue.Itisalsoaquestionofthesocialvaluingandofefficientcitingpractices.Thequestionisifeachofthenewtypesofcitationsandgivingofcreditsupportafunctionalandsustainablecitingculture.Anethosthat,inthespiritofpresenceandauthenticity,focusesongranularityandpreciseness,missessignificantfacetsofciting.
Thesamecouldbesaidaboutthequestionofhowpublisheddataindata-centricdigitalpublicationsisreallyused.Inotherwords,dothedata-usagepatternsthatformatsassumematchwiththeusage-patternsbywhichconsumersofdigitalpublicationsengagewithsuchpublications?Theambiguityoftheconceptofdata-centricformindigitalpublicationshasalreadybeendiscussedelsewhere.Thisambiguitywould,however,haveremainedmoreofatheoreticalissueifdigitalpublicationdesignershadrelatedtheirdesigningprocesstoanalysisaboutexistingdatapractices(KeyPerspectives2010;Dodds2013),insteadofbuildingononespecificempiricistdatapractice(e-Science).Theprincipleofauthenticityisonlyappliedtotherelationshipbetweenresearchsituationsandpublications,butnottotherelationshipbetweenreal-worldpublicationsandtheirdis-seminationinspecificresearchdomains.Thisbroughtforthpublicationsthatexpresstheabstractideaofdata,buthaveahardtimesustainingandpromotingdata-drivenresearchpractices.Theoretically,theyarestableacrossplace,time,anddiscipline,becausetheyareindeedgeneric.Unfor-tunately,thishasnotmadethemmorestableacrossthetimethathaspassedinthehistoryofdigitalpublications.
Onamoreabstractlevel,thisissuealsoincludesquestionsabouttheinterfacesofdigitalpublicationsingeneral.Here,theterminterfacedefinesdifferentthings,suchasvisualandtechnologicalinterfaces,butalsologicalinterfaceswiththeresearchprocess.Thequestioniswhattypeofinteractionsaresuggestedonalltheselevels,anddotheyprovethemselveswhenpublicationformatsbecomeoperational.Fewexamplesexistwheresuchperspectivesgohandinhandwiththedevelopmentofdigitalpublicationsformats.Suchexamples,however,illustratewellhowadevelopmentmodel,whichdevelopsconcretestrategiesforthesta-bilityofdigitalpublicationsinsteadofjustreferringtoitinanabstractway,maylooklike.InthecontextofEPs,AdriaansenandHooft(2010)andJankowskietal.(2012)triedtoimplementsuchastrategyforissuessuchasauthoringtoolsanduserinterfaces.Pensoft’sapproachtoDPsalsoshowswellhowthedesignofnewinteractionmodelsbetweenpublishingstake-holdersbymeansofformatscanemergegradually,outofestablishedand
… Publishing 303
ongoingpublishingpractices.TheScalarprojectdevelopeditsplatform,anauthoringsoftwareatitscore,asanexusforallitsotherengagementsindigitalpublishing.
Hence,itispossibletodevelopdigitalpublicationformatsinsetupsthatmediateverydifferentlybetweenthelayersofformat,technology,andtheirsocialenvironment.Ifanintegrativeapproachseemstooresource-intensive,theobviousprioritizationstilldoesnotneedtobeinfavorofthemodel,oroftechnology.Aswrittenintheintroductionandthroughoutthewholestudy,theimpactofdigitalpublicationformatsintermsofuseandacceptanceislimited.Manydigitalpublicationformatsremainedexperimentsanddidnotsucceedinbecomingestablishedcomponentsofscholarlypublishinguntiltoday.Aninterestingobservationcan,however,bemadeaboutthoseeffortsthataresuccessfulinonewayoranother.Thisobservationillustratesthatprojectsindigitalpublishingmighthaveunderestimatedthecomplexityofthedynamics,possiblyleadingtostablepublicationformats.
Forthesakeofthisdiscussion,impactisunderstoodasprojectsindigitalpublishing which:
– engenderedpublicationsthatconstitutesignificantcontributionsintheirresearchdomain;
– gavetestimonyofasignificantdegreeofinstitutionalizationbeyondtheprojectphase;
– createdahighlevelofparticipation.
LookingattheexamplesofthePensoftWritingToolkitandtheGBIFIntegratedPublishingToolkit,theScalarplatform,andfinallytheAiMEproject,whichsucceededinoneormoreofthesecriteria,onecommonaspectstandsout.Allthreeprojectsinvestedtremendousresourcesinassuringthesuccessofitsapproachestopublishing.Additionally,agreatdealoftheseresourceswasspentonmeansandtechnologiesappliedtomobilizingstakeholders.IncontrasttoROsorOLBs,whichperceivepublicationsasrecordingsordocumentations,theseprojectsadoptacurationalapproachtocontent.
Accordingly,thetoolchainassociatedwithPensoftorganizesnewrelation-shipsbetweenstakeholdersandorchestratesworkflows,inordertosup-porttheemergenceofDPs.CountingtheVectorsJournalandtheScalarprojecttogether,Scalartookaroundtenyearstograduallyandstrategicallyformacommunity.Withinthisprocess,thiscommunityparticipatedinthedesignoftheprocessitself.Finally,theAiMEprojectcreatedanextremelysophisticatedworkflowinordertostimulate,maintain,andchannel
304 Beyond the Flow
contentcreationforitsUBs.Itinvestedintotechnologywhichmediatedthisworkflow,andintohumanresourcesthatcontrolledtheprocess.
Obviouslynotalldigitalpublicationinitiativeswereabletoacquireresourcesonthisscale.However,itisalsonecessarytounderstandtheissueofdigitalpublicationsasaproblemthatinfactneedsthoseresourcesinordertobecomemoresuccessful.Thisisespeciallytruefortimeresources.Thelastparagraphs,butalsothecomplaintsandproblemsthatappearedthroughoutthisstudy,showedthatoften,resources,butmoreimportantlythewaytheyarestrategicallyused,donotmatchthegoalofabsolutestabilityofpublicationsacrossspaceandtime.Thus,theunder-estimationofthescopeofrelatedproblemsandthetypeofinterventiontheydeemnecessaryforthestabilityofdigitalpublicationsresemblesthemisconceptionofsocialdimensionsdiscussedintherespectivechapter.
Lookingattheentiresection,itwasarguedthattherelationshipbetweenissuessubsumedundertermsofauthenticity,presence,exclusionandpersistencearenotgenerallywellbalanced.Thefactthatoftenonlythoseaspectsofresearchthatcannowbemadepresentinnewformatsappearinthediscourse,butnotthosethathavetobeexcludedaspartofthesameprocess,suggestssuchanimbalance.Thewayinwhichthestabilityandpersistenceofpublicationsacrosstime,space,andsocialboundariesisdealtwiththeoreticallyconfirmedthisimpression.
Ithasbeenaddressedthat,ifsomanyauthorsofdigitalpublicationsaimatacceleratingscienceuptothepointofinstantdiscovery,thenthishastomeanalsothatresearchandresourcesrepresentingthisresearchlosevaluemorequickly.Similarly,thefactthattheformatsofdigitalpub-licationsaredeeplyentangledwiththedisciplinarydiscourserolledoutinpublicationformatseasilyquestionstheneedforplacingsuchformatsintoatransdisciplinaryscope.
Thesetensions,betweenpublications’loyaltytothemomentofdiscoveryandthedemandedprovisionofeternalaccountability,betweenthepub-licationformat’smethodologicalconcretizationandthegoaloftransdis-ciplinarydissemination,superposesalltheothersthathavebeendis-cussedinthecontextofdigitalpublication.Usingthetermsthatareusedrespectivelyinthediscourseofdigitalpublicationsthemselves,thismeansthereisatensionbetweenwhatismeantbycommunicationandwhatisaddressedwhenthetermpublicationisused.Theengagementwithissuesinthefirstperspectiveisveryconcrete,whilethoseinthesecondaredis-cussedinaformalorabstractway,ifatall.
… Publishing 305
Againstthisbackground,itisalsopossibletoarguethatthewholeissueofinformationoverloadanddatadelugeislessofatechnicalproblembutmorearesultofamisconceptionbetweendifferentaspirationsandideasinthediscourseondigitalpublications.Theissueofdatadelugeandinformationoverloadmightthusresultfromthefactthatpublicationformatsnotonlydifferinwhattheypresentandhowtheyarestructured,butthattheyarenotalsodistinguishedintermsofhowmuchtheyarepartofaconceptofpublicationthatisneverreallyspecified—ornot,asitwere.Robertson(2013sec. Kindergartenandthearrivalofthenewbornchild)similarlynotesinamoretheoreticalcontributionthat“wheneverypotentialpublicationisactuallypublished,publicationitselfnolongerhasvalue.”Inshort,thedatadelugeandinformationoverloadmightresult from the fact that people in certain areas have similar expectations ofdifferentthings,andthattheproclamationofadatadelugeproblemderivesfromthefactthatdifferentissues,someofwhichmightnotbeissuesatall,aremergedintoonebigchallenge.
Aconcisetheoreticaldefinitionofpublicationsrarelyexistsacrossprojects.Asaunitofunitsincommunication,publicationsaremostlydefinedaspublicationsbyappearingincommunications.Thetermunitoffersnofurtherdetail.Summarizingallinsightsthatcametolightuptothispointofthepresentinquiry,aclearconceptforpublicationsaftertheadventofdigitaltechnologiesismissing,becauseof:
– theattempttousedigitalpublicationsforthecomprehensiveexplorationandimplementationofpossibilitiesofdigitaltechnologies;
– theattempttousepublicationformatsinordertoasperfectlyaspossiblemirrortheshapeofspecificscientificmethodologiesandresearchtopics;
– thefactthatthediscourseondigitalpublicationformatsisprimarilystructuredbynotionsofauthenticity,purity,andpresence,amongothers.
Nodefinitionarisesfromtheseaspectsbecause: – digitaltechnologiesareconversiontechnologies,andthusonlyleadtotherepresentationofheterogeneousideas,insteadofrevealingacommonground,basedonwhichitmightbepossibletoconceiveofthemaspartofthesameconcept;
– despiteanyclaimsmadeintheresearchfieldofdigitalpublications,digitaltechnologiesdonotdissolvegeneralepistemologicaldis-tinctions,suchasbetweentheoreticalandempiricalknowledge,ortypologicalandtopologicalknowledge;
306 Beyond the Flow
– theconceptualframeofspeakingaboutdigitalpublicationsintermsofcommunicationisnotsufficienttoderiveanygeneraldefinitionofscholarlypublications.Especially,itisnotenoughtojustcallpublishingauniquetypeofcommunication.Whatsetofpropertiesconstitutesthisuniqueness?
Thequestionofwhetheritisstillnecessarytodefinepublicationsindigitalpublishing,however,isnotdiscussedexplicitly,either.Publicationsandpublishingarestillthemostusedtermsinthefield,eventhoughtheirpurposeistopositthetopicofcommunication.Onlyfromananglethatisabletotreatpublicationsassomethingdifferentfrom,orasadefinedcaseofcommunicationinthefirstplace,itispossibletodiscusstheeventualityofgettingridoftheconcept.Regardlessoftheintenttofosterordismissthenotionofpublications,agraspofhowitispossibletotalkaboutitwhilelookingatitthroughthelensofcommunicationisneeded.
Publications in Terms of CommunicationSincethethemeofcommunicationisatthecenterofthediscussionofdigitalpublications,butwithinitanyoverarching,thought-provokingsenseofthetermpublicationismissing,thequestionarisesofwhetheracom-munication-orientedapproachexistselsewherethatcanprovidesuchameaninginasystematicmanner?Itwouldalsobedesirableforsuchanapproachtoofferfurtherinsightsintothetensionsbetweenwhathasbeencalledelementsofauthenticity,presence,exclusionandpersistence.Inconcreteterms,thisincludestheattempttolettheresearchprocessstayaliveasmuchaspossibleinthepublicationformat,totreatsustainabilityofpublicationsandpublicationformatsasanabsolutevalue,ortodevelopstrategiesforsuchsustainabilityasaformalissue.
ThemethodologicalframeworkofMuAhasbeenusedonseveraloccasionsalready.Ithasprovenusefulinsomeplaces,becauseitallowstheinsightthattheheterogeneityindigitalpublications,stilltodayperceivedas“afragmentedhybridpublicationlandscape”(Richards2018,37),isanintegralpartofthedevelopmentofdigitaltechnologies.Infact,itsimilarlyanchorsthisheterogeneityoftheproductionofsenseandmeaninginthetopicofcommunicationaswell.Itthereforeseemsreasonableenoughtodeepentheunderstandingofthisfieldofresearch,andtodiscusssomeconceptsthatmayproveusefulforthesetwotasks.
… Publishing 307
Framing
OneofthekeyconceptsinMuA—andprobablyalsothemostfundamental,accordingtoKress(2013)—istheconceptofframing.Framingbasicallydescribeshowthecreationofsomethingmeaningfulincom-municationdependsonthecreationofdemarcationsmadeondifferentlevels.Meaningcanexistonlywithsuchdemarcations,becausethedemar-cationcreatesaseclusionthatisnecessaryinordertointerpretsomethingasmeaningful.Writtenlanguageisagoodillustrationinthissituation.Onlythe use of spaces as framing devicesforwordboundariescreateswords,byincludingandexcludingletters.Likewise,thefullstopisaframingdevicethatintroducesthepossibilityofanewtypeofmeaning,inwhichwordscreatemeaningbyrelatingtoeachotherandnottoothers.Asinthecaseofwords,thelogicofframingissuchthatinordertocreatethepossibilityofsomethingmeaningful,itisnecessary“todrawaline”thatincludessomethingandexcludessomethingelse,whichthencancreatemeaningonitsown.
Thisrelationshipbetweenframingandmeaningisthesameacrossallresourceswhichmightbecomeresourcesforcommunicationpurposes.Accordingly,Kressexplainshowthingslikepitchandintonationworkasframingdevicesinspeech,andhowbreaksformandseparaterhythmpatternsinmusic.Theprocessofframingdoesnotstopatthefine-grainedlevelfromwhichtheseexamplesweretaken.Certainspatialcompositionsconstituteanothertypeofinformationunitintext:theparagraph.Marginsthatcreatetextblocksandcolumnsareframes.Thebindingofabookthatbundlespaperstogetherisaframethatenforcesustointerpretitscontentasbelongingtoaconnecteddiscourse,topic,oramorecomplexsemioticentitythatcouldbecalledamonograph.Accordingly,differentframingdevices(Kress2013)usuallyexistsidebyside:asheetofpaper,certainaspectsoflayout,punctuation,andmarkingsamongotherthings.Incon-clusion,abookworksjustasmuchasaframeasadotdoes,althoughthebookcombinesseveralframingdevices.12Consequently,Kress(2000,134)understands“textasacomplexsign.”Accordingly,publicationformatscanbeunderstoodasframeswhichdrawtogetheracertainsetofframingsandframedevices,andrejectothers.Thisprocessofexcludingandincludingisapreconditionforthecreationofcomplexmeaning,andcreateswhatvanLeeuwen(2005,4)callssemiotic meaning potentialofaspecifictype.
12 GaryHall’sremarksaboutthemonographwerenotsodifferentfromwhatisdis-cussedhere,thoughtheconceptofframesandframinghighlightsthenecessityandtheempoweringaspectsofframessuchasabinding.
308 Beyond the Flow
Thekeyelementoftheconceptofframingforthepurposeofthisinquiryisthestructuraldependencyofwhatiscommunicatedonthewaycom-municationresourcesarestructured.Inotherwords,nointrinsicnatureof meaning exists that enforces a certain structure of complex signs suchaspublicationformats,andnootherlogicofcommunicationexistsbeyondthecreationanddeliveryofsyntacticalunitsofdifferentkindsinconsequenceofframing.Therestrictionsofframingdevicesandtheirapplicationsarehencetightlycoupledwithpeople’snotionsofandfamil-iaritywiththestructureofknowledge.Suchnotionsdonotprecedethem(vanLeeuwen2005,3).
Consequently,theboundariesofatomicunitsofinformationthatarepresentedtothehumanbrainbyapproacheslikeMAsareinfactmoreaconsequenceoftheuseofcertainframingdevicesthatunderliecomplexsigns.InMuA,theterminformationunitactuallyalsoexists,butonlytorefertosyntacticalboundariesthatexistduetoframing(Kress2013),andnotintermsofanytypeofmeaningfulcontent.
SimilarthingscanbesaidabouttheemphasisputonthedynamicfacetsofknowledgebyauthorsbehindUBs,LPs,OLBs,andothers.Again,thelogicofframingsuggestsrejectingtheideathatsuchformatscomeclosertothetruenatureofknowledge,whichisdescribedasbeingdynamicandephemeral.Digitaltechnologiesprovidecomplexnewmeansthatallowtechnologicalandsocialframingofthetemporaldimensionofcom-municationindifferentways.Bydoingso,however,italsore-framesourperceptionofknowledge.Theclaimthatknowledgeisdynamiccannotbeseparatedfromtheintroductionofnewframingdeviceswhichcreateinformationunitsofanewkind,butframingdevicestheyremain.Theyalsoforcecommunicationintoacertaintemporallogic,fromwhichtheycannotescapewithoutusingadifferentformatthatframestimedifferently.Ontheonehand,Hall’scritiqueoftheenforcementofbindingisconfusing,insofarasbindingasanexampleofframingisconstitutiveofmeaning,andthusofcommunicationassuch.Ontheotherhand,Hall’semphasisofthedynamicnatureofknowledgehappensatthesametimeastechnologiesappearwhichallowdecisionsaboutitsconstancy.
Allthingsconsidered,theapplicationoftheconceptofframingtothetopicofdigitalpublicationsforcesemphasisonthefollowingpoints:
– Byintroducingthenotionofthecomplexsign,itisafirststeptodevelopingaconceptofpublicationsoutofatheoryofcom-munication.Accordingly,itmeetstherequirementsofasituationinwhichthedistinctionbetweentheformandthecontentof
… Publishing 309
publicationsgraduallydisintegrates,becausedigitaltechnologiesprovidemoredirectaccesstomoreframingdevices.
– Itwillnotleadtosustainablepublicationformatsifthedesignofsuchformats,understoodasaprocessofframing,primarilylooksfortheperfectrelationshipbetweentheresearchprocessanditsnotionoftruthontheonehand,andtheformatofapublicationontheother.Thisistruenotonlybecauseresearchmethodologiesaredifferent.Itistrue,becauseeachframe—configuredinordertoprovidearesourceandusedtorepresentsomethingfromtheresearchprocess—inmostcasesleadstotheexclusionofotheroptions.Itthusbringswithitthepreconditionsfordifferentopinionsontheissue,iftheconfigurationofthisspecificframingdevicebettersuitsitspurpose,orexcludedonesmightbebetter.Italsocausesthequestionofwhethertheexcludeddevicesreferto something crucial in a research process that is less accessible to theframingdevicesusedinacertainformat.Theseissuescausethedefinitionofnewformatsinconsequenceofthedefinitionofformats,aslongastheirappropriatenessfortherepresentationoftheresearchprocessandtheirnotionoftruthistheprimarycriterioninthedefinitionandinterpretationofdigitalpublications.Thatdoesnotmeanthatcertainframesandframingdevicesmaybemoreappropriateforaspecificnotionofresearchprocess.Itonlymeansthatthisaspectcannotbecentralforthedesignofpub-licationformats.
– The same is also true for those formats which more consciously reflectthesedynamics,buttrytodefineformatsthatminimizetheireffectsbyminimizingthetimespaninwhichcertainframesareset,notablyOLBs,LPs,LBs,andUBs.Theseformatsintendtounderminethelogicsofframes.Theissuewithsuchformats,however,isthefactthattheydosobyviolentlyconfiguringframingdevicesforthetemporaldimensionofpublications.Ashasbeendemonstrated,thisdimensionisavalidresourcefortheproductionofmeaningindigitalpublications.Thecorrespondingapproachesthusoperateoutsideofthelogicsofframesassuggestedbythem.
– Inthissensetheconceptofframesandframingdevicesilluminatethe fact that certain opposing facets of communication form part of thesameprocess.Theymayhelptotonedownsomeoftheafore-mentionedtensionsinthefieldofdigitalpublicationsthatrelatetothem.
310 Beyond the Flow
Thediscussionoftheconceptofframesthereforesuggeststhatthefieldofdigitalpublicationsneedstoemancipateitselffromoveremphasizingtheepistemologicalfunctionsand,inthecaseofUBsandofsomenotionsofopenscience,theethicalimplicationsofpublications.
Mode
Theexampleofthebookasacomplexsignwasgiveninordertodescribehowframingisapracticeacrossdifferentlevelsofgranularityincom-munication.Itmightthusprovideagoodtoolinordertoavoidsomeoftheproblematicperceptionsthathavedriventhedesignofdigitalpublicationformats.Itdoes,however,notsufficeforobtainingasupportiveconceptofdigitalpublications.Toapproachsuchaconcept,itisnecessarytoreferagaintothethreeaspectsofcommunicationinMuAthathavebeensum-marizedinthediscussionoftopologicalandtypologicalknowledge.
Thesefunctionscomprisetheideational,theinterpersonal,andthetextual,ormaybebetterstructural,functionofsigns.Thismeansthatwhenpeoplecommunicate,whatiscommunicatedreferstosomething,thatistosay,itrepresentssomethingtheywishtocommunicatetoothers,whichmeanscommunicationisdirected.Italsomeansthatthemeansofcommunicationpossessacertaininternalstructure:communicationiscomposedofelementsandtheseelementsrelatetoeachotherinacertainimportantway.
Infact,Hallidayintroducessuchaspectsnotprimarilyinordertounder-standhowlanguagealoneworks,butinordertounderstandthenatureofsignsandthechangeofsignsystems.Asmentioned,thisopensuptheperspectiveoftheanalysisofsemioticstructuresoutsideoflanguage,aperspectivethathasbeenusedintensivelyinthepresentinquiry.Butitobviouslyalsoprovidesthemeanstoanalyzeconcreteactsofcom-municationinlanguageandotherformsofcommunication.O’Toole(2006),forinstance,byfollowingthisstrategy,offersanimpressiveexampleofthemultimodalinterpretationoftheSydneyoperahouseasanobjectthatcarriesacertaindiscourse.Lookingathowaphenomenon,analyzedasanactofcommunication,embodiesthesethreefunctions,oneobtainsaninterfacetothemeaningitengenders.Kress(2013)liststhesamethreeanglesinordertoexplainconcretediscourserolledoutbypeoplewritingdiaries.Here,thethreefunctionsareanalyticallenses,allowingadeepersenseofthemeaningproducedinaspecificsituation.Thistypeofresearch,thatusesthefoundationsofHalliday,iscalledMultimodal Discourse Analysis (KressandvanLeeuwen2001;O’Halloran2011).
… Publishing 311
Itwouldbepossibletodescribebothangles,thecreationofmeanstoproducemeaning,aswellastheproductionofmeaninginsuchaway,asanactofframing.Theusageofspaceinordertocreatetheunitofwordsisaframingprocess,asisthecreationoftheSydneyoperahouse,orthewritingofadiary.Theoperaisnotjustafunctionalbuilding,butitisdesignedtohaveamessage.Theissueofthepublicationcannotbecomparedtotheorganizationofresourcesinordertobuildawholemeaningsystemsuchaslanguage.Itishoweveralsonotcomparabletothewritingprocessofaparticulardiaryormonograph.Thespecificationofatypeofpublication,suchasthemonograph,couldbedescribed,byreferringtoapointfromMcPherson,asa“template.”13Consequently,inalloftheseangles,framingtakesplace,butitistheframingofapeculiartypethatneedstobedescribed.Inordertodoso,itisnecessarytodiscussanotherconceptofMuA:mode.
Kressdefinesmodeasanentanglementofmedia,semioticlogics—sometimesalsoreferredtoasontology—,andsocialpractices(Kress2013,61).Inthiscontext,thetermmediawouldbebestunderstoodasatechnologicaldeviceormaterialmeans.Thus,again,attheheartofmodeliesthetriasofperspectivesoncommunication,butinthiscasenotasfunctionsalone.Instead,modeaddresses,andmoreimportantlyistheout-comeof,theapplicationof“organizingprinciples”(Kress2010)withinthesethreeareas.Consequently,“definitionsofmodearedependentonwhatarecountedaswell-acknowledgedregularitieswithinanyonecommunity”MaversandGibson(2012,para.2).
Theacknowledgmentofacommunityisasocialissue,andcomparedtootherconceptsinMuA,modeputssignificantlymoreemphasisoncom-municationasasocialphenomenon,andonthoseelementsofitthataresharedacrosspeopleandsituations.Itisderivedfromthefactthattheseregularitiescanbeobserved—sometimesmoreandsometimesless—whenpeoplecommunicate.Monographsanddiaries,butalsoforinstancearchitecture,aresociallyhighlycodifiedconfigurationscreating“frameworks”(O’Halloran2004)inwhichtheproductionofmeaningaswellascommunicationcantakeplace,andwhichserveasareferencesystemforspecificactsofcommunication.Hence,theconceptofmodeisbuiltontheclaimthatasignificantpartoftheunderstandingofcommunication
13 Thereadermighthavetheimpressionthatatthispointthenotionofformandcon-tentthatwasqualifiedbeforeisusedagain.Althoughtheseanglesaddressthesameissue,itwillbecomeclearduringtherestofthissectionthattheproposedframe-workusestheseanglesslightlydifferentlyandthatitaddsasignificanttwisttotheform-contentdebateinthefieldofdigitalpublicationsandbeyond.
312 Beyond the Flow
remainshiddeniftheissueofsocialorganizationalprinciplesisnotaddressedindependently.Thisisnottosaythatanyaspectofcom-municationisgovernedbysuchconfigurations,butthatitisacrucialangleofcommunication.
Accordingly,themoreframingisconcernedwithoraimsatsupportingtheregularitiesincommunication,themoreitispartofthelevelofmodeastheangleofstabilityincommunication.Sincethismodeislocatedwithinthesocialsemioticnotionofcommunication,theeffectivenessisdeterminedbyhowwellthethreefacetsareservedallinall.Asasociallydrivenprocess,modeiswhereactionsresemblepractices,agentsaresup-portedbyinstitutions,arrangementsofmeansoverlapwithgrammaticalrelationships,andmaterialmeanshavebecomeacceptedtools.“Modeistypicallyseenasastablebackdropformultimodalcommunication”(BoeriisandJohannessen2015,8).
Examplesofmodesoftengivenarebooksorcomputerscreens.Bothincludecertaintechnologiesofproductionandconsumption,theuseofspecificvisualmeansforrepresentation,andthesupportofestablishedpracticeslikewriting,inordertoformafunctionalmodeofcommunicationwithinacertainsocialcommunity.Burn(2013,2)speaksoftheatreasamode,where,again,materialmeans,suchasthestage,enabletheuseofgaze,movement,andthevoiceamongothersinaculturallyencodedandinstitutionalizedenvironment.However,theauthoralsointroducesthe term kineiconic mode—hismainobjectofinterest—ofwhichheremarksthatitpartiallyincorporatesthetheatricalmodeattheearlystageofmovingimagemedia.Movementandvoicearefurthermoretreatedas“supportive”and“embodied”modes(6)throughoutthebook.Con-sequently,theconceptofmodecanbecomeveryfuzzy,andtheinterplaybetween the three perspectives on communication is not always clear or balanced.KressandvanLeeuwen(2002)evenspeakofcolorasasemioticmode.Thisintroducesalevelofabstractionwherespecificsocialortechno-materialaspectscanhardlybeanalyzedproductively.
Itisthusnotsurprisingthattheconceptofmodeischallengedvigorously,evenwithincertainbranchesofMuAitself.Fromthemultimodalinter-actionanalysispointofview,Norris(2009)criticizesthatmodeisonlyaheuristiccategorythatdoesnotexistempirically.Withtheintenttoanalyzemultimodalmeaningproductioninmicrosituations,shefur-thermorearguesthatthemacroperspectiveofmodeneglectsthecon-tingencybywhicheachsuchsituationunderminestheconceptofmode.Inotherwords,ifcommunicationisonlyanalyzedastheuseandapplication
… Publishing 313
ofmode,whichsheaccusesMultimodalDiscourseAnalysisofdoing,significantpartsoftheproducedmeaningremainhidden.Incontrast,Stöckl(2013,276)criticizesthat“theterm‘mode’…representsaratherheterogeneousconcept,asvariousnotionsconvergeinit.”
Bothclaims,theoneaddressingmodeasonlyaheuristicconcept,andtheotheronestressinginconsistenciesintheuseoftheterm,arearguedwellandcannotbeinvalidated.However,thisisnotnecessaryinordertomaintainthekeyelementthatstillassuresitsintegrityandusefulness.First,thereareindicationsthatneitherKressnorLeeuwenconsidermodestoexisteffectively,afactthatwillbecomemoretransparentbelow—therearejustdifferentresearchinterests.KressandLeeuwenareinterestedinevaluatingtheexistenceandtheeffectofsocio-culturalconditionsofcom-munication,whileNorrisandherschoolofMIAtrytoanalyzehowmulti-modalmeansareappropriatedbyspecificpeopleintemporallylimitedsituations.Second,althoughtheconceptofmodereferstomanydifferentthings,acertainperspectiveisappliedwhenthetermisused.Thisper-spectivereferstothereferencedphenomenonasonewhichisinsomewayorganized,andbythischaracteristicfacilitatescommunication.Thepresentstudythereforearguesthatthekeyelementofmodeasaconceptisnotsomuchdefiningexactlywhatpropertiesneedtobefoundinordertobeabletospeakofmode.Italsoarguesthatitisnotnecessarytotreatcon-cretecommunicationasasubclassofmode.Itisaspecificaspectofcom-munication,revealingthatsociallymotivatedregulationofcommunicationhappens,andthatthistypeofregulationisasourceofaspecifictypeofmeaningthatdependsonthisregulationprocess.InthewordsofBurn(2013,376),modeistheoutcomeofaprocessoforchestration,“theover-archingframingsystemsinspaceandtime.”
Theresearchfieldofdigitalpublicationscanbenefitinmultiplewaysfromtheinclusionoftheperspectiveofmodeintoitsconceptualframe-work.Itbuildsonthenotionthatstablestructuresincommunicationareanissuethatisnotexternaltothelogicsofcommunication,butapartofit.Communicationistheoutputofasocio-culturalendeavor.Com-municationhappensbecausepeoplecommunicate,andwherepeoplecommunicatewitheachother,regularitiesemergeandwhereregularitiesbecomerecognizable,meanstosupportthemarebuilt.Thewholeofthisprocess,startingfromindividualmotivationsandreachingtocom-municationsystems,isformedbytheconflationofsocial,technological,andontologicalangles—or,inadifferentcontext,interpersonal,textual,andideationalfunctions.Mode,asframing,thusprovidestheframework
314 Beyond the Flow
todiscussissuesofstabilityandsustainabilityofdigitalpublicationswithinthesametheoreticalcontext,andnotasseparateissues.
Thestabilityandsustainabilityofpublications,then,referstothecon-ceptofmode.Itallowsre-useoftheform-contentdistinction,butinawaythatpreventstheartificialandsimplifyingdistinctionsinpartsofthefieldofdigitalpublications,andthatprotectsfromtheproblemsofthatfieldcausedbythis.Thedistinctionisonethatdoesnotoriginateinanytechnologicalorsemioticlogic.Itisanoutcomeofsocialpracticesbypeopleandinstitutionswhostarttorefertocertainsetsofframesasthestablebackdropusedtogiveone’sowncommunicationpurposesaform.Itistheactofreferringthatconstitutesmode.Theconceptofmodetherebyexplainswhydifferentform-contentdistinctionsemergedinthefieldofdigitalpublications,whythisisareasonableandusefuldynamic,andthatthisresearchfieldshouldsupportselectedversionsofthesedistinctions,insteadofclingingtotheideaofonemeta-logicalformofthem.Theform-contentdistinctionandtheexistenceofmodesofcommunicationisaframingprocessitself,notontologicallydifferentfromtheseparationofwordsbyspaces.
Wheretheenablingandempoweringaspectsofmakingthisdistinctionarehighlighted—aspectsdependingontheavailabilityofsuchbackdrops—theconceptofmodealsoshowsthatanykindofbackdroprequiresbuildinguponsomesenseofregularityanditsenforcement.Theconceptofmode,thus,alsomakesclearthatsustainabilityofthefieldofdigitalpub-licationscanlikewisenotemergefromageneralacceptanceofitsimmenseheterogeneity,orfromitspoliticallymotivatedpositivere-interpretation,butonlybyapplying“organizationalprinciples.”
Finally,andprobablymostimportantlyofall,modemakestransparentwhatisnecessarytogainmoreorlessstabledigitalpublicationformatsandasustainablepublishingenvironment,ofwhichdigitalpublicationsareapart.Bybuildingonthethreefunctionalrequirementsofsigns,modeshowsthatdigitalpublicationscanemergeonlyoutofsetupsinwhichmaterialandtechnologicalmeans,socialpracticesandbodies,and,lastbutnotleast,semioticlogicsandontologicalpremises,mutuallysupporteachother,eachwithequalrights.Itwasshownthroughoutthewholeofthestudyathandthatthiswasnotthecaseinmostcircumstances.Notonlyweresomeoftheseareasnotincludedinthedesignofdigitalpublicationsorcorrespondingtaskspostponed;equalrightsmeanthatanyoftheseareashavetobegiventherighttooverruledemandsofotherareas,forthe
… Publishing 315
overallgoalofcreatingsustainablepublications.Thisperspective—withfewexceptions—canhardlybefoundinanyoftheanalyzedinitiatives.
Semiosis
ItwasindicatedbeforethatcritiquecomparabletotheonebyNorrisalsoarisesfromacompletelydifferentpointofview.Severalauthorshavearguedduringthelasttentofifteenyearsthatdigitaltechnologies,sometimescalledmultimediatechnologies,havemadetheappearanceofmodesunlikely(Lemke2005;Jewitt2013;BoeriisandJohannessen2015).Thus,theseauthorsdonotchallengetheconceptofmodeingeneral.Whattheyquestionisitsrelevanceforcommunicationtoday.Moreprecisely,theyarguethatthemeansofcommunicationtodaydonotproducethenecessaryconditionsfornewmodestoappear.Theinquiryintodigitaltechnologiesthisstudyhascarriedoutindeedalsoofferssomeresultssupportingthisobservation.Itwillnotdenythattheconditionsformodehavechanged.Itnonethelessarguesthatitscompleterejectionbothmis-understandstheconceptofmodeandexaggeratestheimpactofdigitaltechnologiesoncommunication.Inordertodoso,thissectionwillcon-cludewithadiscussionofMuA’sconceptofsemiosis.
Inshort,semiosisisdefinedasthehistoricalprocessinwhichsemioticresources—meansofcommunication—appearassuchandchangeovertime(Kress2010;MODE2012;Newfield2013).ItwasmentionedseveraltimesnowthattheuniqueelementofHalliday’sviewonlanguageistheextenttowhichhediscusseslanguageasasociallycreatedproject.ThetransferofHalliday’spremisestophenomenaotherthanlanguagebyMuAareatthefoundationfortheconceptofsemioticresources,formodesaswellasfortheanalysisofdigitalpublicationsinthestudyathand.
Whileinthepresentstudythetermsemioticresourcewasprimarilyusedinordertorefertothesituationalavailabilityofresourcesotherthanlanguage,forthepurposeofconcreteactsofcommunication,modeandspecificallysemiosisopenuptheperspectiveforaholisticanalysisofhowsemioticresourcesemergeandchangeassociallysharedandcodifiedphenomena.Theconceptofmodeencompassessemioticresourcesinsofar,astheiruseissharedwithinsocialcommunitiesofacertainsizethatmakeitreasonabletospeakofthemassocialphenomena.Semiosissubstantiatesthecentralityofthesocialdimensionofcommunication,byofferingaviewpointforunderstandingtheplaceofmodesintheoverallsocio-historicalprojectofengenderingcommunication.
316 Beyond the Flow
Itcouldbearguedthattheconceptofsemiosisisanecessaryconsequenceoftheclaimthatsignsdonotexistassuch,butaresocio-historicallycon-structed.Asconstructedentities,theymaynotonlychange,but,ofcourse,alsodisappear.Inotherwords,thereisnootherrealminwhichsigns,modes,andmeaningresidethaninpractice.Halliday’sapproachthensuggestsconceptualizingsomelogicbehindthecoming,thechange,andthegoingofsignsystemsandcommunicativemeansthatoriginateswiththisschoolofthought.
The two components of this logic are given by the terms chain of semiosis andpunctuation of semiosis.Thesetermsgivenamestothestatementsthatsignsandsignsystemsareconstructedandemergehistorically,aswellasthefactthatthisaspectmakesthemdependentonactualuse.Inprinciple,thechainofsemiosisreferstotheprocessofsemiosisitself,asitwasdescribedabove.Thespecificationofthisprocessasachain,however,addsanimportantaspect.Aprocessofsemiosiscouldhaveprovokedtheideathat,ifnotspecificsignsandmodes,thenatleastsemiosisassuch—theneedtocreatesignsandmodes—isanautonomousandself-sup-portingphenomenon.Theillustrationofthisprocessasachainemphasizesthatnosuchself-supportingdynamicofsemiosisexists.Itencourageslookingoutforthemeansbywhichthisprocessismediatedanddriven:thepunctuationswhichcreatethechain.
Ontheabstractandformallevel,whichistheonetakeninsemiosis,punctuationsarephenomena“ofrelativestasisandstability”(Kress2010,121;seealsoKress1996)withincommunication,i.e. theprocessofsemiosis.Thedependencybetweensemiosisanditspunctuationsistwofold:
1. Punctuationsaretheonlymanifestationsofsignsandsignsystems.Concreteobjectsoractsofcommunicationsuchasparticularmonographs,dialogues,performances,movies,buildings,diagrams,andpaintingsamongothersaretheonlyformbywhichitispos-sibletosaythatsignsandsignsystemsexist.Punctuationstherebyprovidetheonlypointsofreference,orstartingpointsforfuturepunctuations,touseandmodifysignsandsignsystems.Onlyduetothisprocessofreproductionandactualization,meaningthememorizationandanticipationofpastandfuturepunctuations,cansignsbecomepartofasocio-historicalsignsystem,i.e. theprocessofsemiosisinwhichaspecificphenomenonisconceivedofasamonographoramovie,amongothers.
2. Consequently,onlytheangleofsemiosisprovidesthenecessarymeanstoconceiveofsomethingasasignorasemioticsresource,inshort,somethingthathasmeaning.Itbecomesapunctuation,
… Publishing 317
becauseitrevealsitselfassomethingthatbeyondbeingitselfisalinkinachainthatisthechainofsemiosis.Itisthislink,therelationalstructurepeopleputaroundsuchphenomena,thatmakesapunctuation“readable,”andthatindicatestherealmofmode.
Correspondingwiththesetwointerdependencies,Kress(2010)remarksthatpunctuationsofsemiosishavetwodimensions.Thefirstisthematerialdimensionandthesecondistheabstractdimension.
Theconceptsofthechainofsemiosisanditspunctuationsspecificallyaddresstheissueofstabilityandorganizationincommunication,ashigh-lightedinthequotebyGuntherKressalready.Punctuationsaretheonlythingsthatcanberegardedasstableenoughtosustainsemiosis,andtheprojectedstabilityofanongoingprocessofsemiosisistheonlynotionthatenablescommunication.Incontrast,bothdimensionshavetheirephemeralaspects.Booksareforgottenorgetlost,theyarere-editedintonewversions.Dialoguesandperformancesend,sometimestheyarerecorded.Paintingsyellowwithageandallofthesepunctuationsarecon-tinuouslyreplacedorre-representedbynewones.Semiosis,consequently,isalwaysinmotionandchange,andhasalwaysbeen.Therefore,semiosisisabout“relativestasisandstability,”andmodeisexactlytheoneconceptthatprovokessubstantiationofthenotionofrelativity,insteadofreferringtoitinapurelytheoreticalorformalsense.
Itcouldbearguedthatmodeisalsoapunctuationofsemiosis,butoneofaspecifictype.Thisseemstobepartiallyinconsistentwithwhathasbeensaidsofar.Thenotionofmodeisneitheraconcreteactnoranobjectofcommunication.Additionally,itwasmentionedabovethataparticularbranchofMuAcriticizesmodeforbeingtooinflexibletograsppeculiaritiesandcontingenciesofconcreteactsofcommunication.
Theinconsistency,however,islesscriticalwhenreconsideringKress’remarkthatpunctuationspossesstwodimensions,anabstractandamaterialone.Havingsaidthat,modeisatthecenteroftwoconstructivistprocesses.Wheretheconceptofmodeisaffirmedandanalyzed,itsub-stantiatestheideaofanabstractsemioticcontext(semiosis).Theneces-sitytoassumethiscontextturnsintothedefinitionofconcretemeansandpracticescombinedbymodethatallowanunderstandingofcertainfacetsofconcretecommunicativeacts.Wheremodeiscriticized,itisusedasadelimiter,inordertopositalevelofmeaningthatismoresubtlethanthemeaningthatwouldhavebeenderivedsolelyfromanunderstandingofacertaindefinitionofmode.Bydeclaringthatcertainsemioticchoicesinananalysissituationdonotcorrespondwithcommonusagepatterns,defined
318 Beyond the Flow
inmodes,suchananalysissimilarlydefineswhatisnotcharacteristicinmostcases.Thecharacteristicgainsmuchofitsmeaningherebyhavingacontrastingrelationshiptothegeneralrulesofmode.Thefirstper-spectiveapproachesmodewithinthe“abstractdimension,”asaconditionforconcreteactsofcommunicationofacertaintype.Thesecondper-spectiveapproachesitfromthe“materialdimension”ofaconcreteuseofsemioticresources,whichinconfrontationrevealsitselfasricherthananyabstractioncanexpress.
Forbothperspectives,theassumptionofalayeraddressedbytheconceptofmodeisindispensable.Itisthisindispensabilitybywhichmodebecomesaphenomenoninitself,andbywhichitcouldbesaidtoexist.Assuch,itcanbeanalyzedandaddressedwithinitsownlogic.Itdoesinfactbecomeapunctuationofsemiosisonitsown,apunctuationofatypethattriestogiveconcreteanswerstothequestionofhownecessaryitistoanalyzeandtoaimatthesocialorganizationofcommunicativemeansatanygivenpointintime,sothatconcreteactsofcommunicationcreatevalue.
Inthecontextofdigitalpublications,theissueofsemiosisindeedsub-stantiates the claim that the questions of how far it is reasonable to assumetheemergenceofstablepublicationsetups,andwhatformsta-bilitywilltakeinthisrespect,aremoreimportantthanthediscussionofspecificformats.Ithasbeenshownthatintheoveralldiscourseondigitalpublications,anunbalancedrelationshipbetweenthenotionsofcom-municationandpublicationpreventsaseriousdiscussionofthisissue.Whilecertainidealsofpersistenceandmaturityofpublicationsremainuntouched,everythingthatconnectstoamoreflexible,dynamic,contextaware,orprecisenotionofcommunicationiscelebrated,withoutputtingitintoanycontext.Itisthennotsurprisingthatthoseformatsthataddresstheissueofstabilityandsustainabilityofformatsassuchexplicitlytendtodefinetheonenewformatthatwillsupersedetheolderones(EPs,SPs),orarelikelytogiveuponanynotionofpersistenceoforganizedstructuresinpublishing(HPs).Modeiswithoutdoubtaheuristic.Asanecessaryheuris-ticbetweentheprocessofsemiosisanditspunctuations,itdemandsaresponsetothequestionoftheconditionsandneedsfortheorganizationofpersistent,sustainablesetupsinscholarlycommunication,specificallyinanynewperiodandsituation.
Havingsaidthis,thedesignofpublicationsassustainablescholarlypub-lication setups appears to be an issue of a social practice of a particular type.Thistypeofpracticedoesnotequatestabilitywithastaticformaldefinitionofsomething(seebelow).Itfurthermoredoesnotstriveforany
… Publishing 319
accelerationistvisions—semiosisdoesnotmovetowardsends,itsat-uratesthehereandnow—thoughsuchvisionsmaybecometruealongtheway.Itisarelational-socialpracticeevaluatingthepossibilitiesofnewpublicationsonthegroundsofthreeconditions,again,representingthethreemeta-functionsofsignsfollowingHalliday,i.e. howmaypublicationsexistandlooklike:
1. whenconfrontedwithsemioticresourcesandestablishedrep-resentationalstrategiesatourdisposal;
2. inordertobeunderstandable,consumable,andprocessable;3. inordertobesocialized,sustained,institutionalized,orpatronized.
Thefirstconditionasksquestionssuchaswhatdoesthecombinationofsemioticresourcesinthedesignofadigitalpublicationlooklike?Howdosuchdesignsinteroperatewitheachother?Howaretheyembeddedinanotionaboutthestateofsemiosisinscholarlycommunication,andfinallywhichcommunicativepurposeisembodiedbyaparticulardesignincomparisonwithothers,possiblywiththeirowndesigns?Thesecondconditionlooksatissueslikehowmuchthesemioticmaterialusedcanbeconsideredtobeeasilyunderstandableorefficientlyreadable.14 It analyses patternsofpracticesbywhichtargetaudiencesinteractwithpublications,andthesituationsinwhichthishappens.Thisdoesnotinfactnecessarilymeanreproducingexistingpatterns,butthatitisnecessarytoknowandconsiderthem.Thelastconditionismoreobviousandconcernsthefactthatpublicationsrequirefinancial,institutional,personal,andtemporalresourcesamongothers,inordertobecomeandremainpersistent,acces-sible,andsociallyvaluable.Thelikelinesswithwhichsuchresourcescanbeproducedinalong-termperspectivedependsontheorganizationalshapebothofthepublicationconceptandthestateofthescholarly(com-munication)environment.
Whileinthisparagraph,andinthesectiononmode,theseanglesprovidethemeanstosuccessfullybuildpublicationsetups,theirapplicationinthecontextofsemiosisisdifferent.Here,theyprovideaidformakingconcreteresponsestothequestionoftheconditionsandneedsfortheorganizationofpersistent,sustainablesetupsinscholarlycommunication,earlierfoundtobenecessary.Inotherwords,theyprovidethemeanstoidentifyandframeanareawithinthebroadsocialspaceofscienceinwhichfirst,itseemsusefulandnecessarytoorganizecommunicationaroundspecific
14 Asimpleandgoodexamplearetheelementsandtypesofdiagrammaticcom-munication,butalsothestateofuseforspecificsemioticresourcesinspecificfields.Sequentialanddiscursiveorganizationofresources,forinstance,arevariouslypartofdifferentfieldsofresearch,ashasbeenshownbefore.
320 Beyond the Flow
publicationdesigns,andsecond,wheresuchaninterventionmeetsthenecessaryrequirements.Initsentireequivocalnessonecouldsaythatsemiosisallowstoaskwithinwhichsocialboundariespublicationformatsmakesense,butwithoutquestioningtheformattingofcommunicationassuch.
Someofthepublicationconceptsdiscussedbeforecouldactuallybedescribedinthisrespect.IthasbeenarguedthatNano-Publications,forinstance,makesensewithinthewell-definedboundariesofcertainareasinthebio-andlife-sciences.Accordingly,itcouldbethatsomethingsmightlooksimilarinaresearchfieldonnewscholarlypublicationsinformedbyargumentssuchasthosemadeinthecurrentresearch.Thepointisthatsuchengagementswouldhavedifferentgoals,wouldmakedifferentstrategicdecisions,intervenedifferentlyintothescholarlycommunity,wouldrelatetheirworkinamoresensiblewaytootherinitiatives,andtheoutcome,regardlessofhowsimilarordifferentitwouldlooktocurrentformats,wouldbeanoutcomeofmaturationandnotdefinition.
Togetherwithsuchclarifications,itisnecessarytospecifyfurtherwhattheadjective“relative”mightdenote,inordertopreventissuessuchasthosediscussedinthefieldofdigitalpublications.Thehorizonofsemi-osisistemporal.Projectingthefutureofsemiosismeansthinkingaboutnewformsofcommunicationthathavenotbeenrenderedinpunctuationsyet.Thedependencybetweenthechainofsemiosisanditspunctuations,togetherwiththenotionofrelativestability,meansthatpunctuationsareonlystableinsofarastheyneitherjustduplicateexistingpunctuations,norfocusonrealizingtheimaginativehorizonofsemiosislyingahead(theaccelerationistviewpoint).Theyexistintime,thatmeanstheyareembeddedintheprocessofsemiosis.Theyarenotsolelyorientedtowardsthetwoendsofthehorizonofsemiosis.Thisdoesnotmeanthatthelatterarenotpunctuationsofsemiosis,butthatitisnecessarytothinkdifferentlyaboutthescopeandqualityofitsstability.Justlikepublicationformatsshouldmatureinsteadofbeingdefined,initiativesinthefieldofdigitalpublicationsshouldunderstandtheirworkasanintervention,insteadoffoundationaloravant-garde.Thecrucialquestionisthenwhataninter-ventionmightlooklikethatismostefficientinagivencontext,inagiventimeperiod,andundertheconsiderationsofthethreeanglesidentifiedabove.Suchaninterventioncanprovidefoundationalwork,butitcanalsomeanpositingandpromotingaveryfuzzytermsuchasDataPapers.
Asecondmisunderstandingistheonethatcouldarisefromthecentralityoftheconceptofframing,whenseeninconjunctionwithpunctuationsof
… Publishing 321
semiosis.Ithasbeennotedthatanycommunicativeactisanactofframinginmultiplewaysandonmultiplelevels.Sincepunctuationsofsemiosisareeffectivelycommunicativeacts,theissueofframingneedstobedealtwithhere,too.Burn’sspecificationoftheactoforchestration,andtheframingoftheappropriatesocialspaceforanintervention,hasindicatedthisalready.Theaforementionedmisunderstandingwouldconsistofclaimingthatthehigherthedegreeofconsciouslyandintentionallysetframes,themorestablethepunctuations.Therelativestabilityofpunctuationsdoesnotcorrespondwiththequantityofexplicitlydefinedframeboundariesobservableacrossthesameperiodofrelativestasisandstability.Thecon-ceptofframingallowsanalysisof,orinterventioninto,theinnerstructureofpunctuationsofsemiosis,notjudgmentabout,orpredictionof,itsrolewithinsemiosis.15.Itwouldhoweveralsobewrongtoassumethatthereisnorelationshipbetweentheseconcepts.Itisjustnotafixedrelationship.Instead,itdependsonthespecificsituationinsemiosis.
Evaluatingstabilityinthecontextofsemiosisdoesnotmeanaimingatanabstractorfixednotionofstability,oratthehighestdegreeofstabilityseeminglypossible.Itmeanslookingoutforareasonablewaytoinfluencetheprocessofsemiosisandshapingpunctuationsofsemiosisinasus-tainableway,sothateachsupportstheotherwithintheirconstitutiverelationshipbeforethebackdropofagivenstateofaffairs.
Withthisemphasized,itappearsnecessarytobrieflyre-approachthecritiqueofseveralbranchesofMuAregardingtheimpossibilityofmodes—i.e. therelativestabilityofthestructureofcertainwaysofcom-munication—inthelightofdigitaltechnologiesleadingtothediscussionofsemiosis.Thisisevenmorerelevantconsideringthebackgroundthatthisclaimissupportedbytheheterogeneityandvolatilityofnewpublicationformats,andtheinsightthatnonotionofstabilityincommunicationexistsassuch.Twopathscanbetakeninreactiontothiscritique.Oneistoreviseandclarifywhatismeantbyusingthetermstabilityasapointofreferencewithinthistopic.Theotheristoqualifythecritiqueandtoputsupportingobservationsintocontext.
Ithasbeenindicatedseveraltimesalreadythattheconceptofsemiosisdoesnotpermitassuminganygeneralideaofstability.Consequently,thereisonlymoreorlessstabilityinrelationtootherconceivedorquantifieddynamics.ModularArticleswereobviouslyalessstableconceptthanthe
15 Thedifferenceiscomparabletothedifferencebetweenclarityandusefulness,whichhasbeenanalyzedindepthinphilosophyoflanguage,especiallyinWittgenstein(2006).
322 Beyond the Flow
monograph,andmaybeeventhenotionofamodulewillbe.Thepaceofinnovationintheeraofdigitaltechnologiesisoftenconceivedofastoounstabletomatchtheexpectationsofstabilityofdigitalpublicationsandpublicationenvironments.Accordingly,theconceptofstabilityasseeninsemiosisseekstodefinesetupsofrelativestability.Preciselysuchqual-ificationdistinguishestheleitmotifofstability,asitissuggestedhere,fromabstractandabsolutenotionsofstability.TheissueofstabilityforscholarlypublicationsisneitherrepresentedwellwithinthefoundationalthinkingofinfrastructureprojectssuchasOpenAIRE,norwithinthenarrativesof“forcedbindings.”Toaimatrelativestabilitymeansopeningup,con-cretizing,andusingthepossibilitiestopromotestabilityinscholarlycom-munication,withoutidealizingthembyassuminganykindofinherentlogictowardsacertaintypeofmaturity.Theobservationthattheconditionsformodesofcommunicationasrepresentationsofrelativestabilityincom-municationhavechangeddoesthusnotimposestoppingtoreachfornewandmoreappropriatemodes.Suchattemptswill,nonetheless,havetotakeintoaccountmuchmoreflexiblenotionsofstabilitythanthosepresup-posedinmanyattemptstoestablishnewpublicationformats.
ThisargumentisalreadyleadingtothecritiquesoftheconceptofmodeinMuAandcorrespondinginsightspresentedinpartone.Althoughithasbeenconfirmedthatdigitaltechnologiesdochangetheconditionsforstablepatternsinscholarlycommunicationthatwouldengenderscholarlypublicationmodes,itisofcrucialimportancetonotethatveryfewattemptshavebeenmadetomorebroadlyevaluatecurrentconditionsforstablecommunicativemodes.Fromtheimplementationlevelofcon-creteprojects,throughtheconceptuallevelofpublicationformatsuptothetheoreticallevelinpartsofMuA16,researchactivitieshaveprimarilyfocusedonshowcasing,representing,andanalyzingthepluralizationofresourcesandstrategiesinscholarlycommunicationinstigatedbydigitaltechnologies.Stöckl’scritique,thattheconceptofmodeisfuzzyandinconsistent,canalsobeinterpretedagainstthisbackground:sincemuchanalysisinMuAisdoneforthepurposeofdescribingnewandcomplexmultimodalsetupsincommunicationunderthelabelofmode,thecon-cept’smainissue,whichashasbeenarguedistheissueofstability,sus-tainability,andpersistenceincommunication,getslostfromview.
Norris,bydeclaringthatmodeisaheuristicconceptobscuringthesubtlemeaningsoftoday’scommunication,isalsonotwillingorableto
16 SignificantexamplesforthistypeofresearchincludeDoloughan(2011),Smithetal.(2011),Rowsell(2013),FerdigandPytash(2014).
… Publishing 323
substantiallyanalyzetheconcretedimensionofthistension,duetothemethodologicalfocusofherresearchagenda.Itleavesopenwhatkindofan impact the application or the abolishment of such heuristics itself has ontheirusefulness.Ananalysisisnotjustanobservationbutatthesametimeaninterventionthatchangesthestateoftheanalyzedobject.Inshort,notonlydofewactivitiesfunctioninthespiritofasophisticatedconceptofmode,someoftheseactivitiesevenpersistentlyundermineanypossibilityofnewmodes.Itisthereforehighlydouble-edgedtoarguethattheheuris-ticofmodeisofnouse,ortocomplainfromtheoppositepointofviewthatdigitalpublicationshavenevergonebeyondthe“lumpenpdf.”Judgmentsonthepossibilitiesofnewformsofpublishing,finally,alsohavetotakeintoaccountwhathasbeencalledissuesofepistemologicalshifting.Toputitdifferently,claimsthataremadeabouttheimpossibilityofmodesintimesofdigitaltechnologiescannotbejudgedindependentlyfromthefactthatintermedialsituationsofhighdynamicprovokesimplificationsofthenatureofongoingchanges,inordertoregainepistemologicalconfidenceonlostgrounds.
Infact,thediscussionofmodeasamediatingconceptseemsappropriateforalsomediatingbetweentheemphasisofthepluralityofpresent-daycommunicationcausedbyunbalancednotionsofauthenticityandpresence,andtheabstractdemandsforabsolutesustainabilityandpersistencethatdonotstopdespitesuchemphasis.Modeisaconceptthatraises awareness of the fact that the important question is not whether sustainableconfigurationsinscholarlycommunicationarestillpossible.Itallowstoaskwherestablepatternsinallthesenewexperimentsandexplorationsindigitallymediatedscholarlycommunicationmightbecon-ceivable,andwhatwouldbeneededinordertosupporttheseareas.
Intervening in Communication: Designing Scholarly Publication Modes
Afteranalysesoftheconceptofframing,mode,andsemiosis,andtheirpartialapplicationtotheissuesofnewpublicationformats,theattemptwillnowbemadetobrieflyindicatewhatinterventionsintoscholarlycommunication,liketheonesdiscussedinthiswork,couldlooklikewhenshapedbytheargumentsmade.Itgoeswithoutsayingthateventheintenttositdownandpretendtodefineanddesignthenewformatforpublishingwithinaspecificscholarlyenvironment“atonce”—assomeoftheprojectshavedone—contrastswiththeaforementionedframework.Itmight,nonetheless,beausefulexerciseinordertoputsomeofthe
324 Beyond the Flow
pointsbackintoawell-knowncontextandtherebysupporttheprocessoffamiliarizationwiththem.Theoutlineofthisinterventionwillremainanoutline,asitsprimarygoalistocommunicateacertainspirit.Itwas,afterall,claimedthatitisthespiritthatpreventedthefieldfrommakingfur-therprogressonthegoalsitsoughttoachieve,notspecificelementsoraparticulartypeofinventions.
Forthepurposeofthisexercise,thenotionofmodeissimplified,inordertorepresentwhatwasdiscussedasthepublicationformatinmanyoftheprecedingapproaches.Theillustratingtaskthusistostartwithadesignapproachtothecreationofamodeofscholarlycommunication,meaningasocially,technically,andstructurallymoresaturatedandreliableformofcommunication.Candelaetal.(2015),hascriticizedDPsas“slowcom-munication.”Byintentionallymisusingthisphrase,onecouldsaythatpublicationsbydefinitionalwaysbelongtoslowcommunicationinacertainsense.Theyareslowbecausetheyareorganizedviademandswhichexceedthosethatareimmediatelytransparentandcomprehensibleinthecommunicativesituationitself.
Asmodes,thethreeconstitutivedimensionsforpublicationsequatetothethreemeta-functionsofcommunication.Itispossibletoapplyafunctionalapproachtothedesignofpublicationconceptsaswell,whichisthenseenasacommunicativeact.Assaidbefore,thethreedimensionsarerep-resentedbythreequestionsinHalliday’sandsuccessiveworks.Appliedtothegoal-orienteddesignofpublicationconceptsandrelatedprojects,thesepointscanbetranslatedintoquestionsbyasking:
1. Howshouldthestructureofknowledgebemodified?Whichnewsemioticresourcesandregulationsshouldbepromoted,andwhichmethodologicalcommitmentsforthecreationofaccountabilityofresearchshouldbesupported?
2. Whatdoesthenetworkofstakeholderslooklikethatshouldbeshapedbythepublicationconcept?Whichstakeholdersarethere,andhowdotheyinteroperatewitheachother?Whereisinstitutionalsupportdesiredandwheredoesinstitutionalizationhavetotakeplace?
3. Whatisthetechnologicalandinfrastructuralenvironmentthatittriestosustainorintroduce?
Thephrasingofthesequestionsreflectstheintentionoftheinterventiontointroducechangesandreachgoals.Thelastsectionsabovesuggestthatitissupportiveofthedesignprocesstorelatetheanswerstothesequestionswitheachother,insteadofrespondingtotheminisolation.Thatdoesnot
… Publishing 325
necessarilymeanthatanswersneedtobeperfectlyfittedtoeachother.Sinceeachdimensionbringswithititsownspecificlogic,thisishardlypossibleinanycase.Becomingawareoftherelationshipsandmayberearrangingthemhereandthere,however,issomethingdifferent.Anintervention,furthermore,changesthegivensituation,whichismorethanazeropointoffuturemodesofcommunication.Itisasituationundercon-struction,partiallysatisfactoryandpartiallynot.Thereissomethingtoloseandsomethingtogain.Addressingthissituation,Halliday’smeta-functionscanthereforebesimilarlyre-phrasedinordertomakemorethanazeropointoutofthem.Accordingly:
1. Whatareconventionalstrategiesfororganizingknowledge,andwhatsemioticresourcesareusedhowinordertodoso?
2. Whatpracticesbetweenwhichagentssupportsuchstrategies?3. Whatdoestheinfrastructureandtechnologylooklikethat
embodiesandsustainsthesestrategiesandpractices?
Whilethefirstversionofthequestionstakesastrategicpointofview,thesecondversionhasmoreofananalyticalangle.
Anynewpublicationformatorinterventionintothelandscapeofscholarlypublicationstakesupaposition,firstwithinthematrixofpossibleanswerstothestrategicalsetofquestions,andsecondlybycreatingaspecificconnectionbetweenthestrategicangleandtheretrospectiveone.Thispositionismarkedbyavarietyofdecisions.Forthefirstsetofquestions,suchdecisionsmayrevealdifferentlevelsofattentiontoorinterestinoneofthreedimensions.In-betweenthestrategicalandtheanalyticalsetofquestions,decisionsmayappearconservative,generative,adaptive,orcreative.
Aconservativedecisionfollowsestablishedwaysofdoingthings.Itisimportanttomentionthatthetermconservativedoesnotincludeanytypeofjudgment.ThePDFtakesaconservativestandintermsofstructuringandpresentingknowledge,asthemajorityofadvocatesofdigitalpub-licationshavehighlightedsowell.Itdoessobecauseittriestoresemblethepresentationalandorganizationalknowledgeinpaperarticlesormonographs.Acreativedecisionisadecisionthatleadstotheintroductionofacompletelynewideaofhowthingsshouldchangeinoneofthethreeareas.CollectionsandROs,accordingly,stagedtheuseoftheOAI-OREtechnologyasakeytechnologyofdigitalpublications.OpenLaboratoryBookspositedtheideaofopen-endednessasanorganizationalparadigmforpublicationsandsoforth.Adaptivedecisionstransferideasofchangethatmightbeknownoroperativeinotherscholarlyenvironmentsinto
326 Beyond the Flow
environmentswherethisisnotthecase.TheOpenNotebookHumanitiesprojectoutlinedearlierisaprojectandaconceptwhichtriedtoimplementideasofOLBsandofNPs,andwhichhasalreadybeenimplementedinotherdomainsofthehumanities.Generativedecisions,finally,aredecisionsleadingtoconceptsandimplementationsthatfacilitatechangesinthedirectionofconcepts,andimplementationsthataremoredifficulttorealizedirectly.Thesedecisionsarenotidenticalwiththeoriginalgoals,butstimulatechangestoreachsuchgoals.ManydecisionsbehindDPsareofagenerativenature,andithasbeenarguedinthisworkthatgenerativedecisions,atleastaftertheperiodofdigitalpublications,arepotentiallythosewiththegreatestimpact.
Thisdoesnotmeanthatonlygenerativedecisionscreatetheidealtypeofinterventionassuch,itdependsontheoverarchingpurposeofaninter-ventionnoranewpublicationformatdesign.Iftheattemptistocreateabeaconproject,generativedecisionsarenotagoodfit.Itgoeswithoutsayingthatabeaconprojectmaybeavaluablecontribution,forinstanceinordertoshowalternativepathsinadeadlocksituation.Thiscontributionnonethelesshastobeevaluatedandidentifiedbetweenthestrategicalandanalyticalangleanditsthreedimensions.Theimportantaspectistoadaptanyfollowingdesigndecisiontothegeneraldecisionaboutwhatsuchaninterventionorsuchcontributionsshouldrepresentandcom-municate.Abeaconprojectdoesnotrequireinfrastructuredevelopment,andaseriousattempttointroducechangestothelandscapeofscholarlypublicationsshouldprobablyavoidbuildingonthemostcreativeconceptsandtechnologies.Theanalysisofpublicationconceptsinpartonesuggeststhatfeweffortshavebeenmadetoclearlyevaluateanddefinewhattheseconceptscouldbecomeandwhattheyshouldbecomeinthescopeoftheprojectsthatpushedthemforward.
AppliedtotheexampleoftheUnboundBook,thefollowinganswerstothefirstsetofquestionscanbeformulated:
1. TheUBunderstandsknowledgeasanuncentred,inconsistentphenomenon.Thus,thepublicationshouldreflectthepluralityofviewpointsandthediversityofmodesofrepresentingknowledge.
2. TheUBwantstodemocratizethepoliticaleconomyofknowledgeproductioninthecontextofcriticalrelationshipswithconceptsofpowerandhierarchyinacademia.
3. Technologyhastobeaccessibleandmustallowparticipationofasmanystakeholdersaspossible,butthereisnooriginaltechnicalgoal.
… Publishing 327
Inconsequencetotheseresponses,thefollowingdesigndecisionsonaspectsandresourcesweremade.MostoftheseaspectswerediscussedinthesectiononUBsalready.
The answers to the strategical versions of the three questions illustrate the intentofUBstointroducechanges,mostlyintheareasofsocialpractice.Themostinnovationisintroducedwithintheseconddimension,andeventhefirstdimensionisinterpretedinawaythatrelatestotheseconddimension.Anothersteprevealstherelationshipbetweentheresponsesandthedesigndecisions,summarizedinthetableabove.Theportaldecision,forinstance,clearlylinkstothesecondquestions.Neitherachannelnoranobjectcouldengenderthelevelofparticipatorycurationofcontent.ThescaleoftheinformationunitrenderedwithinUBsalsoreferstothesecondquestion.Incontrast,issuesliketheintermodalrelationshiptypeandmodalcomplexitymorestronglyreflectthefirstquestion.Themoderatewayinwhichtheymakeuseofthisapproachreflectstheafore-mentionedrelationshipbetweendimensiononeandtwo.Thetechnologicalserializationshowsverywellthattechnologicaldecisionsaredrivenbythefirsttwoquestions,andnotsomuchbygoalsthataregenuinelytechnological.Thisisverydifferentfrommanyotherpublishingconceptsthathavebeenintroduced.
resource decision resource decisionarchitectural integrity
portal intermodalrelationship type
inter-medial
scale the whole of a researchtrack
cohesion given by the social networkofagents
secularization none residencetime definedbycontributions
synchronist parallel-incremental
structural rigor moderate
modalcomplexity moderate technological serialization
contingent (differentproprietary software solutions)
[Table6.3]DesigndecisionsbehindtheUnboundBookconcept
Byusingthesetermsinordertodescribetherelationshipbetweenthedifferentanglesbehindthetwosetsofquestions,furtherspecificationsarepossible.ThechoicesbywhichUBsimplementthegoalofallowingadditionalmediaresourcesinapublicationcanbedescribedasgenerative,evenconservative,whencomparedwiththeuseofdifferentmediain
328 Beyond the Flow
anthologiesandmonographs.Onlytheappearanceofvideosinoneortheotherdistinguishesthem,whileTPs’roleisreallytobecreativeinthisrespect.Thesecondgoalcanbedefinedascreative,oratleastadaptive.Anon-restrictedcollaborativeandcontinuousauthoringofbookswasaverynewapproachatatimewhenprojectspresentedinthisworkimplementedUBs.TheadaptivetoconservativedecisionregardingtechnologicalgoalsisrepresentedbythewayUBsaretechnologicallyserialized.
Theimportanceofthemodellingoftheexampleliesnotsomuchincorrectness,itisprobablypossibletoargueaboutoneortheotheraspect,andthedescriptionisfarfrombeingcomplete.Theimportanceliesinthecreationofreferencesinordertoenableadesignprocesswhichismoreenvironmentallyaware.Inanecologicalapproachtowardsinnovationforscholarlypublications,everycontributionisacontributionsituatedbetweenstabilizinganddestabilizingeffects,acontributionwhichattractsandrejects.Onewaytointerpretthelackofsuccessofdigitalpublishingconcepts,diagnosedbytheiradvocates,wouldbetoarguethatoften,thepotentiallydestabilizingeffectsontheexistinglandscapeofdigitalpub-licationsoutranktheattractiontheycreate.Yetagain,itisimportanttonotidealizethislandscapeasthedefactostablebackdrop.Itgoeswithoutsayingthattheanalysisoftheexistinglandscapecanrevealaveryunstablestatecallingforinnovativeimpulses.Insemiosis,asitwashighlightedinthelastsection,thereisnogeneralstability,andanyinterventionintothelandscapeofscholarlypublications,conceivedinthecontextofsemiosis,canbedescribedasa“designofsocialrelations”(Kress2010,143).
Inanecologicalperspectivesuchastheoneabove,themanywaysinwhichanewconceptrequiresadjustmenttotheexistinglandscapemayappeartooexpensive.Thisisespeciallytrueifthenumberofconceptsthatdemandadjustmentisthathigh.Onceagain,suchadjustmentscanbedescribedintermsofthethreeconstitutivedimensionsofcommunication.Hence,theyrequiretechnologicalandinfrastructuraladjustments,adjustmentsofsocialpracticesandinstitutions,aswellasadjustmentsonthelevelofsemioticpracticesandsymbolicvalues(Bourdieu2010).Itispossibletomodeltheseissuesintermsofacost-benefitcalculation.Specificationslikethoseexemplifiedabovecanhelptogainanunder-standingofthecomplexityandextentofsuchcosts.Additionally,theymayallowmorestrategicandthusmoreeffectivehandlingofcosts,meaningthedistincteffortsnecessarytoestablishacertaintypeofpublication.Thinkingaboutthemasabstract,intermsofcost,mayalsoallowthinkingabouttheexchangeofcostsinonedimensionwithresourcesavailableinanotherdimension.ThisisexactlythestrategythatNPsadoptedwhen
… Publishing 329
tryingtosolvesocialissuesofpublicationswithtechnologicalmeans.Itwasanattemptthatdidnotworkoutwell,becauseNPsneglectedthefactthatsuchmeansmustbecomesociallyacceptableinordertoreallyfunction.Nonetheless,suchstrategiesofvalue-exchangebetweenimplementationandconstructionwork,socialengagement,andothertypeoftasksdonotneedtobewrongingeneralwhenappliedinamoresensibleway.
Whentalkingaboutscholarlypublicationformatsasmodesofcom-municationthatsaturateandstabilizeovertime,andaboutgenerativeinterventions,theinclusionatime-orientedangleintothedesignper-spectiveofpublicationconceptsseemsnatural.Itmakesalotofsensetoconceiveofdesignasaniterativeprocess,inwhichthedesignofthepub-licationformatbecomesmoreandmoreconcreteovermultipleiterations.Ineachiteration,theinterventiontakesapositionbetweentheanalyticalandthestrategicperspective.However,eachiterationalsobringswithittheadaptionoftheanalysistothechangesthattookplacesincethelastiteration,aswellaspossiblemodificationstothestrategicgoals.Theiterativeprocess,consequently,isnotjustastepwiseproceduretowardsfixedgoals,butacourseofactionthat,byusinginformationtechnologyterms,couldbedefinedasanagileprocess.ThetermwasalsousedbytheLPsprojectinordertodescribethe“morenatural”procedurebywhichpublicationscanbecreatedwithintheLPsframework.Theironyisthatthisprinciple,emphasizedasmoreappropriateforgraspinghowresearchworks,wasnotappliedtotheresearchontheLPsformat.
Inthefinalanalysis,anapproachconceivingofpublicationsasmodesestablishingthemselveswithinaprocessofsemiosisneedstoconsiderseventasks:
1. thedefinitionofcommunicativegoals,2. theevaluationofsemiotic,socio-cultural,andtechnological
resources,3. theevaluationofstabilitiesandinstabilitiesintheexistingpub-
licationlandscape,4. thedefinitionofcertainsocialboundariesthatpermitreasonably
carryingouttasktwoandthree,5. thetypeofintervention(beaconproject,solvingaproblem,
establishinganewformatetc.),6. thecompositionofoneormoreinterventions,eachconceptually
situatedsomewherebetweentheanalytical(3)andthestrategical(2)angle,
7. optionally,theorganizationofaniterativeprocess.
330 Beyond the Flow
ThislastsectionofthestudyathandhasshownhowconceptsfromthefieldofMuAcanre-arrangekeymotifsinthefieldofdigitalpublicationsinawaythattonesdownthetensionshighlightedintheprecedingsections.Therelationshipbetweentechnologicalandsocialissues,thestatusofheterogeneityandthedatadeluge,themediationbetweendifferentdesiresregardingtherepresentationalcapacity,andthesustainabilityofpublications—alltheseandotherissuescanbedescribedbysuchconceptsinaformthataccentuatestheirinterplayinsteadofpositingfalsehierarchies.Theytherebyhelptoavoidunproductiveexpectations,unreasonableresourceallocation,and,lastbutnotleast,emotionalfrus-tration,suchasoutlinedintheintroduction,basedonselectiveorcon-troversialconceptions.Theanalysispresentedpublicationsasmodesincommunication,andthusastheissueoforganizingcommunication.Thisdoesnotmeanthatcommunicationisnotalwaysorganizedinonewayortheother.Itmeans,ashasbeenemphasizedbefore,thatmode,andthuspublicationsasmodes,evaluatethestabilizingorganizationofcommunicativeresourcesovertimeasasemioticresourceitself.Inotherwords:towhatextentdoesthistypeoforganizationcreate“meaningpotentials”thatwouldnotexistwithoutit,andtowhatextentisthispos-sibleanddesirablewithinadefinedsocialcontextandwithinaspecificperiod?Thisviewpointopenedupadistinctareaofpublicationsunderthethemeofcommunication.Itturnsthisconceptintomorethananemptyplaceholder—aunitofcommunication—becauseithasitsownlogicthatcanbemademethodicaluseof.Theillustrationattheendisfarfromprovidingsuchacompletemethodology,butitshouldsufficetoconvincethatsuchamethodologyispossibleandempowering.
ConclusionIntheintroduction,thetopicofdigitalpublicationswaspresentedviatheearlyworkofOwenasoneofthefirstauthorswhotriedtoraisetheques-tionoftheimpactofdigitaltechnologiesonscholarlypublications,inawaythatwouldgobeyondprogrammaticexcitementorcategoricalskepticism.Muchoftheanalysiscanbesituatedbetweenperspectivesofarticulatedexpectations,reasonableexpectations,misledexpectations,expectationsthatcametrueandthosethatdidnot,allframedbydiscoursesonacomingrevolution,afailedrevolution,orarevolutionthatwouldneverhappen.Itthereforestandstoreasonthatinhisconcludingsections,Owentriestodevelophisowntheoreticalmodelofchange,onethatwouldgobeyondtheempiricalresults,showingsignificantlyfewermodificationsofpub-licationformatsandrelatedscholarlycommunicationpractices.
Thismodelofchangederivesfromwhathereferstoastheevolutionary model or selection theory.AccordingtoOwen(2006,198),selectiontheorybringsaboutprogressonthebasisofthreetypesofsteps:innovation,selection,andreproduction.Innovationsintechnologyprovidenewpos-sibilitiesandnewoptions.Selectionisastepcarriedoutbyagentswhodecidetomakeuseofsomeoftheseoptionsandrejectothers.Anotheraspectofselectionisthelibertytochooseinwhichwaytheselectedoptionsareused.Thisappropriationcanvarysignificantlyfromtheintentionsthatledtotheintroductionofsaidinnovations.Reproductionaddressestheneedforindividualselectionstoturnintocommonpractices,inordertoprovokerealchanges.Whilethismodelisstillquitelinearandprogress-oriented,itincludessignificantdifferencescomparedtotheprogress-orientednarrativesinthefieldofdigitalpublications.Inselectiontheory,subsequentstepsarenotdeterminedbyearlierones.Itcannotbeassumedthattheintroductionofnewoptionsequateswiththeselectionofsuchoptions,ordefineshowtheyareappropriated.Noselectionbyanyagentscausesachangeofculturalnormsandcommonpractices.Thereasonforthisisthateachstepaddsitsownassessmentcriteriaandmodifications,changingwhatappearstobebeneficialandusefuloverall.Followingfromthisisthat:
…theoutcomeofevolutionarydevelopmentprocessessuchasthatstudiedhereisemergentandcontingent.Itisemergentinthesensethattheoutcomeofachangeprocesscannotbededucedfromthepressuresthatbearonit,howeverrelevantthesepressuresaretotheoutcome.Anditiscontingentinthesensethattheoutcomescanbeexpectedtofitthepragmaticcontextoftheactors(e.g. scientists)
334 Beyond the Flow
ratherthananytheoreticalorideologicalmodel.Whenclosurehashappened,theprocessanditsoutcomescanbedescribedinalogicalfashion.Butastheresultofahighlycomplicatedprocesswithamulti-tudeofpressuresbearingonthepathtowardsclosure,theoutcome,howeverlogicalonceithasbeenachieved,cannotbepredictedfromthebeginning.(Owen2006,200)
Asmentionedabove,Owen’sresearchledhimtotheconclusionthatin2006,digitaltechnologieshavenotchangedpublicationsandrelatedscholarlycommunicationpracticesinanywaythatrevolutionaries,or,ashecallsthem,changeagents,presupposed.Inhisview,theseagents,andwiththemacertainnotionofprogress,oversimplifythemeaningofprogressasasequenceofsteps.Theytreattechnologyasthemainagent,whileitismerelytheagentthatdeliverspossibilities.Thisreductionismthencausesa“battleagainstmoreconservativeandignorantforces”(211)thatisinherentintherevolutionarypointofview.
Owencontinuesthat,duetotheabovementionedlogic,changeagentshaveoverlookedasignificanttensionpreventingdigitaltechnologiesfrombecomingoriginarytechnologiesofscholarlycommunication.Drawingontheresultsofhisempiricalanalysisofpropertiesofdigitalpublications,henotesthatdigitaltechnologiesappeartofavorchangessupportingephemeralaspectsandsubjectivation.Inlinewithhischangemodel,heconcludesthatdigitaltechnologiesaremoreopentobeingshapedthantheyareshapingtechnologiesthemselves(212).This,however,constitutesafundamentalincompatibilitywithwhathecallsthe“objectifyingfunction”andtherequirementofpersistenceofpublications.Thesetwoaspectsare,inhisview,aspectsofpublicationsthatarebeyondculturalortechnologicalchange(223).Consequently,Owenclaimsthatnofundamentalchangescouldbeexpectedanylonger,andthattherevolutionaryexcitementdrivenbydigitaltechnologieshaslittlefurtherbasis.
ItisindeedastonishingjusthowmuchmanyoftheresultsofthepresentstudyarereminiscentofobservationsmadebyOwen.Theemphasisthatisputonsocialappropriationoftechnology,theinsightthatdigitaltechnologiesgohandinhandwiththeaccentuationofephemeralaspectsinpublishing,andthedescriptionofaquasipost-digitalsituationallhadcounterpartsinthelastchapters.Thisinsight,however,causesaproblem.Thestudyathanddividedthehistoryofdigitalpublicationsintofourphases.Owenworkedonhisresearchduringthesecondphase,whichwasshapedbyadecreaseintheproductionofinnovativescholarlypub-lications.Hisobservationsthusmatchthecharacteristicsofthisphase.
Conclusion 335
Howthenshoulditbeinterpretedthatimmediatelyafterthepublicationofhisbook,asecond,muchmorevibrant,phaseofinnovativepublicationformatsstartedthatnotonlyrenewedtherevolutionarydiscoursebutevensurpassedtheearlierone?ThisobservationapparentlynotonlychallengesOwen’sclaims:itmustalsobeunderstoodasachallengetotheonesinthepresentstudy,insofarastheseclaimsresembleOwen’s.Thereis,nonetheless,nodoubtthat,again,thisnewoutburstofinitiativeshascalmedandturnedintoalessactivephaseinrecentyears.Itappearsthatthereisapatterninwhichreasonsthatfueltherevolutionary’sexcitementandthosethatsupportgeneralskepticismseemtoalternate.
Thisalternationsuggestslookingfordifferencesbetweenthefirstandtheseconditeration;first,intermsofdifferencesbetweenclaimsinthisstudyandthosebyOwen,andsecond,betweenthetwo“revolutionary”phasesandthequieterphases.
Althoughthisstudysharesacertaintendencyintheevaluationofthefieldofdigitalpublications,therearetwosignificantdifferences.Ontheonehand,Owen,asdescribedabove,buildshisclaimabouttheimpactofdigitaltechnologiesonscholarlypublishingaroundthesamefundamentaldistinctionbetween“ephemeral”aspectsofdigitalpublicationsandtherequirementofanabstractnotionofstability.Theonlypointatwhichhediffersfromdigitalpublicationsadvocatesishisjudgementonthefeasibilityofintegratingbothfacetsintonewpublicationformats.Ontheotherhand,hisjudgementoftenreferstothetopicofscholarlypublicationsasamoreorlesshomogeneousissue.Thismeansthatheevaluateschangeintermsofchangesthatareappliedtothearticleformat,whileithasbeenmostlyarguedinthepresentstudythatchangestrivestowardsadditionalformatsandpluralityofcommunicationpractices.Theperceptiblechangeismoreofadiversificationthanareplacement.Again,thisorientationtowardsamostlyhomogeneousscholarlypublicationlandscapeisasim-ilaritybetweenOwenandmany—notall—oftheprojectsdiscussedbefore.Thus,inpartshislineofargumentsremainsattachedtowhathecriticizes.
InasmuchasOwen’sconclusionsarestillshapedbythetwoabovementionedbipolarities,hemightnothavebeenabletopredicthowmuchthefollowingphasewouldbedrivenbythevastpossibilitiesofferedbydigitaltechnologiestofillthespacebetweenthetwopolesrespectively,i.e. thespaceforpossiblepublicationformatsindifferentdomainsanddifferentmethodologies,andthespacebetweencommunicationandpub-lication.Furthermore,phasethreeandfourareobviouslymorethanjust
336 Beyond the Flow
repetitionsofphaseoneandtwo.LookingatinitiativessuchSPARC,theopenaccessdeclaration,ScienceCommons,OAI-ORE,andlinkedopendataingeneral,thesecondphaseisshapedbyinitiativesintendingtochangefoundationalconditionsforintellectual,legal,andtechnologicalaspectsofpublishing.Incontrast,thefourthphaseproducedinitiativesliketheAllianceforNetworkingVisualCultureandboundaryobjectssuchasDataPapers,attemptingtorelatestakeholderstotheformofpublicationsandtoembedaswellasadaptexistingstandardsandtechnologies,respectively.Thesecondphaseisfoundational,whilethefourthphasestartstoberelational.Similarly,thefirstphasecomprisesinitiativeswhichverymuchfocusonconcretejournalssuchastheLivingReviewofRelativityorTheIMEJ of Computer-Enhanced Learning.Inthethirdphase,thoseinitiativespromoteinnovationsthatarewidelyindependentofspecificjournalsorothertypesofestablishedcommunicationchannels.ApproachessuchasROs,NPs,andwithsomerestrictionevenSPsweredefinedasaconceptbefore,oratleastinparallelto,theirapplicationinconcretepublishingenvironments.Itwasfurthermoredescribedhowmuchthethirdphaseappliedtechnologicalstandards,wherefewstandardizationprocessesexistedinthefirstphase.
Havingsaidthis,thefourthphasemightbesimilartothesecondphaseintermsoftheslowingdevelopmentaroundnewpublicationformats.Yet,thereisadifferencewhenitcomestothesituationthefourthphaserespondsto,aswellasthetypeofresponse.Asmentionedatthebeginningofthelastparagraphandarguedinchapterfiveandsix,thethirdphasehasdemonstratedthatitisnotfeasibletoinnovatescholarlypublishingunderthethemeofdigitaltechnologieswhileatthesametimemaintainingaholisticviewonpublishingaswellasa“transcendental”coreofabsolutevaluesofpublications.In1997,Easonetal.(1997,sec.7.4)hadalreadyarguedthat“itisourbeliefthatprogressacrosstheentireacademiccommunitywilldependuponrecognizingthedifferences.”Atleastanotherfifteentotwentyyearshadtopassuntilitwaspossibletoestimatewhatsuchdifferenceswouldinclude.Initiativesofthethirdphasewouldlikelyhavehadmoreimpact—lessdisappointmentforsure—iftheyhadreflectedmoreonthisbackground.Heterogeneitytodayisnotjustthesurroundingcircumstanceofatransformativeprocess,thereissomethingconstitutivewithinheterogeneityfortoday’sstateofaffairs.Ithasnonethelessalsobeendiscussedthatacceptingthissituationequatestothecelebrationof“messiness.”“Recognizingthedifferences”meansacknowledgingdifferentoptionsbetweentheephemeralandthe
Conclusion 337
persistent,itmeanstostopdebatingwhethertherewillbedigitalpub-licationsornot.
Inalltheserespects,theconclusionsofthepresentstudy,albeitresem-blingthoseofOwen,arequitedifferent.Theyreflectadifferentstateofaffairs.Thegoal,assaidintheintroduction,wastopresentawayofperceivingdigitalpublicationsthatavoidsthedistinctionbetweentherev-olutionaryandtheskepticview.Theresultisanapproachthatsimplyputsdifferencesintheirplaceasonedistinction,andaverybasicmodelthatmakesrecognizingthesedifferencesmoreofasystematicendeavorthanabasicattitude.Forobviousreasons,thisstudyhadtocallthisapproach“post-digital”atacertainpointintime.Post-digital,asCramer(2014)putsit,is“atermthatsucksbutisuseful.”
Anotherconclusionofthepresentresearchisthatsuchengagementswillnotstop,assomeskepticsmighteventuallythink.Section5showedthattheauthoracknowledgesthattheintroductionofwhatisreferredtoasdigitallogics,andwhathasbeenanalyzedunderthethemeofthecalculatedly-calculatingmachine,isdisruptiveinmanyaspects.Thedifferenceisthatthisdisruptionislesstheresultofwhatdigitaltechnologiesallegedlyprescribe,butpreciselyaconsequenceofwhattheydonotprescribe.Theyintroduceuncountablenewoptionsandpossibilitiesofreferringtoorengagingwiththeworld,withoutsuggestinganyspecificformofapplication.Theyqualifyandquestionoptionsandpossibilitiesofthepast,withoutbringingexperiencesandarrangementsofthefuturealong.
Howthenshouldengagementswithformsofscholarlypublicationsbedifferentfromthosewithdigitalpublications?Theywoulddifferinsofarastheyrejecttheimplementationofsupposedlymostinnovativetechnologicalinnovations,mostappropriatetypesofrepresentation,orthegreatestextentoffreedom.Theyareinformedbyallthesedevelopmentsandprospects,theyreflectandconsidertheminonewayoranother,buttheydonotactontheirbehalf.Accordingly,suchengagementswithscholarlypublishingareprobablyalwaysadisappointment.Theyreferenceafieldandadiscourseofexcitingpromises,butseemtonottakesuchpromisesseriously.Theydosoinordertofacilitatetherealizationofsomeofthesepromises,butatatimewherethesedonotappearexcitinganylonger.
Theyare,however,moreradicalwhenitcomestoanotheraspectofdigitalpublishing.Nothinghasbeenemphasizedmorestronglyinthediscourseondigitalpublicationsthanthatscholarlypublishingisaboutscholarly
338 Beyond the Flow
communication.Itturnedoutthatthismotifwasnottakenseriouslyenough.Theradicalizationofthisthoughtunderthethemeofsemiosisrevealedamoresystematicandbalanceddescriptionoffacetsnecessaryforcommunicationinordertofunctionwell.
Suchfacetswereofmaterial-technological,socio-cultural,aswellassemi-otic-epistemologicalnature.Thehistoryofdigitalpublicationsbroughtto light publication concepts focusing on one or two of these areas while neglectingtheother:new“unitsofinformation,”amoreappropriaterep-resentationofknowledge,amoreefficientmediatorofprogress,amoredemocraticcatalystofknowledgecreationprocesses,lesscostlyformsofdistribution,andmanymore.Newpublicationformatswillhavetodoabetterjobofconsideringallthreeareaswithinthesamedesignprocessatthesametimeinordertobecomesignificant.
Whiletheabovementionedthreeareasareconstitutiveforanytypeofcommunication,itwasshowninthesectionsonmodeandsemiosisthattheirbelongingtogetherisofevengreatersignificancewhenitcomestothedevelopmentofmoreorganizedconfigurationsincommunication,configurationsdesiredinthefieldofdigitalpublishingitself,butwhichthesamefieldhaspartiallyunderminedaswell.
Accordingly,hybridpublishingstrategiescannotinvalidatetechnologicalissuesofstandardizationandinteroperabilityinpublishingtoday.EmbracingHPswithouttakingcareofsuchissues,asisdoneinsomeoftheexamples,risksarbitrarypublishingwithoutmuchofastrategicaspectleft.TPs,comparably,emphasizetherepresentationalfunctionofpub-licationsbutneglectsocio-culturalissuesofdissemination,readability,andthefeasibilityoflong-term-preservation.Theengagementintosocio-cul-turalissuesinROsonlymakesaninitialdifference.EventhoughitistruethatauthorslikeDavidDeRouretalkalotaboutthesocialdimensionofpublications,ithasbeenshownthatwhenitcomestotheimpactofthisdimensiononthedesignoftheformat,socialaspectsareonlyrespectedinasmuchastheyfitin.ResearchObjectsarenotinfactsocialobjectswithinthecurrentsocio-culturalhorizon.
Incontrast,promisingexamplesalsoexist,givinganideaoffacetsofengagementsintoscholarlypublishingafterthedigital.TheycanbederivedfromScalar,DPs,video-essays,theGuidetoOpenandHybridPublishing,theJournalofDigitalHumanities,OLBs,SPPs,andothers.Accordingly,itwasshownhowtheScalarprojectusestheAllianceforVisualNetworkingCulturetocreateaninnovationprocessdrivenbystakeholderintegration,notonlyforthequestionofhowtorealizegoals,butmore
Conclusion 339
importantlytosetthegoalsinthefirstplace.Scalar,furthermore,offersanexceptionalexampleofinnovationplannedtobealongandincrementalprocessinsteadofaone-timeintervention.TogetherwithitspredecessorVectors,Scalarpublicationslookbackatahistoryofnearlyfifteenyears.WithitsagencyintheCriticalCommonsinitiativesandthecontract-basedassociationwithcontributingdigitalarchives,Scalar,finally,offersverysubtle insights into the limitations of purely formal approaches to inter-operabilityandopenness,socommoninthecontextofdigitalpublications.DataPapersdemonstratedhowsuccessandimpactmightbetheproduct,notofpreciselyandformallydefinedpublicationconcepts,butoftherightleveloffuzzinessandflexibilitythatmakesthisconceptaccessibleenoughforabroadrangeofstakeholders,butalsodecisiveenoughtoguideadirectedinnovationprocess.Theformatofthevideo-essayisagreatexampleofhowinnovationsinpublishingthatareacceptedandthathaveimpactcanbecreatedbyconsideringandmobilizingexistingcapacitiesandregardwithinadefinedenvironment.TheGuidetoOpenandHybridPublishingisinterestingbecause,despiteitsdiscussedlimitations,itatleast suggests establishing strategic relationships between forms of pub-lishing,insteadofpursuinganewformofpublishing.TheJournalofDigitalHumanitiesandsomeactivitiesintheareaofOLBsareworthmentioning,with their attempt to lift ongoing online communications into more elab-oratedpublicationenvironments,insteadoftryingtochangetheoriginalcommunicationenvironment.Yetagain,Hunter’sSPPshavetobenamedfortheoppositepointofview.ThedecayfactorofSPPs,inconjunctionwith the notion of situationally lifting existing informal communication intomoreorganizedpublicationenvironments,isaconvincingfirstsetupfordealingwithtoday’sfluenttransitionbetweenpublicationandcommunication.
Engagementsandexperimentsinpublishingmaybecomeconvincinginsofarastheyarewillingtobuilduponstrategicallysetboundariesorframes,wherebystrategicreferstoframesthatsupportthecohesionofthethreeconstitutivesofcommunicationwithinadefinedpublishingenviron-ment.Acohesiveframeisaframethathasasupportive,oratleastnon-breaking,relationshipwithframeswithintheothertwoconstitutiveareasofcommunication.Accordingly,engagementsintoscholarlypublishingshouldbeconceivedofassomethingthatisoftencalledanecologicalapproach.Thetensionbetweencohesionandinnovationmightbeoneofthemainreasonsforthefrustrationdescribedintheintroduction,becausecohesion must always restrict possible innovations in one of the con-stitutives,duetotheaffordancesoftheothertwo.
340 Beyond the Flow
Similarly,thereneednolongerbeattemptstocreategenericapproaches,atermthatisoftenusedininformationtechnologyenvironments,butsta-bilizingapproaches.1Thedifferentnotionsofinteroperabilityreferencedabovereflectthesameissue.Futurescholarlypublishingwillgreatlybenefitfromasocio-culturallymotivatedmisappropriationandreinterpretationoftechnologicalconcepts.Thesamecouldhoweveralsobestatedintheoppositeway:futurescholarlypublishingwillgreatlybenefitfromtechnologicalsubstantiationofsocio-culturallymotivatedapproachestonewformsofpublishing,whichoftentreatedtechnologicalimplementationasanegligibleaspect.
Designquestionsthatfollowthecohesionprinciplemayask,forinstance,whattypeandlevelofvolatilityofcontinuouslyupdatablepublicationsstillmeettherequirementsofefficientcitingpractices;whichdegreeofmulti-modalityandmultimediainpublicationscanbesustainedbypreservationinfrastructureandremainaccessibleforconsumers;inwhichwaysshouldpublicationssharedataandcomputations,consideringthattherearedifferentnotionsofthenatureofdataandcomputation?
Howtointerlaceprinciplesofmethodological“openness”andaccessibilityintermsofcopyrightwiththepoliticaleconomyofresearchercareersandtheunevenrelationshipbetweenpublicandprivateresearch?2
Buildingontheprincipleofcohesion,manyinitiativesinthefirstandthirdphaseofthedigitalpublicationhistorywerenotengineeringthenewscholarlypublishinglandscape.Theymostlyjustoutlinedtheelementsandcomponentsthatanemergentpublishinglandscapemightreferto.Thisisnottosaythatsuchcontributionsarenotimportantornecessary,butitputadifferentlightoncorrespondingexpectationsanddesires,theanalysisofwhichwasoneoftheprimarygoalsofthisstudy.Themismatchbetweenthetypeofengagementthesecontributionschoosetocarryoutandthetypeofengagementtheyproclaimedtofollowcanbefoundwithoutdoubtinallsituationsinwhichfrustrationanddisappointmentwenthandinhandwiththedesignofdigitalpublicationsaspresentedintheintroduction.To,therefore,qualifytheseengagementscanhopefullyalsoleadtoabetter
1 Dallas(2016),inthecontextofmodelling,callsacomparabledifferencethedifferencebetweenthe“wildfrontier”approachandthe“contactzone”approach.Thefirstapproachseeksharmonizationinatop-downfashion,whilethelatteremphasizesnegotiationandagreementsbetweenrelevantstakeholders.
2 Inthiscontext,thenewinitiativebyHerbandSchöpfel(2018)toestablishadomainofcriticalopenaccessstudiesforthesupportofopenaccessvalueshastobeverymuchwelcomed.
Conclusion 341
valorizationofthegainsthattheyactuallymade,especiallybythoseskepticofchangesofscholarlypublications.
Thetermcohesionandthediscussionofdesigndecisionsthatsupportcohesionreferstothedescriptionofscholarlypublicationsasmodesofcommunicationthatweredevelopedattheendofthefinalchapter.Theintroductionmentionedthatacertainnotionofscholarlypublicationsneedstobedevelopedinordertore-configurethediscourseondigitalpublications,andmodeisthecautiousresponsetothisneed.Itfur-thermore became clear why this notion has to remain cautious: although thephenomenaofmodeandstabilityincommunicationarecrucialissuesforthepurposeofcommunicationingeneral,resourcesarenowavail-ablefortherealizationofsituationalcommunicativegoalswhichformerlyshapedthepossibilityofcommunicatingassuch.
Itwassaidthatmorethanever,formishardlyseparablefromcontent.ThisisjustanotherwayofphrasingOwen’sremarkthatdigitaltechnologiesaretechnologiesthatareformedinsteadofformingtechnologies.Itisthereforenotreasonabletoassume,nortostrivefor,theonenewpub-licationformat,notevenforthefewestimaginablenumbersofformats.Heterogeneityofpublicationformatsisandwillbeafactofpublishingafterthedigital.Torealizeandtoacceptthismaysignificantlyhelptoovercomegreatpartsofthefrustrationinthefield.Itisthereforenecessarytorefrainfromoverambitiousideasofdefiningcontemporaryscholarlypublishing,anideawhich,forinstance,drivesthefieldsofSPs,EPs,ROs,andothers.
Thisdoesnotmean,ontheotherhand,thatpublishingformatsshouldbearbitrary,adirectionthatcanbeobservedinsomeargumentsofTPsandHPs.IftheongoingsuccessofthePDFistobeinterpreted,thenitisboth,theincapacityofthedigitalpublishingfieldtodealwiththeextentofdifferentandconflictingdemandsarticulatedinthefield,aswellastheunsystematizedorwelcomedrandomnessofoptionsfor“goingdigital”inpublishing.Nonewtypeofscholarlypublication,butneithernotypingatall,thatisthespaceinwhichscholarlypublishingfindsitselftoday.Thisisthesituationofpublicationsintermsofcommunication.
TheexampleofthechainofdevelopmentsfromSPstoNPstoMPs,aswellasthecoexistenceofprofessionallyoperatedresearchblogsnexttomonographpublications,showverywellhow,indefinedsocialenviron-ments,demandsfordifferentlevelsofpublishingexistinparallel.Accordingly,certainformatsmightbecomepublishingmodesacrossdifferentsocialenvironments,andineachenvironment,therewillprobablybemorethanonepublishingmode.Asystematicdescriptionand
342 Beyond the Flow
developmentofthisecology,incontrasttotheoftenisolatedorstronglyfocusedcontributionsinthepast,isataskforfurtherresearchonscholarlypublishing.
Concerningtheanalysisoftheeffectsofdigitaltechnologiesonthesemi-oticlandscape,itseemsappropriateindeedtoconceiveofpublishingfromastandpointofcommunication.Incontrasttothewayofdoingsointhefieldofdigitalpublishing,inwhichthemeaningoftheconceptofpublishingremainswidelyunrelated,publishingisanorganizationalinterventionintocommunication.Assuch,thetwoareneitherthesamenoropposites.Publicationsinformofcommunicationcreateacontinuum,inwhichduetodigitaltechnologiestransitionshavebecomeextremelyfluentandaremarkedbydifferentcommunicativegoals.
Itwouldinanycaseoffergreatsupporttoresearchonnewformsofscholarlypublishingtoevaluateandsystematizethebackgroundsandgoalsofactsofscholarlycommunication,andrelatethemtopossibleformats.TheargumentofPettifer'setal.(2011)observationsonthesuccessofthePDFhasemphasizedthisalready.Thisstudyhasalsotakenafirststepinthisrespect,evenifitonlymadeepistemologicalgoalsandgoalsininnovationtransparent.Itshouldbeobviousfromtheargumentsgiventhatcommunicationgoalsmeansomuchmorethanthis.
Thedescriptionofpublicationsas“currency”forthecurriculaofacademics,thedisseminationofknowledge,ortheprovisionofaccountabilityfortruthareallaspectsthat,ofcourse,arenotfalse,butfartooabstractforunderstandingtheentirecontextofdifferentcommunicationstoday.Vari-ationreferstoquestionssuchas:disseminationtowhom,whatkindofknowledge,whichstep,whatpartofthecurriculum,andmanymore.
Theabovementionedcontinuumofstabilityofnewformsofscholarlypublicationsbringstomind,again,thepositivementionoftheJournalforDigitalHumanitiesandtheOLBs,fortheireffortto“lift”certaincom-municationstomoreformalformsofcommunication.Scholarlypublishingafterthedigitalisindeedanactivitythatdefinescertainorganizationalstagesinthiscontinuum.Suchstagescorrespondtoclearlydefinedcom-municationstrategies,withenvironmentsabletosustainthem.Theydonotexistjustbecauseitispossibletoimaginethem.Accordingly,itisnotnecessarytogenerallytreatatweetoratwitterdumpasapublication,likethepublicationtaxonomysuggests(WorthingtonandFurter2014).Never-theless,communicationgoalsmayexistthatmakeitworthtransformingsuchtweetsordumpsintopublications,byliftingthemintoacontextthathasanotherorganizationalstageandaddsstructure.Inthisrespect,
Conclusion 343
theDebatesintheDigitalHumanitiesseriesprovidesanotherinsightfulexample.Theseanthologiespublish,amongotherthings,textswhichhavebeenwrittenandpublishedasblogpostsalready.Accordingly,theypullcontentoutofamoreday-to-dayandephemeralpublicationcontextandstageitinapublishingenvironmentwithgreatersocial,infrastructural,andsymbolicsupport.Followingsuchexamples,publishingafterthedigitalcanalsobedefinedasstagingcommunication.Thetaskforanaccompanyingresearchfieldwouldthenbetotakecareofpopularorpromisingstages.Foreachpublicationmodetoariseitishencealsonecessarytoaskhowfarstaging,intermsofintendedorganizationalcomplexity,hastogo.
Theanswerstothisandother,aforementioned,questionsthatattempttodescribetheattitudetowardsscholarlypublishingafterthedigitalhavetocomefromanautonomousconceptualspaceofpublications.Thisspaceisrenderedbythepotentialtodesignmorethanephemeralformationsbetweentechno-materiality,socio-culture,andepistemologico-semiology,butindeedalsolessstableonesthanrequiredfortheultimateresourceof“objectivation,”asOwenhasputit.Itmustrefrainfromobjectifyingtheobjectivationfunctionofpublicationsitself.Theseabovementionedformationsdonotjustemergealongtheway.Thisiswhattheexperiencesofthefirstandthirdperiodofdigitalpublishingcanteach.Neitheronlyafascinationfornewwaystorepresent,norethicaldrivestorestructurethepoliticaleconomyofknowledgeproductionanddissemination,andcertainly not the implementation of technological principles will be able tohelpsaturatethelandscapeofscholarlypublishing.Instead,publishingmodeswillemergeinspaceswherecosts,motivations,andbenefitsinsuchareasareabletoaccommodateeachother.Andthereisstillalongwaytogoforthistohappen.
Accordingtotheargumentspresentedinthelastsections,thekeyquestionofaresearchfieldofscholarlypublishingtodayactuallyis:whenisit,andshoulditbe,publishing?Thisisaquestioncallingforconcreteanswersinconcretecontexts.Thenotionofarevolutiontocomeanditscounter-claimthatnosubstantialchangeswillactuallytakeplace,that,asshownintheintroduction,somuchdrivetheengagementintothefieldofpublicationstoday,requiresomefinal,generalanswers.Totherevolutionaries,asuit-ableresponsealludestoatitlebyUBadvocateBrunoLatour(1993).Justlikehetriestoconvincethat“wehaveneverbeenmodern,”itcouldbearguedthatthereneverhavebeendigitalpublicationsandtherewillneverbeany.
Aresponsetotheskepticswouldbetoemphasizethatthediscourseondigitaltechnologies,andthedrivetowardsdigitalpublicationshas
344 Beyond the Flow
disruptedscholarlypublishingtoomuchalready.Whethersuchrealitiesemergedunderquestionablecircumstancesornotisofsecondarycon-cern.Itcouldevenbearguedthatitisnotsomuchabouthowconvincingthesecircumstancesare,butabouthowmuchthehistoricalconfigurationofscholarlypublicationsdealtwithitsownquestionablecircumstances,heterogeneity,andimaginarydrivers.Ittherebymighthavecausedthedrivetowardsdigitalpublicationsinthefirstplace,longbeforedigitaltechnologiesgaveitform.Inanycase,theimportanttasknowistomakesenseoftheserealities.Thepresentstudyhastriedtocontributetothistask,byprovidingthemeanstoseeandbuildsomepatternswherethereissomuchregretaboutheterogeneity,orcelebrationofmessiness.
A P P E N D I X
Acronyms
ACM AssociationforComputing
Machinery
AIDA Atomic,Independent,
Declarative,Absolute
ANVC AllianceforNetworkingVisual
Culture
API ApplicationProgramming
Interface
APs AutomatedPublications
CRIS CurrentResearchInformation
Systems
CSS CascadingStyleSheets
CWA ConceptWebAlliance
DDC DeweyDecimalClassification
DH DigitalHumanities
DIDL DigitalItemDeclaration
Language
DOI DigitalObjectIdentifier
DP Data Paper
DPO DigitalPublishing
Organizations
DRIVER DigitalRepositoryInfra-
structureVisionforEuropean
Research
EP EnhancedPublication
EPMS EnhancedPublicationsMan-
agementSystems
ERC ExecutableResearch
Compendiums
FORCE TheFutureofResearchCom-
municationsande-Scholarship
FRBR FunctionalRequirementsfor
BibliographicRecords
GBIF GlobalBiodiversityInfor-
mationFacility
HP HybridPublication
HTML HypertextMarkupLanguage
IMEJ(IMMJ)InteractiveMultimediaElec-
tronic Journals
IMRaD Introduction,Methods,Results
andDiscussion
JDH JournalforDigitalHumanities
JSON JavaScriptObjectNotation
JSTOR JournalSTORage
KISS Keepitsimple,stupid
LB LivingBook
LOD LinkedOpenData
LORE LiteratureObjectRe-useand
Exchange
LP LiquidPublication
LaP LayeredArticle
MA ModularArticle
MIA MultimodalInteraction
Analysis
MP MicroPublication
MuA MultimodalAnalysis
NP Nano Publication
OA OpenAccess
OAI OpenArchivesInitiative
OAI-ORE OpenArchivesInitiativeObject
ReuseandExchange
OAI-PMH OpenArchivesInitiative
ProtocolforMetadata
Harvesting
OCR OpticalCharacterRecognition
OLB OpenLaboratoryBook,
sometimesalsoreferredtoas
OpenNotebookScience
OWL WebOntologyLanguage
PDF PortableDocumentFormat
PID PersistentIdentifier
PLOS PublicLibraryofScience
RDF ResourceDescription
Framework
350 Beyond the Flow
RDFS ResourceDescriptionFrame-
workSchema
RIDE ReviewJournalforScholarly
DigitalEditions
RIP Rich Internet Publication
RO ResearchObject
RSS ReallySimpleSyndication
SALT SemanticallyAnnotatedLaTeX
SCI ScholarlyCommunication
Infrastructure
SCOPE ScientificCompoundObject
Publishing
SCP Self-ContainedPublication
SGML StandardGeneralizedMarkup
Language
SKO ScientificKnowledgeObject
Pattern
SP SemanticPublication
SPARC ScholarlyPublishingand
AcademicResourcesCoalition
SPARQL SPARQLProtocolandRDF
QueryLanguage
SPP ScientificPublicationPackage
SPRO SemanticPublishingand
ReferencingOntologies
SW SemanticWeb
SWAN SemanticWebApplicationsin
Neuromedicine
TEI TextEncodingInitiative
TP TransmediaPublication
UB UnboundBook
UML UnifiedModellingLanguage
UMLS UnifiedMedicalLanguage
System
UNIX UniplexedInformationand
ComputingService
URI UniformResourceIdentifier
URL UniformResourceLocator
VCS VersionControlSystem
WYSIWIG Whatyouseeiswhatyouget
WYSIWYM Whatyouseeiswhatyoumean
XML ExtensibleMarkupLanguage
References
Aalbersberg,IjsbrandJan,SophiaAtzeni,HylkeKoers,BeateSpecker,andElenaZudilova-Seinstra.2014.“BringingDigitalScienceDeepInsidetheScientificArticle:TheElsevierArticleoftheFutureProject.”Liber Quarterly23(4):274–99.doi:10.18352/lq.8446.
Abargues,Carlos,CarlosGranell,andJoaquínHuerta.2010.“DescribiendocoleccionesderecursosparalaWebdeDatos.”GeoInfo.http://www.geoinfo.uji.es/pubs/2010-jiide-GeoCollector.pdf.
Abbinnett,Ross.2017.The Thought of Bernard Stiegler: Capitalism, Technology and the Politics of Spirit.London:Taylor&Francis.
Ackoff,RussellL.1989.“FromDatatoWisdom.”Journal of Applied Systems Analysis16(1):3–9.Adema,Janneke.2014.“HybridPublishing:ScalarandWatchingReadingWrite.”
Open Reflections.March18.https://openreflections.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/hybrid-publishing-scalar-and-watching-reading-write/.
———.2015.“KnowledgeProductionBeyondtheBook?PerformingtheScholarlyMonographinContemporaryDigitalCulture.”Coventry:CoventryUniversity.
Adema,Janneke,andGaryHall.2016.“Posthumanities:TheDarkSideof‘TheDarkSideoftheDigital’”.Journal of Electronic Publishing19(2).doi:10.3998/3336451.0019.201.
Adriaansen,Dennis,andJürgenHooft.2010.“PropertiesofEnhancedPublicationsandtheSupportingTools.”http://www.cs.uu.nl/docs/vakken/mdic/papers/Adriaansen-fin.pdf.
Agosti,Maristella,OwenConlan,NicolaFerro,CormacHampson,andGaryMunnelly.2013.“InteractingwithDigitalCulturalHeritageCollectionsviaAnnotations:TheCULTURAApproach.”InProceedings of the 2013 ACM Symposium on Document Engineering,13–22.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/2494266.2494288.
Akers,Katherine.2014.“AGrowingListofDataJournals.”Data@MLibrary.May9T13:00:29+00:00.https://mlibrarydata.wordpress.com/2014/05/09/data-journals/.
Alsop,Graham,ChrisTompsett,andJamesWisdom.1997.“AStudyofHumanCom-municationIssuesinInteractiveScholarlyElectronicJournals:eLibSupportingStudy.”35423.UKOLN,UniversityofBath.http://opus.bath.ac.uk/35423/.
Amerika,Mark.2011a.“Remixthebook.”http://www.remixthebook.com/.———.2011b.Remixthebook.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Andersen,ChristianUlrik,GeoffCox,andGeorgiosPapadopoulos,eds.2014.“Post-Digital
Research.”A Peer-Reviewed Journal About3(1).http://www.aprja.net/?page_id=1291.Anderson,Chris.2008.“TheEndofTheory:TheDataDelugeMakestheScientific
MethodObsolete.”Wired,no.16.07(March).https://www.google.de/url?sa=-t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi2v4iK-KzaAhWGb1AKHd0QCKwQFggrMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wired.com%2F2008%2F06%2Fpb-theory%2F&usg=AOvVaw0e06Sdy3GcTRtNvbdynoAG.
Anderson,NicholasR.,PeterTarczy-Hornoch,andRogerE.Bumgarner.2006.“OnthePersistenceofSupplementaryResourcesinBiomedicalPublications.”BMC Bioinformatics 7(1).doi:10.1186/1471-2105-7-260.
Andrews,Ian.2002.“Post-DigitalAestheticsandtheReturntoModernism.”PresentedattheMAP-UtsLecture.http://www.ian-andrews.org/texts/postdig.html.
Andriopoulos,Stefan.2003.“OkkulteundtechnischeTelevision.”InText und Wissen: technologische und anthropologische Aspekte,editedbyRenateLachmannandStefanRieger,105–26.Tübingen:GunterNarrVerlag.
Assante,Massimiliano,LeonardoCandela,DonatellaCastelli,andAliceTani.2016.“AreScientificDataRepositoriesCopingwithResearchDataPublishing?”Data Science Journal 15(April).doi:10.5334/dsj-2016-006.
352 Beyond the Flow
Assante,Massimiliano,LeonardoCandela,DonatellaCastelli,PaoloManghi,andPasqualePagano.2015.“Science2.0Repositories:TimeforaChangeinScholarlyCommunication.”D-Lib Magazine21(1):4.doi:10.1045/january2015-assante.
Attwood,TeresaK.,DavidKell,PhilipMcDermott,JamesMarsh,andDavidThorne.2010.“UtopiaDocuments:LinkingScholarlyLiteraturewithResearchData.”Bioinformatics26(18):i568–i574.doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq383.
Baez,Marcos,andFabioCasati.2010.“LiquidJournals:KnowledgeDisseminationintheWebEra.”DISI-10-028.UniversityofTrento.http://eprints.biblio.unitn.it/archive/00001814/01/028.pdf.
Baez,Marcos,AliaksandrBirukou,FabioCasati,MaurizioMarchese,andDaniilMirylenka.2009.“LiquidJournals:OvercomingInformationOverloadintheScientificCommunity.”https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=10spyCxs-G5jcUD7AhTr6TVRON9QTddCkUg00TO9tmK8&pli=1.
Ball,CherylE.2016.“TheShiftingGenresofScholarlyMultimedia:WebtextsAsInnovation.”The Journal of Media Innovations3(2):52–71.doi:10.5617/jmi.v3i2.2548.
———.2017.“BuildingaScholarlyMultimediaPublishingInfrastructure.”Journal of Scholarly Publishing48(2):99–115.doi:10.3138/jsp.48.2.99.
Ball,CherylE.,andDouglasEyman.2015.“EditorialWorkflowsforMultimedia-RichScholar-ship.”The Journal of Electronic Publishing18(4).doi:10.3998/3336451.0018.406.
Bardi,Alessia.2014.“ScholarlyCommunication:What’sWrongwithIt?”https://rd-alliance.org/sites/default/files/attachment/AlessiaBardi.pdf.
Bardi,Alessia,andPaoloManghi.2014.“EnhancedPublications:DataModelsandInfor-mationSystems.”Liber Quarterly23(4):240–73.doi:10.18352/lq.8445/.
———.2015a.“AFrameworkSupportingtheShiftfromTraditionalDigitalPublicationstoEnhancedPublications.”D-Lib Magazine21(1/2).doi:10.1045/january2015-bardi.
———.2015b.“EnhancedPublicationManagementSystems:ASystemicApproachTowardsModernScientificCommunication.”InProceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion,1051–2.InternationalWorldWideWebConferencesSteeringCommittee.doi:10.1145/2740908.2742026.
Bartling,Sönke,andSaschaFriesike.2014.“TowardsAnotherScientificRevolution.”InOpening Science,editedbySönkeBartlingandSaschaFriesike,3–15.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_1.
Beall,Jeffrey.2013.“PredatoryPublishingIsJustOneoftheConsequencesofGoldOpenAccess.”Learned Publishing26(2):79–84.doi:10.1087/20130203.
———.2017.“ScholarlyOpenAccessCriticalAnalysisofScholarlyOpen-AccessPublishing.”January11.https://web.archive.org/web/20170111172309/https://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/.
Bechhofer,Sean,JohnAinsworth,JitenBhagat,IainBuchan,PhilipCouch,DonCruickshank,MarkDelderfield,IanDunlop,MatthewGamble,andCaroleA.Goble.2010.“WhyLinkedDataIsNotEnoughforScientists.”In2010 IEEE Sixth International Conference on E-Science (E-Science),300–307.Brisbane:IEEE.doi:10.1109/eScience.2010.21.
Bechhofer,Sean,KhalidBelhajjame,JunZhao,DanielGarijo,KristinaHettne,RaulPalma,ÓscarCorcho,José-ManuelGómez-Pérez,GrahamKlyne,andCaroleA.Goble.2014.“TheResearchObjectSuiteofOntologies:SharingandExchangingResearchDataandMethodsontheOpenWeb.”ArXiv Preprint1401(4307).https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.4307.
Bechhofer,Sean,ÓscarCorcho,DanielGarijoVerdejo,KhalidBelhajjame,JunZhao,PaoloMissier,DavidNewman,etal.2012.“Workflow-CentricResearchObjects:FirstClassCit-izensinScholarlyDiscourse.”InProceedings of Workshop on the Semantic Publishing.Vol.994.Crete:CEUR.
References 353
Bechhofer,Sean,DavidDeRoure,MatthewGamble,CaroleGoble,andIainBuchan.2010.“ResearchObjects:TowardsExchangeandReuseofDigitalKnowledge.”Nature Precedings,no.713( July).doi:10.1038/npre.2010.4626.1.
Becker,Gabriel,CoryBarr,RobertGentleman,andMichaelLawrence.2017.“EnhancingReproducibilityandCollaborationviaManagementofRPackageCohorts.”Journal of Sta-tistical Software82(1).doi:10.18637/jss.v082.i01.
Bekaert,Jeroen,PatrickHochstenbach,andHerbertVandeSompel.2003.“UsingMPEG-21DIDLtoRepresentComplexDigitalObjectsintheLosAlamosNationalLaboratoryDigitalLibrary.”D-Lib Magazine9(11).doi:10.1045/november2003-bekaert.
Berners-Lee,Tim.2009.“LinkedData-DesignIssues.”http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html.
Berners-Lee,Tim,JamesHendler,andOraLassila.2001.“TheSemanticWebANewFormofWebContentThatIsMeaningfultoComputersWillUnleashaRevolutionofNewPos-sibilities.”Scientific American284(5):34–43.doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0501-34.
Bernstein,Paula.2016.“WhatIsaVideoEssay?CreatorsGrapplewithaDef-inition.”Filmmaker Magazine.May3.https://filmmakermagazine.com/98248-what-is-a-video-essay-creators-grapple-with-a-definition/.
Berry,DavidM.2013.“Post-DigitalHumanities.”Stunlaw.October17.http://stunlaw.blog-spot.de/2013/10/post-digital-humanities.html.
Bijker,WiebeE.2009.“SocialConstructionofTechnology.”InA Companion to the Philosophy of Technology,editedbyStigAndurPedersen,VincentF.Hendricks,JanKyrreBergOlsen,andMarcVries,1sted.,88–94.BlackwellCompanionstoPhilosophy43.Chichester,UK:Wiley-Blackwell.
Birchall,Clare,andGaryHall.2006.New Cultural Studies: Adventures in Theory.Athens,Georgia:UniversityofGeorgiaPress.
Bishop,AnnPeterson.1999.“DocumentStructureandDigitalLibraries:HowResearchersMobilizeInformationinJournalArticles.”Information Processing & Management35(3):255–79.doi:10.1016/S0306-4573(98)00061-2.
Bizer,Christian,RichardCyganiak,andTomHeath.2007.“HowtoPublishLinkedDataontheWeb.”http://wifo5-03.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/bizer/pub/LinkedDataTutorial/.
deBoer,Tim,andKimVerkooij.2011.“InteractiveVisualizationToolkitsforRichInternetPub-lications.”http://www.computerscience.nl/docs/vakken/mdic/papers/Verkooij-deBoer-fin.pdf.
Boeriis,Morten,andChristianMosbaekJohannessen.2015.“SemogeneticPerspectivesonConventionalizationDynamics.”InConference Abstracts. Multimodality: Methodological Explorations.London:UniversityCollegeLondon.https://multimodalmethodologies.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/mme-programme-and-abstracts.pdf.
Boettiger,Carl.2015.“AnIntroductiontoDockerforReproducibleResearch,withExam-plesfromtheREnvironment.”ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review49(1):71–79.doi:10.1145/2723872.2723882.
Bogost,Ian.2012.Alien Phenomenology, or What It ’s Like to Be a Thing.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
Borgman,ChristineL.,JillianC.Wallis,andNoelEnyedy.2007.“LittleScienceConfrontstheDataDeluge:HabitatEcology,EmbeddedSensorNetworks,andDigitalLibraries.”Inter-national Journal on Digital Libraries7(1-2):17–30.doi:10.1007/s00799-007-0022-9.
Bourdieu,Pierre.2010.“TheFormsofCapital.”InCultural Theory: An Anthology,editedbyImreSzemanandTimothyKaposy,81–93.Chichester:Wiley-Blackwell.
Bourne,PhilipE.2005.“WillaBiologicalDatabaseBeDifferentfromaBiologicalJournal?”PLoS Computational Biology1(3):179–81.doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0010034.
———.2010.“WhatDoIWantfromthePublisheroftheFuture?”PLoS Computational Biology 6(5).doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000787.
354 Beyond the Flow
———.2011.“DigitalResearch/AnalogPublishingOneScientist’sView.”Serials24(2):119–22.doi:10.1629/24119.
Bourne,PhilipE.,SimonBuckinghamShum,PaoloCiccarese,BradleyP.Allen,AliaksandrBirukou,JudithA.Blake,GullyBurns,LeslieChan,OlgaChiarcos,andTimClark.2012.“ImprovingtheFutureofResearchCommunicationsandE-Scholarship.”Dagstuhl Man-ifestos,41–60.doi:10.4230/DagMan.1.1.41.
Bourne,PhilipE.,DavidShotton,IvanHerman,AnitadeWaard,TimothyW.Clark,RobertDale,andEduardH.Hovy.2012.“ImprovingtheFutureofResearchCommunicationsandE-Scholarship.”Dagstuhl Manifestos.doi:10.4230/DagMan.1.1.41.
Boyd,Danah.2017.“TowardAccountabilityData,Fairness,Algorithms,Consequences.”Data & Society: Points.April13.
Bradley,Arthur.2011.Originary Technicity: The Theory of Technology from Marx to Derrida.London,NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan.
Bradley,Jean-Claude.2007.“OpenNotebookScienceUsingBlogsandWikis.”Nature Precedings,no.713( June).doi:10.1038/npre.2007.39.1.
Bradley,Jean-Claude,andKevinOwens.2008.“ChemistryCrowdsourcingandOpenNotebookScience.”Nature Precedings,no.713( January).doi:10.1038/npre.2008.1505.1.
Bradley,Jean-Claude,RajarshiGuha,AndrewLang,PierreLindenbaum,CameronNeylon,AntonyWilliams,andEgonL.Willighagen.2010.“BeautifyingDataintheRealWorld.”Nature Precedings,no.713(September):259–78.doi:10.1038/npre.2010.4918.1.
Brammer,GrantR.,RalphW.Crosby,SuzanneJ.Matthews,andTiffaniL.Williams.2011.“PaperMâché:CreatingDynamicReproducibleScience.”Procedia Computer Science,ProceedingsoftheInternationalConferenceonComputationalScience,ICCS2011,4:658–67.doi:10.1016/j.procs.2011.04.069.
Bresland,John.2010.“OntheOriginoftheVideoEssay.”Blackbird9(1).https://blackbird.vcu.edu/v9n1/gallery/ve-bresland_j/ve-origin_page.shtml.
Breure,Leen.2014.“TransformingaResearchPaperintoaRichInternetPublication.”Infor-mation Services & Use34(3–4):335–44.doi:10.3233/ISU-140757.
Breure,Leen,MaartenHoogerwerf,andRenévanHorik.2014.“Xpos’re:AToolforRichInter-netPublications.”Digital Humanities Quarterly8(2).
Breure,Leen,HansVoorbij,andMaartenHoogerwerf.2011.“RichInternetPublications:‘ShowWhatYouTell’.”Journal of Digital Information12(1).
Brooking,Charles,StephenR.Shouldice,GautierRobin,BostjanKobe,JenniferL.Martin,andJaneHunter.2009.“ComparingMETSandOAI-OREforEncapsulatingScientificDataProducts:AProteinCrystallographyCaseStudy.”InE-Science’09. Fifth IEEE International Conference On,148–55.Oxford:IEEE.doi:10.1109/e-Science.2009.29.
Brown,Titus.2016.“WhatIsOpenScience?”Living in an Ivory Basement Stochastic Thoughts on Science, Testing, and Programming.October22.http://ivory.idyll.org/blog/2016-what-is-open-science.html.
Brüggemann-Klein,Anne.1995.“WissenschaftlichesPublizierenimUmbruch.”Informatik Forschung und Entwicklung10(4):171–79.doi:10.1007/s004500050025.
Brüggemann-Klein,Anne,GüntherCyranek,andAlbertEndres.1995.“DiefachlichenInformations-undPublikationsdienstederZukunftEineInitiativederGesellschaftfürInformatik.”InGISI 95,editedbyFriedbertHuber-Wäschle,HelmutSchauer,andPeterWidmayer,2–12.Informatikaktuell.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.
BuckinghamShum,Simon,andTimClark.2010.“ScientificDiscourseontheSemanticWeb:ASurveyofModelsandEnablingTechnologies.”Semantic Web Journal: Inter-operability, Usability, Applicability.http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/content/scientific-discourse-semantic-web-survey-models-and-enabling-technologies.
Buckley,Jake.2011.“Believinginthe(Analogico-)Digital.”Culture Machine12.http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/viewDownloadInterstitial/432/463.
References 355
Burg,Jennifer,Yue-LingWong,Ching-WanYip,andAnneBoyle.2000.“TheStateoftheArtinInteractiveMultimediaJournalsforAcademia.”InProceedings of EdMedia: World Con-ference on Educational Media and Technology 2000,2:37–42.Montréal:AssociationfortheAdvancementofComputinginEducation.http://www.editlib.org/p/16036.
Burkhardt,Marcus.2015.“HybridPublishingLab.WissenschaftlicheKommunikationImDigitalenZeitalter.”Leuphana.https://www.leuphana.de/fileadmin/user_upload/portale/inkubator/download/1504_A01_HybridPublishing_DIN_lang_16s_de_RZ_lay.pdf.
Burn,Andrew.2013.“TheKineiconicMode.TowardsaMultimodalApproachtoMoving-ImageMedia.”InThe Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis,editedbyCareyJewitt,2nded.,375–85.Routledge.
Callaghan,Sarah.2013.“DataJournals–asSoon-to-Be-ObsoleteSteppingStonetoSomethingBetter?”Citing Bytes – Adventures in Data Citation.January29.http://citingbytes.blogspot.com/2013_01_01_archive.html.
Callaghan,Sarah,FionaHewer,SamPepler,PaulHardaker,andAlanGadian.2009.“OverlayJournalsandDataPublishingintheMeteorologicalSciences.”Ariadne,no.60.http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue60/callaghan-et-al.
Candela,Leonardo,DonatellaCastelli,andPasqualePagano.2013.“VirtualResearchEnvironments:AnOverviewandaResearchAgenda.”Data Science Journal12:GRDI75–GRDI81.https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/dsj/12/0/12_GRDI-013/_article/-char/ja/.
Candela,Leonardo,DonatellaCastelli,PaoloManghi,andAliceTani.2015.“DataJournals:ASurvey.”Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology66(9):1747–62.doi:10.1002/asi.23358.
Candela,Leonardo,DonatellaCastelli,PasqualePagano,andManueleSimi.2005.“FromHeterogeneousInformationSpacestoVirtualDocuments.”InDigital Libraries: Implementing Strategies and Sharing Experiences,editedbyEdwardA.Fox,ErichJ.Neu-hold,PimrumpaiPremsmit,andVilasWuwongse,11–22.LectureNotesinComputerScience3815.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.
Caracciolo,Caterina.2003.“TowardsModularAccesstoElectronicHandbooks.”Journal of Digital Information3(4).https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/86.
Carr,LesA.,DavidDeRoure,WendyHall,andGaryJ.Hill.1995.“TheDistributedLinkService:AToolforPublishers,AuthorsandReaders.”ProjectReport.Southampton:Uni-versityofSouthampton.http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/250739/.
———.1998.“ImplementinganOpenLinkServicefortheWorldWideWeb.”World Wide Web1(2):61–71.doi:10.1023/A:1019251328413.
Carter-Thomas,Shirley,andElizabethRowley-Jolivet.2017.“OpenScienceNotebooks:NewInsights,NewAffordances.”Journal of Pragmatics116( July):64–76.doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.003.
Casati,Fabio,FaustoGiunchiglia,andMaurizioMarchese.2007.“LiquidPublications:ScientificPublicationsMeettheWeb.”TechnicalReport07-073.Povo.http://eprints.biblio.unitn.it/1313/.
Casati,Fabio,MaurizioMarchese,CristianParra,LucaCernuzzi,andRalfGerstner.2011.“LiquidBook:CollaborativeReuseandSharingofMultifacetedContent.”InProceedings of 7th European Computer Science Summit.Trento:UniversityofTrento.
Cascone,Kim.2000.“TheAestheticsofFailure:“Post-Digital”TendenciesinContemporaryComputerMusic.”Computer Music Journal24(4):12–18.
Castelli,Donatella,andPasqualePagano.2002.“OpenDLib:ADigitalLibraryServiceSystem.”InResearch and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries,292–308.LectureNotesinComputerScience.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/3-540-45747-X_22.
Castelli,Donatella,PaoloManghi,andCostantinoThanos.2013.“AVisionTowardsScientificCommunicationInfrastructures.”International Journal on Digital Libraries13(3-4):155–69.doi:s00799-013-0106-7.
356 Beyond the Flow
Chavan,Vishwas,andLyubomirPenev.2011.“TheDataPaper:AMechanismtoIncentivizeDataPublishinginBiodiversityScience.”BMC Bioinformatics12(15):1–12.doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-S15-S2.
Chen,Ya-Ning.2017.“AnAnalysisofCharacteristicsandStructuresEmbeddedinDataPapers:APreliminaryStudy.”Libellarium: Journal for the Research of Writing, Books, and Cultural Heritage Institutions9(2).doi:10.15291/libellarium.v9i2.266.
Chichester,Christine,PascaleGaudet,OliverKarch,PaulGroth,LydieLane,AmosBairoch,BarendMons,andAntonisLoizou.2014.“QueryingNeXtProtNanopublicationsandTheirValueforInsightsonSequenceVariantsandTissueExpression.”Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web,LifeScienceande-Science,29:3–11.doi:10.1016/j.websem.2014.05.001.
Chichester,Christine,OliverKarch,PascaleGaudet,LydieLane,BarendMons,andAmosBairoch.2015.“ConvertingNeXtProtintoLinkedDataandNanopublications.”Semantic Web6(2):147–53.doi:10.3233/SW-140149.
Choudhury,Sayeed,TimDiLauro,AlexSzalay,EthanVishniac,RobertHanisch,JulieSteffen,RobertMilkey,TeresaEhling,andRayPlante.2008.“DigitalDataPreservationforScholarlyPublicationsinAstronomy.”International Journal of Digital Curation2(2):20–30.doi:10.2218/ijdc.v2i2.26.
Ciancarini,Paolo,AngeloDiIorio,AndreaGiovanniNuzzolese,SilvioPeroni,andFabioVitali.2013.“SemanticAnnotationofScholarlyDocumentsandCitations.”InAI*IA 2013: Advances in Artificial Intelligence,336–47.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-03524-6_29.
Ciccarese,Paolo,MarcoOcana,andTimClark.2012.“OpenSemanticAnnotationofScientificPublicationsUsingDOMEO.”Journal of Biomedical Semantics3(1).doi:10.1186/2041-1480-3-S1-S1.
Cito,Jürgen,VincenzoFerme,andHaraldC.Gall.2016.“UsingDockerContainerstoImproveReproducibilityinSoftwareandWebEngineeringResearch.”InWeb Engineering,editedbyAlessandroBozzon,PhilippeCudre-Maroux,andCesarePautasso,609–12.LectureNotesinComputerScience9671.Berlin:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-38791-8_58.
Cito,Jürgen,GeraldSchermann,JohnErikWittern,PhilippLeitner,SaliZumberi,undHaraldC.Gall.2017.“AnEmpiricalAnalysisoftheDockerContainerEcosystemonGitHub.”InProceedings of the 14th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories,323–333.MSR’17.Piscataway:IEEEPress.doi:10.1109/MSR.2017.67.
Clark,AlexM.,AntonyJ.Williams,andSeanEkins.2015.“MachinesFirst,HumansSecond:OntheImportanceofAlgorithmicInterpretationofOpenChemistryData.”Journal of Chemin-formatics7(March):9.doi:10.1186/s13321-015-0057-7.
Clark,Tim.2014.“NextGenerationScientificPublishingandtheWebofData.”Semantic Web Journal5(4):257–59.http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2786113.2786114.
Clark,Tim,andPaoloCiccarese.2013.Micropublications.https://micropublications.googlecode.com/svn/tags/1.17/mp.owl.
Clark,Tim,PaoloCiccarese,andCaroleA.Goble.2014.“Micropublications:ASemanticModelforClaims,Evidence,ArgumentsandAnnotationsinBiomedicalCommunications.”Journal of Biomedical Semantics5(1):28.doi:10.1186/2041-1480-5-28.
Clinio,Anne,andSaritaAlbagli.2017.“OpenNotebookScienceasanEmergingEpistemicCultureWithintheOpenScienceMovement.”Revue Française des Sciences de L’information et de La Communication,11(August).doi:10.4000/rfsic.3186.
Coleman,AnitaS.2002.“ScientificModelsasWorks.”Cataloging & Classification Quarterly33(3-4):129–59.doi:10.1300/J104v33n03_07.
Collin,Finn.2008.Konstruktivismus für Einsteiger.Paderborn:Fink.
References 357
Collins,Ellen,CarenMilloy,andGrahamStone.2015.“GuidetoOpenAccessMonographPublishingforArts,HumanitiesandSocialScienceResearchers.”JiscCollections.doi:10.5920/oapen-uk/oaguide.
ConceptWebAlliance.2015.“NanopublicationGuidelines.”February19.http://nanopub.org/guidelines/working_draft/.
Cramer,Florian.2014.“WhatIs‘Post-Digital’?”A Peer-Reviewed Journal About3(1).http://www.aprja.net/?p=1318.
Cranmer,Kyle,LukasHeinrich,RogerJones,andDavidM.South.2015.“AnalysisPreservationinATLAS.”Journal of Physics: Conference Series664(3):032013.doi:10.1088/1742-6596/664/3/032013.
CreativeCommons.2005.“AboutScienceCommons.”Science Commons.http://sciencecommons.org/about/.
———.2008.“ScienceCommonsforOpenScience.”http://sciencecommons.org/resources/readingroom/principles-for-open-science/.
Crew,MichaelA.,andTimothyJ.Brennan.2014.The Role of the Postal and Delivery Sector in a Digital Age.Cheltenham:EdwardElgar.
Cribb,Julian,andTjempakaHariHartomo.2010.Open Science: Sharing Knowledge in the Global Century.Collingwood:Csiro.
Crick,Tom,BenjaminA.Hall,SaminIshtiaq,andKenjiTakeda.2014.“ShareandEnjoy:Pub-lishingUsefulandUsableScientificModels.”InProceedings of the 2014 IEEE/ACM 7th Inter-national Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing,957–61.Washington:IEEEComputerSociety.doi:10.1109/UCC.2014.156.
CriticalCommons.2016.“CriticalCommons.ForFair&CriticalParticipationinMediaCulture.”http://www.criticalcommons.org/.
Cyganiak,Richard.2015.“TheLinkingOpenDataCloudDiagram.”http://lod-cloud.net/.vanDalen,Arjen.2012.“TheAlgorithmsBehindtheHeadlines.”Journalism Practice6(5-6):
648–58.doi:10.1080/17512786.2012.667268.Dallas,Costis.2016.“DigitalCurationBeyondthe‘WildFrontier’:APragmaticApproach.”
Archival Science16(4):421–57.doi:10.1007/s10502-015-9252-6.Darnton,Robert.1999.“TheNewAgeoftheBook.”The New York Review of Books.46(5):5.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1999/mar/18/the-new-age-of-the-book/.Davenport,Elisabeth,andBlaiseCronin.1990.“HypertextandtheConductofScience.”
Journal of Documentation46(3):175–92.David,PaulA.,MatthijsdenBesten,andRalphSchroeder.2008.“WillE-ScienceBeOpen
Science?”InWorld Wide Research,editedbyWilliamH.DuttonandPaulW.Jeffreys,299–316.Camebridge,MA:MITPress.
DeRoure,David.2010.“E-ScienceandtheWeb.”IEEE Computer43(5):90–93.doi:10.1109/MC.2010.133.
———.2011.“Machines,MethodsandMusic:OntheEvolutionofE-Research.”In2011 Inter-national Conference on High Performance Computing,8–13.Istanbul:IEEE.doi:10.1109/HPCSim.2011.5999801.
———.2013.“TowardsComputationalResearchObjects.”InProceedings of the 1st Inter-national Workshop on Digital Preservation of Research Methods and Artefacts,16–19.DPRMA“13.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/2499583.2499590.
———.2014a.“ExecutableMusicDocuments.”InProceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Digital Libraries for Musicology,1–3.DLfM“14.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/2660168.2660183.
———.2014b.“TheFutureofScholarlyCommunications.”Insights: The UKSG Journal27(3):233–38.doi:10.1629/2048-7754.171.
DeRoure,David,andWendyHall.1997.“DistributedMultimediaInformationSystems.”Multimedia, IEEE4(4):68–73.
358 Beyond the Flow
DeRoure,David,SeanBechhofer,andCaroleA.Goble.2011.“ScientificSocialObjects:TheSocialObjectsandMultidimensionalNetworkoftheMyExperimentWebsite.”InThird International Conference on Social Computing (SocialCom),1398–1402.Boston:IEEE.doi:10.1109/PASSAT/SocialCom.2011.245.
DeRoure,David,SeanBechhofer,IainBuchan,PaoloMissier,JohnAinsworth,JitenBhagat,PhilipCouch,etal.2013.“WhyLinkedDataIsNotEnoughforScientists.”Future Generation Computer Systems,Specialsection:RecentAdvancesine-Science,29(2):599–611.doi:10.1016/j.future.2011.08.004.
DeRoure,David,KhalidBelhajjame,PaoloMissier,José-ManuelGómez-Pérez,RaúlPalma,JoséEnriqueRuiz,KristinaHettne,etal.2011.“TowardsthePreservationofScientificWorkflows.”InProc 8th International Conference on Preservation of Digital Objects.Singapore:ACM.
DeRoure,David,CaroleA.Goble,SergejsAleksejevs,SeanBechhofer,JitenBhagat,DonCruickshank,PaulFisher,etal.2009.“TowardsOpenScience:TheMyExperimentApproach.”Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience22(17):1–6.http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/17270/.
DeRoure,David,KevinR.Page,BenjaminFields,TimCrawford,J.StephenDownie,andIchiroFujinaga.2011.“AnE-ResearchApproachtoWeb-ScaleMusicAnalysis.”Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences369(1949):3300–3317.doi:10.1098/rsta.2011.0171.
DeRoure,David,MarcoRoos,KristinaHettneSoiland-Reyes,JoséEnriqueRuiz,KevinR.Page,José-ManuelGómez-Pérez,andCaroleA.Goble.2012.“Ro-Manager:AToolforCreatingandManipulatingResearchObjectstoSupportReproducibilityandReuseinSciences.”InProceedings of the Second International Workshop on Linked Science 2012.Boston:CEUR.
Denning,PeterJ.,andBernardRous.1995.“TheACMElectronicPublishingPlan.”Com-munications of the ACM38(4):97–109.doi:10.1145/205323.205348.
Derrida,Jacques.1982.Margins of Philosophy.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.Dewar,JamesA.2000.“TheInformationAgeandthePrintingPress:LookingBackwardto
SeeAhead.”Ubiquity2000(August):1–es.doi:10.1145/347634.348784.Diender,Bas.2010.“EnhancedPublications:AnEnhancedExperience?”Universityof
Utrecht.http://www.cs.uu.nl/docs/vakken/mdic/papers/Diender-fin.pdf.Dodds,Leigh.2013.“WhatIsaDataset.”Lost Boy.February9.http://blog.ldodds.com/.Doloughan,FionaJ.2011.Contemporary Narrative: Textual Production, Multimodality and Multi-
literacies.London:Continuum.Doorenbosch,Paul,andBarbaraSierman.2011.“InstitutionalRepositories,LongTerm
PreservationandtheChangingNatureofScholarlyPublications.”Journal of Digital Infor-mation12(2).http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/article/viewArticle/1764.
Dörr,KonstantinNicholas.2016.“MappingtheFieldofAlgorithmicJournalism.”Digital Journalism4(6):700–722.
Drees,Bastian,AngelinaKraft,andThomasKoprucki.2018.“ReproducibleandCom-prehensibleResearchResultsThroughPersistentlyLinkedandVisualizedNumericalSimulationData.”Optical and Quantum Electronics50(2):59.doi:10.1007/s11082-018-1327-1.
Eason,Ken,ChrisCarter,SusanHarker,andSuePomfrett.1997.“AComparativeAnalysisoftheRoleofMulti-MediaElectronicJournalsinScholarlyDisciplines.”November.Loughborough:HUSATResearchInstitute.http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/services/elib/papers/tavistock/eason/eason.pdf.
Eggins,Suzanne.1994.An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics.London:PinterPublishers.
Elsevier.2008.“ElsevierArticle2.0Contest.”http://article20.elsevier.com/contest/home.html.
References 359
———.2011.“ArticleoftheFuture.”http://www.articleofthefuture.com/.Esposito,Joseph.2013.“TheDigitalPublishingRevolutionIsOver.”The
Scholarly Kitchen.March4.https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/03/04/the-digital-publishing-revolution-is-over/.
Estellés-Arolas,Enrique,andFernandoGonzález-Ladrón-de-Guevara.2012.“TowardsanIntegratedCrowdsourcingDefinition.”Journal of Information Science38(2):189–200.doi:10.1177/0165551512437638.
Eve,MartinPaul,andCarolineEdwards.2015.“OpeningtheOpenLibraryofHumanities.”Open Library of Humanities1(1).http://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/13030.
Fanghor,Hans.2014.“BloggingwiththeIPythonNotebook.”Computational Modeling Blog.April22.http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~fangohr/blog/blogging-with-the-ipython-notebook.html.
Farace,Dominic,JerryFrantzen,ChristianeStock,LaurentsSesink,andDebbieRabina.2012.“LinkingFull-TextGreyLiteraturetoUnderlyingResearchandPost-PublicationData:AnEnhancedPublicationsProject2011-2012.”The Grey Journal8(3):181–89.
Fenner,Martin.2010.“BeyondthePDFItIsTimeforaWorkshop.” Gobbledygook.November6.http://blogs.plos.org/mfenner/2010/11/06/beyond-the-pdf-it-is-time-for-a-workshop/.
Fenton,William.2013.“Scalar.”PCMag UK.May30T15:47:00+00:00.http://uk.pcmag.com/scalar/2103/review/scalar.
Ferdig,RichardE.,andKristineE.Pytash.2014.Exploring Multimodal Composition and Digital Writing.Hershey:IGIGlobal.
Ferwerda,Eelco,FrancesPinter,andNielsStern.2017.“ALandscapeStudyonOpenAccessandMonographs:Policies,FundingandPublishinginEightEuropeanCountries.”Zenodo.doi:10.5281/zenodo.815932.
Fink,J.Lynn,PabloFernicola,RahulChandran,SavasParastatidis,AlexWade,OscarNaim,GregoryB.Quinn,andPhilipE.Bourne.2010.“WordAdd-inforOntologyRec-ognition:SemanticEnrichmentofScientificLiterature.”BMC Bioinformatics11(1):103–11.doi:10.1186/1471-2105-11-103.
Flusser,Vilém.1994.Gesten: Versuch einer Phänomenologie.FrankfurtamMain:Fischer.Force,Megan,NigelRobinson,MarkMatthews,DanielAuld,andMarianaBoletta.2016.
“ResearchDatainJournalsandRepositoriesintheWebofScience:DevelopmentsandRecommendations.”TCDL Bulletin12(1):27–30.http://www.ieee-tcdl.org/Bulletin/current/papers/IEEE-TCDL-DC-2016_paper_3.pdf.
Foucault,Michel.1982.The Archaeology of Knowledge.NewYork,NY:PantheonBooks.Friend,Frederick.1998.“AlternativestoCommercialPublishingforScholarlyCom-
munication.”Serials11(2).doi:10.1629/11163.Fukuyama,Francis.2006.The End of History and the Last Man.Reissue.NewYork:FreePress.Gamble,Matthew,andCaroleA.Goble.2010.“StandingontheShouldersoftheTrusted
Web:Trust,ScholarshipandLinkedData.”InWeb Science Conference 2010.Vol.2010.Raleigh:JournalofWebScience.doi:10.1.1.611.7967.
Gao,Yong,JuneKinoshita,ElizabethWu,EricMiller,RyanLee,AndySeaborne,SteveCayzer,andTimClark.2006.“SWAN:ADistributedKnowledgeInfrastructureforAlzheimerDiseaseResearch.”Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web,SemanticWebforLifeSciences,4(3):222–28.doi:10.1016/j.websem.2006.05.006.
Garcia,Alexander,FedericoLopez,LeylaGarcia,OlgaGiraldo,VictorBucheli,andMichelDumontier.2018.“Biotea:SemanticsforPubmedCentral.”PeerJ6( January).doi:10.7717/peerj.4201.
Garcia-Garcia,Alicia,AlexandreLopez-Borrull,andFernandaPeset.2015.“Datajournals:eclosióndenuevasrevistasespecializadasendatos.”El Profesional de la informacion24(6):845–54.
360 Beyond the Flow
Gärdenfors,Peter.2000.Conceptual Spaces: The Geometry of Thought.Cambridge:MITPress.Garvey,WilliamD.1979.Communication the Essence of Science.Oxford:PergamonPress.Gerber,Anna,andJaneHunter.2008.“LORE:ACompoundObjectAuthoringandPublishing
ToolfortheAustralianLiteratureStudiesCommunity.”InDigital Libraries: Universal and Ubiquitous Access to Information,246–55.LectureNotesinComputerScience.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-540-89533-6_25.
———.2010.“Authoring,EditingandVisualizingCompoundObjectsforLiteraryScholarship.”Journal of Digital Information11(1).
Ghani,NorjihanbtAbdul,SuriawatiSuparjoh,andSurayaHamid.2008.“AFrameworkforOnlinePublishingintheUniversityofMalaya.”EditedbySoliman,K.S.Information Man-agement in the Modern Organizations: Trends & Solutions1,2:938–45.
Gibson,Andrew,JessevanDam,ErikSchultes,MarcoRoos,andBarendMons.2012.“TowardsComputationalEvaluationofEvidenceforScientificAssertionswithNanopub-licationsandCardinalAssertions.”InProceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Semantic Web Applications and Tools for Life Sciences,952:28–30.Paris:CEUR.
Gibson,Frank.2007.“DoScientistsReallyBelieveinOpenScience?”We.http://fgibson.com/2007/06/26/do-scientists-really-believe-in-open-science/.
Gielkens,Charley,andJeroenHulman.2011.“IdentifyingRequirementsforEnhancedPublications.”UniversityofUtrecht.http://www.charleygielkens.nl/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Gielkens-Hulman-fin.pdf.
Gil,Yolanda,andDanielGarijo.2017.“TowardsAutomatingDataNarratives.”InProceedings of the 22Nd International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces,565–76.IUI“17.NewYork,NY,USA:ACM.doi:10.1145/3025171.3025193.
GitHub.2018.“AboutGists.”March30.https://help.github.com/articles/about-gists/.Giunchiglia,Fausto,RonaldChenu,HaoXu,AliaksandrBirukou,andEnzoMaltese.2010.
“DesignoftheSKOStructuralModel.”Giunchiglia,Fausto,HaoXu,AliaksandrBirukou,andRonaldChenu.2010.“Scientific
KnowledgeObjectPatterns.”InProceedings of the 15th European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs,15:1–15:6.EuroPLoP“10.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/2328909.2328928.
Goble,Carole.2015.“Researchobject.Org.”http://www.researchobject.org/.Goble,CaroleA.,DavidDeRoure,andSeanBechhofer.2012.“AcceleratingScientists”
KnowledgeTurns.”Communications in Computer and Information Science,Communicationsincomputerandinformationscience,348:3–25.doi:10.1007/978-3-642-37186-8_1.
Gold,MatthewK.2012.Debates in the Digital Humanities.1sted.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
———.2016a.Debates in the Digital Humanities.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.https://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/debates-in-the-digital-humanities-2016.
———.2016b.“DebatesintheDigitalHumanities.About.”Debates in the Digital Humanities.http://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/about.
Golden,Patrick,andRyanShaw.2015.“PeriodAssertionasNanopublication:ThePeriodOPeriodGazetteer.”InProceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion,1013–8.InternationalWorldWideWebConferencesSteeringCommittee.
Gómez-Pérez,José-Manuel.2013.“Wf4ever.”http://www.wf4ever-project.org.vanGorp,Pieter,andSteffenMazanek.2011.“SHARE:AWebPortalforCreatingand
SharingExecutableResearchPapers.”Procedia Computer Science,ProceedingsoftheInternationalConferenceonComputationalScience,ICCS2011,4:589–97.doi:10.1016/j.procs.2011.04.062.
Gosling,Paul.1997.Government in the Digital Age.WorkintheDigitalAge.London:Bowerdean.
References 361
Gradmann,Stefan.2010.“FromBookstoXanadutoSemanticPub-lishing.”presentedattheTextandLiteracyintheDigitalAge,DenHaag,December17.https://kulslide.com/download/from-books-to-xanadu-to-semantic-publishing-_59fd7ec8d64ab2f105a29592_pdf.
Grassano,Nicola,DanieleRotolo,JoshuaHutton,FrédériqueLang,andMichaelM.Hopkins.2016.“FundingDatafromPublicationAcknowledgements:Coverage,UsesandLimitations.”Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technologyforthcoming.doi:10.2139/ssrn.2767348.
Groth,Paul,AndrewGibson,andJanVelterop.2010.“TheAnatomyofaNanopublication.”Information Services and Use30(1):51–56.
Groza,Tudor.2012.Advances in Semantic Authoring and Publishing.Vol.13.Heidelberg:IOSPress.
Gunkel,DavidJ.2007.“ThinkingOtherwise:Ethics,TechnologyandOtherSubjects.”Ethics and Information Technology9(3):165–77.
———.2012.The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
Guo,Libo.2006.“MultimodalityinaBiologyTextbook.”InMultimodal Discourse Analysis: Sys-temic-Functional Perspectives,editedbyKayO’Halloran,196–219.London:Continuum.
Hall,Gary.2008.Digitize This Book!: The Politics of New Media, or Why We Need Open Access Now.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
———.2013.“TheUnboundBook:AcademicPublishingintheAgeoftheInfiniteArchive.”Journal of Visual Culture12(3):490–507.doi:10.1177/1470412913502032.
———.2015.“CultureMachineLiquidBooks.”http://liquidbooks.pbworks.com.Hall,Gary,andMarkAmerika.2011.“ForceofBinding:OnLiquid,LivingBooks(Version
2.0:MarkAmerikaMix).”Remixthebook.May.http://www.remixthebook.com/force-of-binding-on-liquid-living-books-version-2-0-mark-amerika-mix.
Hall,Gary,andClareBirchall.2009.“NewCulturalStudies:TheLiquidTheoryReader.”Culture Machine10.
Hall,Gary,KamilaKuc,andJoannaZylinska.2015.“AGuidetoOpenandHybridPublishing.”EuropeanaSpace.https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-OGUrkemSMiN0JQbldjNlNNU0U/view.
Hall,Gary,JoannaZylinska,andClareBirchall.2011.“LivingBooksAboutLifeHome.”http://www.livingbooksaboutlife.org/.
Halliday,Michael.1978.Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning.Baltimore:UniversityParkPress.
Halliday,Michael,andRuqaiyaHasan.1985.Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective.Geelong,Victoria:DeakinUniversityPress.
Halliday,Michael,andJamesR.Martin.1996.Writing Science Literacy and Discursive Power.London:FalmerPress.
Hammond,Tony,TimoHannay,andBenLund.2004.“TheRoleofRSSinSciencePublishing:SyndicationandAnnotationontheWeb.”D-Lib Magazine10(12):1082–9873.
Haraway,DonnaJ.1991.Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature.NewYork:Routledge.
Harmsze,Frédérique-AnnePacifique.2000.A Modular Structure for Scientific Articles in an Electronic Environment.Amsterdam:Self-published.
Harmsze,Frédérique-AnnePacifique,andJoostG.Kircz.1998.“FormandContentintheElectronicAge.”InProceedings. Socioeconomic Dimensions of Electronic Publishing Work-shop,43–49.Piscataway:IEEE.doi:10.1109/SEDEP.1998.730707.
Harmsze,Frédérique-AnnePacifique,MaartenvanderTol,andJoostG.Kircz.1999.“AModularStructureforElectronicScientificArticles.”InConferentie Informatiewetenschap
362 Beyond the Flow
1999,2–9.Amsterdam.http://www.science.uva.nl/projects/commphys/papers/infwet/infwet.html.
Hayward,Susan.2013.“DigitalCinema/Post-DigitalCinema.”InCinema Studies: The Key Con-cepts,editedbySusanHayward,104–8.NewYork:Routledge.
Heath,Tom,andChristianBizer.2011.Linked Data: Evolving the Web into a Global Data Space.EditedbyJamesHendler.Vol.1.1.Williston:Morgan&Claypool.
Hendler,Jim.2013.“BroadData:ExploringtheEmergingWebofData.”Big Data1(1):18–20.doi:10.1089/big.2013.1506.
Herb,Ulrich.2017.“OpenAccessZwischenRevolutionUndGoldesel.”Information – Wissen-schaft & Praxis68(1):1–10.doi:10.1515/iwp-2017–0004.
Herb,Ulrich,andJoachimSchöpfel,eds.2018.Open Divide? Critical Studies on Open Access.Sacramento:LitwinBooks.
vandenHeuvel,Henk,RenévanHorik,EricSanders,StefScagliola,andPaulaWitkamp.2010.“TheVeteranTapes:ResearchCorpus,FragmentProcessingTool,andEnhancedPub-licationsfortheE-Humanities.”InProceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation,2687–92.Valletta:EuropeanLanguageResourceAssociation.http://hdl.handle.net/2066/85921.
Hey,Tony,StewartTansley,andKristinTolle.2009.The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery.Redmond:MicrosoftResearch.
Hinsen,Konrad,KonstantinLäufer,andGeorgeK.Thiruvathukal.2009.“EssentialTools:VersionControlSystems.”Computing in Science & Engineering11(6):84–91.doi:10.1109/MCSE.2009.194.
Hitchcock,SteveM.,LesA.Carr,andWendyHall.1996.“ASurveyofSTMOnlineJournals1990–95:TheCalmBeforetheStorm.”ELP2/35.London:JISC.http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/250742/1/survey.html.
Hogenaar,Arjan.2009.“EnhancingScientificCommunicationThroughAggregatedPub-licationsEnvironments.”Ariadne,no.61.http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue61/hogenaar.
Hogenaar,Arjan,andMaartenHoogerwerf.2009.“SampleDatasetsandDemonstrator.”InEnhanced Publications. Linking Publications and Research Data in Digital Repositories,editedbyMarjanVernooy-Gerritsen,133–56.Amsterdam:AmsterdamUniversityPress.
Holl,Andras.2012.“InformationBulletinonVariableStarsandNovelServicesforanEnhancedPublication.”D-Lib Magazine18(5/6).doi:10.1045/may2012-holl.
Holtermann,Sabine.2017.“ChangingBooks,ChangingRoles:TheRoleoftheAcademicBookPublisherintheDigitalAge.”Masterthesis,Leiden:LeidenUniversity.https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/47746.
Hoogerwerf,Maarten.2009.“DurableEnhancedPublications.”InProceedings of the African Digital Scholarship Curation Conference.Vol.2009.Pretoria:UniversityofPretoria.http://www.ais.up.ac.za/digi/docs/hoogerwerf_paper.pdf.
Humphreys,Alex,ChristinaSpencer,LauraBrown,MatthewLoy,andRonaldSnyder.2017.“ReimaginingtheDigitalMonograph:DesignThinkingtoBuildNewToolsforResearch.”JSTORLabsReport.JSTOR.
Hunter,Jane.2006.“ScientificModels:AUser-OrientedApproachtotheIntegrationofScientificDataandDigitalLibraries.”InVALA2006,1–16.Melbourne.
———.2008.“ScientificPublicationPackagesSelectiveApproachtotheCommunicationandArchivalofScientificOutput.”International Journal of Digital Curation1:33–52.doi:10.2218/ijdc.v1i1.4.
Hunter,Jane,andAnnaGerber.2009.“LORE:ACompoundObjectAuthoringandPublishingToolforLiteraryScholarsBasedontheFRBR.”In4th International Conference on Open Repositories.GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology.http://hdl.handle.net/1853/28466.
———.2011.“TheAus-E-LitProject:AdvancedEResearchServicesforScholarsofAustralianLiterature.”InVALA2010.Melbourne.
References 363
Hunter,Jane,andCarlLagoze.2001.“CombiningRDFandXMLSchemastoEnhanceInter-operabilityBetweenMetadataApplicationProfiles.”InProceedings of the 10th Inter-national Conference on World Wide Web,457–66.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/371920.372100.
Hunter,Jane,KwokCheung,AnnaLashtabeg,andJohnDrennan.2008.“SCOPE:AScientificCompoundObjectPublishingandEditingSystem.”International Journal of Digital Curation 3(2):4–18.doi:10.2218/ijdc.v3i2.55.
Hunter,Philip.2001.“TheManagementofContent:UniversitiesandtheElectronicPub-lishingRevolution.”Ariadne,no.28.http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue28/cms.
HybridPublishingConsortium.2015.A-Machine.http://a-machine.net/.InstitutefortheFutureoftheBook.2008.“Mission.”Institute for the Future of the Book.
http://www.futureofthebook.org/mission.html.InstituteofNetworkCultures.2011.The Unbound Book Conference Report.Amsterdam:
HogeschoolvanAmsterdam.http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/the-unbound-book-conference-report/.
———.2017.“PostdigitalPublishing.”Amsterdam.http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11884/388c0b99-f7a0–4246-a956-ff84925900df.
Ishizuka,Hidehiro.1997.“Author-FriendlyElectronicSubmissiontoSGML-BasedAcademicJournal.”InProceedings of International Symposium on Research, Development and Practice in Digital Libraries 1997: ISDL’97, November 18–21, 1997, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan,209.Uni-versityofLibraryandInformationScience.http://www.dl.slis.tsukuba.ac.jp/ISDL97/proceedings/ishizuka/ishizuka.html.
Jackson,Korey.2014.“MoreThanGatekeepingClose-uponOpenAccessEvaluationintheHumanities.”College & Research Libraries News75(10):542–45.http://crln.acrl.org/content/75/10/542.
Jankowski,NicholasW.,andSteveJones.2013.“ScholarlyPublishingandtheInternet:ANM&SThemedSection.”New Media & Society15(3):345–58.
Jankowski,NicholasW.,AndreaScharnhorst,CliffordTatum,andZuotianTatum.2012.“EnhancingScholarlyPublications:DevelopingHybridMonographsintheHumanitiesandSocialSciences.”SSRNScholarlyPaper1982380.Rochester,NY:SocialScienceResearchNetwork.
Jansen,BernardJ.,andSooYoungRieh.2010.“TheSeventeenTheoreticalConstructsofInformationSearchingandInformationRetrieval.”Journal of the Association for Infor-mation Science & Technology61(8):1517–34.
Jewitt,Carey.2011.“DifferentApproachestoMultimodality.”InThe Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis,editedbyCareyJewitt,31–43.London;NewYork:Routledge.
———.2013.“WhatNextforMultimodality.”InThe Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis,editedbyCareyJewitt,450–55.London;NewYork:Routledge.
———.2014.“MultimodalApproaches.”InInteractions, Images and Texts: A Reader in Multi-modality,editedbySigridNorrisandCarmenDanielaMaier,11:125–34.Boston:DeGruyterMouton.
JISC.2013.“ImplementingaVirtualResearchEnvironment(VRE).”https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/implementing-a-virtual-research-environment-vre.
Johnson,Rick.2001.“DeclaringIndependence:AGuidetoCreatingCommunity-ControlledScienceJournals.”SPARC(theScholarlyPublishing&AcademicResourcesCoalition).
jupytercon.2017.“WritingProfessionalDocumentsforthe21stCenturywithAuthorea:JupyterCon,August22-25,2017,NewYork,NY.”Jupytercon.https://conferences.oreilly.com/jupyter/jup-ny-2017/public/schedule/detail/63297.
Kaden,Ben,andMichaelKleineberg.2017.“ZurSituationdesdigitalengeisteswissen-schaftlichenPublizierens.ErfahrungenausdemDFG-Projekt‘FuturePublicationsindenHumanities’.”Bibliothek Forschung und Praxis41(1):7–14.
364 Beyond the Flow
Karisiddappa,C.R.,andLakshmanaMoorthy.1996.“ElectronicPublishing:ImpactandImplicationsonLibraryandInformationCentres.”InDigital Libraries: Dynamic Storehouse of Digitized Information: Papers Presented at the SIS’96 15th Annual Convention and Con-ference 18–20 January, 1996 Bangalore,15:15.Taylor&Francis.
Keller,Alice.2001.“FutureDevelopmentofElectronicJournals:ADelphiSurvey.”Electronic Library, The19(6):383–96.doi:10.1108/02640470110412008.
Kennedy,Eamonn.2003.“AFrameworkforAcademicElectronicJournalPublications.”Dublin:TrinityCollegeDublin.http://hdl.handle.net/2262/839.
Kery,MaryBeth,MarissaRadensky,MahimaArya,BonnieE.John,andBradA.Myers.2018.“TheStoryintheNotebook:ExploratoryDataScienceUsingaLiterateProgrammingTool.”InProceedings CHI’2017: Human Factors in Computing Systems.NewYork:ACM.
KeyPerspectives.2010.“DataDimensions:DisciplinaryDifferencesinResearchDataSharing,ReuseandLongTermViability.”Edinburgh:DCC.http://hdl.handle.net/1842/3364.
King,RossD.,JemRowland,StephenG.Oliver,MichaelYoung,WayneAubrey,EmmaByrne,MariaLiakata,etal.2009.“TheAutomationofScience.”Science324(5923):85–89.doi:10.1126/science.1165620.
Kircz,JoostG.1998.“Modularity:TheNextFormofScientificInformationPresentation?”Journal of Documentation54(2):210–35.doi:10.1108/EUM0000000007185.
———.2001a.“NewPracticesforElectronicPublishing:HowtoMaintainQualityandGuaranteeIntegrity.”InProceedings of the Second ICSU/-UNESCO International Conference on Electronic Publishing in Science, París,19–23.Paris:UNESCO.
———.2001b.“NewPracticesforElectronicPublishing1:WilltheScientificPaperKeepItsForm?”Learned Publishing14(4):265–72.doi:10.1087/095315101753141365.
———.2002.“NewPracticesforElectronicPublishing2:NewFormsoftheScientificPaper.”Learned Publishing15(1):27–32.doi:10.1087/095315102753303652.
Kircz,JoostG.,andFrédérique-AnnePacifiqueHarmsze.2000.“ModularScenariosintheElectronicAge.”InProceedings Conferentie Informatiewetenschap 2000,31–43.DeDoelen.
Kitamura,Keiko,andJohnJ.Leggett.1996.“RepresentingAncientBooksforHumanScienceResearchBasedonaHypermediaModel.”InProceedings of HICSS-29: 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,2:147–54.Piscataway:IEEE.doi:10.1109/HICSS.1996.495393.
Knorr-Cetina,Karin.1999.Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress.
Knuth,DonaldE.1984.“LiterateProgramming.”The Computer Journal27(2):97–111.doi:10.1093/comjnl/27.2.97.
Kobos,Mateusz,LukaszBolikowski,MarekHorst,PaoloManghi,NataliaManola,andJochenSchirrwagen.2014.“InformationInferenceinScholarlyCommunicationInfrastructures:TheOpenAIREplusProjectExperience.”Procedia Computer Science38:92–99.doi:10.1016/j.procs.2014.10.016.
KoninklijkeBibliotheek.2006.“DARE.”https://www.kb.nl/en/organization/research-expertise/research-on-digitisation-and-digital-preservation/completed-projects/dare.
Koukounidou,Vasiliki.2017.“OpenAIRE:SupportingtheH2020OpenAccessMandate.”InExpanding Perspectives on Open Science: Communities, Cultures and Diversity in Concepts and Practices: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Electronic Publishing,56.IOSPress.
Krämer,Sybille.2003.“Textualität,VisualitätundEpisteme.ÜberihrenZusammenhanginderfrühenNeuzeit.”InText und Wissen: technologische und anthropologische Aspekte,editedbyRenateLachmann,17–27.Tübingen:GunterNarr.
References 365
Kreitzberg,CharlesB.1989.“DesigningtheElectronicBook:HumanPsychologyandInfor-mationStructuresforHypermedia.”InProceedings of the Third International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction on Designing and Using Human-Computer Interfaces and Knowledge Based Systems,457–464.Boston:Elsevier.
Kress,Gunther.1996.Before Writing: Rethinking the Paths to Literacy.London:Taylor&Francis.
———.2000.“TextasthePunctuationofSemiosis:PullingatSomeThreads.”InInter-textuality and the Media: From Genre to Everyday Life,editedbyUlrikeHannaMeinhofandJonathanSmith,132–54.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.
———.2010.Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication.London;NewYork:Routledge.
———.2013.“WhatIsMode?”InThe Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis,editedbyCareyJewitt,2nded.,54–67.NewYork:Routledge.
Kress,Gunther,andTheovanLeeuwen.2001.Multimodal Discourse.London;NewYork:BloomsburyAcademic.
———.2002.“ColourasaSemioticMode:NotesforaGrammarofColour.”Visual Com-munication1(3):343–68.doi:10.1177/147035720200100306.
Kuc,Kamila,andJoannaZylinska.2016.Photoremediations: A Reader.London:OpenHumanitiesPress.
Kuhn,Tobias.2013.“Nanobrowser.”http://nanobrowser.inn.ac.———.2015.“ScienceBots:AModelfortheFutureofScientificComputation?”InProceedings
of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion,1061–2.InternationalWorldWideWebConferencesSteeringCommittee.
Kuhn,Tobias,andMichelDumontier.2014.“TrustyURIs:Verifiable,Immutable,andPermanentDigitalArtifactsforLinkedData.”InThe Semantic Web: Trends and Challenges,8465:395–410.LectureNotesinComputerScience.Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07443-6_27.
Kuhn,Tobias,andMichaelKrauthammer.2012.“UnderspecifiedScientificClaimsinNano-publications.”ArXiv Preprint1209(1483).
Kuhn,Tobias,PaoloEmilioBarbano,MateLeventeNagy,andMichaelKrauthammer.2013.“BroadeningtheScopeofNanopublications.”InThe Semantic Web: Semantics and Big Data,487–501.LectureNotesinComputerScience.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38288-8_33.
Kuhn,Tobias,ChristineChichester,MichelDumontier,andMichaelKrauthammer.2015.“PublishingWithoutPublishers:ADecentralizedApproachtoDissemination,Retrieval,andArchivingofData.”InThe Semantic Web - ISWC 2015,656–72.LectureNotesinComputerScience.Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25007-6_38.
LaManna,Manfredi,andJeanYoung.2002.“TheElectronicSocietyforSocialScientists:FromJournalsasDocumentstoJournalsasKnowledgeExchanges.”Interlending & Doc-ument Supply30(4):178–82.doi:10.1108/02641610210452475.
LabtivaInc.2015.“ReadCubeEnhancedPDF.”https://www.readcube.com/enhancedpdf.Lagoze,Carl.2009.“TheOreChemProject:IntegratingChemistryScholarshipwiththe
SemanticWebandWeb2.0.”InWebSci’09: Society On-Line,18–20.http://dsc.soic.indiana.edu/publications/The%20oreChem%20Project.pdf.
Lagoze,Carl,andJaneHunter.2006.“TheABCOntologyandModel.”Journal of Digital Infor-mation2(2).
Lagoze,Carl,andHerbertVandeSompel.2007.“CompoundInformationObjects:TheOAI-OREPerspective.”OpenArchiveInitiative.
Lagoze,Carl,JaneHunter,andDanBrickley.2000.“AnEvent-AwareModelforMetadataInteroperability.”InResearch and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries,103–16.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/3-540-45268-0_10.
366 Beyond the Flow
Lagoze,Carl,HerbertVandeSompel,MichaelNelson,SimeonWarner,RobertSanderson,andPeteJohnston.2012.“AWeb-BasedResourceModelforScholarship2.0:ObjectReuse&Exchange.”Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience24(18):2221–40.doi:10.1002/cpe.1594.
Larman,Craig.2004.Agile and Iterative Development: A Manager’s Guide.AgileComputer-SoftwareDevelopmentSeries.Boston,MA.:Addison-Wesley.
Latar,NoamLemelshtrich.2015.“TheRobotJournalistintheAgeofSocialPhysics:TheEndofHumanJournalism?”InThe New World of Transitioned Media,editedbyGaliEinav,65–80.TheEconomicsofInformation,Communication,andEntertainment.Berlin:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09009-2_6.
Latour,Bruno.1993.We Have Never Been Modern.NewYork,London:HarvesterWheatsheaf.———.2014.“AnInquiryintotheModesofExistence.”Modes of Existence.http://www.
modesofexistence.org.Latour,Bruno,andHeatherDavis.2014.“TheAmoderns:ThoughtsonanImpossible
Project.”Amodern.October.http://amodern.net/article/amoderns-impossible-project/.Leclercq,Christophe.2011.“SummaryoftheAiMEProject.AnInquiryintoModesof
Existence.”Bruno-Latour.fr.October24.http://www.bruno-latour.fr/node/328.vanLeeuwen,Theo.2005.Introducing Social Semiotics.London:Routledge.Lemke,Jay.2003.“MathematicsintheMiddle:Measure,Picture,Gesture,Sign,andWord.”
In Educational Perspectives on Mathematics as Semiosis: From Thinking to Interpreting to Knowing,editedbyMyrdeneAnderson,215–34.NewDirectionsintheTeachingofMath-ematics1.Brooklyn:Legas.
———.2005.“MultimediaGenresandTraversals.”Folia Linguistica39(1–2):45–56.doi:10.1515/flin.2005.39.1-2.45.
Levin,Nadine,andSabinaLeonelli.2017.“HowDoesOne“Open”Science?QuestionsofValueinBiologicalResearch.”Science, Technology, & Human Values42(2):280–305.doi:10.1177/0162243916672071.
Li,Gangmin,VictoriaUren,EnricoMotta,SimonBuckinghamShum,andJohnDomingue.2002.“ClaiMaker:WeavingaSemanticWebofResearchPapers.”InThe Semantic Web 2002,editedbyIanHorrocksandJamesHendler,436–41.LectureNotesinComputerScience.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/3-540-48005-6_37.
Licastro,Amanda.2017.“TeachingEmpathyThroughVirtualReality.”InDigital Humanities 2017 Book of Abstracts,504.Montréal,Canada:McGillUniversity.https://dh2017.adho.org/abstracts/375/375.pdf.
Liew,CheeSun,MalcolmP.Atkinson,MichelleGalea,TanFongAng,PaulMartin,andJanoI.VanHemert.2016.“ScientificWorkflows:MovingAcrossParadigms.”ACM Computing Surveys49(4):66:1–66:39.doi:10.1145/3012429.
Liew,ChernLi,andSchubertFoo.1999.“DerivationofInteractionEnvironmentandInfor-mationObjectPropertiesforEnhancedIntegratedAccessandValue-AddingtoElectronicDocuments.”Aslib Proceedings51(8):256–68.doi:10.1108/EUM0000000006985.
———.2001.“ElectronicDocuments:WhatLiesAhead.”InThe Proceedings of the 4th Inter-national Conference of Asian Digital Libraries. Bangalore, IIIT-B.Citeseer.doi:10.1.1.476.5934.
Liu,Lei,RaresVernica,TamirHassan,NiranjanDameraVenkata,YangLei,JianFan,JerryLiu,StevenJ.Simske,andShanchanWu.2016.“METIS:AMulti-FacetedHybridBookLearningPlatform.”InProceedings of the 2016 ACM Symposium on Document Engineering,31–34.DocEng“16.NewYork,NY,USA:ACM.doi:10.1145/2960811.2967155.
Lobe,Adrian.2015.“AutomatisierterJournalismus:NehmenRoboterJournalistendenJobweg?”Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung,April17.http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/medien/automatisierter-journalismus-nehmen-roboter-allen-journalisten-den-job-weg-13542074.html.
References 367
Long,Do,andWilliamMobley.2015.“SingleFigurePublications:TowardsaNovelAlternativeFormatforScholarlyCommunication.”F1000Research;London4.doi:10.12688/f1000research.6742.1.
Lopes,Pedro,PedroSernadela,andJoséLuísOliveira.2013.“ExploringNanopublishingwithCOEUS.”InProceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Semantic Web Applications and Tools for Life Sciences.Edinburgh:CEUR.http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1114/.
Lord,Phillip,SimonCockell,andRobertStevens.2012.“ThreeStepstoHeaven:SemanticPublishinginaRealWorldWorkflow.”Future Internet4(4):1004–15.doi:10.3390/fi4041004.
Lourdi,Irene,ChristosPapatheodorou,andMaraNikolaidou.2007.“AMulti-LayerMetadataSchemaforDigitalFolkloreCollections.”Journal of Information Science33(2):197–213.doi:10.1177/0165551506070711.
Ludovico,Alessandro.2013.Post-Digital Print: The Mutation of Publishing Since 1894.2nded.Onomatopee;77.Eindhoven:Onomatopee.
———.2015.“Post-DigitalPublishing.”Post-Digital Culture.http://post-digital-culture.org/.Lyon,Liz.2009.“OpenScienceatWeb-Scale:OptimisingParticipationandPredictive
Potential.”November.JISC.Manghi,Paolo,LukaszBolikowski,NataliaManola,JochenSchirrwagen,andTimSmith.
2012.“OpenAIREplus:TheEuropeanScholarlyCommunicationDataInfrastructure.”D-Lib Magazine18(9/10).doi:10.1045/september2012-manghi.
Manghi,Paolo,NikosHoussos,MarkoMikulicic,andBrigitteJörg.2012.“TheDataModeloftheOpenAIREScientificCommunicationE-Infrastructure.”InMetadata and Semantics Research,168–80.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35233-1_18.
Manghi,Paolo,NataliaManola,WolframHorstmann,andDalePeters.2010.“AnInfra-structureforManagingECFundedResearchOutput.TheOpenAIREProject.”The Grey Journal6(1):31–41.
Marcondes,Carlos.2005.“FromScientificCommunicationtoPublicKnowledge:TheScientificArticleWebPublishedasaKnowledgeBase.”InProceedings of the 9th ICCC Inter-national Conference on Electronic Publishing.Leuven:PeetersPublishing.
Marcondes,CarlosH.,LucianaR.Malheiros,andLeonardoC.daCosta.2014.“ASemanticModelforScholarlyElectronicPublishinginBiomedicalSciences.”Semantic Web Journal5(4):313–34.
Markowetz,Florian.2015.“FiveSelfishReasonstoWorkReproducibly.”Genome Biology16(December):274.doi:10.1186/s13059-015-0850-7.
Matthews,Brian,VasilyBunakov,CatherineJones,andShirleyCrompton.2013.“Inves-tigationsasResearchObjectsWithinFacilitiesScience.”InTheory and Practice of Digital Libraries 2013 Selected Workshops,127–40.CommunicationsinComputerandInformationScience.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-08425-1_12.
Mavers,Diane,andWillGibson.2012.“Mode.”Glossary of Multimodal Terms.https://multi-modalityglossary.wordpress.com/mode-2/.
Mazanek,Steffen.2011.“ExecutablePaperswithSHARE.”https://sites.google.com/site/executablepaper/.
McAdams,Mindy,andStephanieBerger.2001.“Hypertext.”The Journal of Electronic Pub-lishing6(3).doi:10.3998/3336451.0006.301.
McDonald,Fran,andWhitneyTrettien.2016.“Thresholds.”http://openthresholds.tumblr.com.
McGann,Jerome.1994.“TheCompleteWritingsandPicturesofDanteGabrielRossetti:AHypermediaResearchArchive.”Text7:95–105.
McGarry,Glenn,PeterTolmie,SteveBenford,ChrisGreenhalgh,andAlanChamberlain.2017.““They’reAllGoingOuttoSomethingWeird”:Workflow,LegacyandMetadataintheMusicProductionProcess.”InProceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer
368 Beyond the Flow
Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing,995–1008.CSCW“17.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/2998181.2998325.
McIlroy,MalcomDouglas,ElliotPinson,andBerkTague.1978.“UnixTime-SharingSystemForward.”The Bell System Technical Journal57(6).
McLuhan,Marshall.2002.The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man.EditedbyElenaLambertiandDominiqueScheffel-Dunand.Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress.
McPherson,Tara.2008.“Introduction:MediaStudiesandtheDigitalHumanities.”Cinema Journal48(2):119–23.doi:10.1353/cj.0.0077.
———.2010.“ScalingVectors:ThoughtsontheFutureofScholarlyCommunication.”Journal of Electronic Publishing13(2).doi:10.3998/3336451.0013.208.
———.2014.“DesigningforDifference.”Differences25(1):177–88.doi:10.1215/10407391-2420039.
McWhirter,Andrew.2015.“FilmCriticism,FilmScholarshipandtheVideoEssay.”Screen56(3):369–77.doi:10.1093/screen/hjv044.
Meade,Chris.2013.“IF:BOOK–FutureoftheBookUK.”http://www.ifbook.co.uk/.Meadows,Jack.2006.“TheUsersofE-PublishingandTheirCommunicationBehaviour.”In
Proceedings of the ELPUB2006 Conference on Electronic Publishing.Sofia:IMI-BAS.Meeks,Elijah.2012.“BuildingaScholarlyDigitalObject.”Digital Humanities Specialist.March
19.https://dhs.stanford.edu/spatial-humanities/building-a-scholarly-digital-object/.Meng,Haiyan,andDouglasThain.2017.“FacilitatingtheReproducibilityofScientific
WorkflowswithExecutionEnvironmentSpecifications.”Procedia Computer Science,InternationalConferenceonComputationalScience,ICCS2017,12-14June2017,Zurich,Switzerland,108( January):705–14.doi:10.1016/j.procs.2017.05.116.
Meng,Haiyan,RupaKommineni,QuanPham,RobertGardner,TanuMalik,andDouglasThain.2015.“AnInvariantFrameworkforConductingReproducibleComputationalScience.”Journal of Computational Science9( July):137–42.doi:10.1016/j.jocs.2015.04.012.
Mersch,Dieter.2004.“KunstundSprache.Hermeneutik,DekonstruktionunddieÄsthetikdesEreignens.”InÄsthetik Erfahrung,editedbyJörgHuber,41–59.Wien:Ambra.
Meyer,EricT.,MonicaE.Bulger,AvgoustaKyriakidou-Zacharoudiou,LucyPower,PeterWilliams,WillVenters,MelissaTerras,andSallyWyatt.2011.“CollaborativeyetIndepen-dent:InformationPracticesinthePhysicalSciences.”1991753.Rochester:SocialScienceResearchNetwork.https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1991753.
Milloy,Caren,andEllenCollins.2016.“OAPEN-UKFinalReport:AFive-YearStudyintoOpenAccessMonographPublishingintheHumanitiesandSocialSciences.”FinalReport.JISC.https://scholarlycommunications.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2016/01/28/oapenukreport/.
MODE.2012.“GlossaryofMultimodalTerms.”http://multimodalityglossary.wordpress.com/.Mons,Barend.2005.“WhichGeneDidYouMean?”BMC Bioinformatics6(1):142.
doi:10.1186/1471-2105-6-142.Mons,Barend,andJanVelterop.2009.“Nano-PublicationintheE-ScienceEra.”InWorkshop
on Semantic Web Applications in Scientific Discourse (SWASD 2009).Vol.523.Washington,DC:CEUR.http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-523/Mons.pdf.
Mons,Barend,HermanvanHaagen,ChristineChichester,JohanT.denDunnen,GertjanvanOmmen,ErikvanMulligen,BharatSingh,etal.2011.“TheValueofData.”Nature Genetics 43(4):281–83.doi:10.1038/ng0411-281.
Moyle,Martin,andPanayiotaPolydoratou.2007.“InvestigatingOverlayJournals:IntroducingtheRIOJAProject.”D-Lib Magazine13(9/13).
MozillaScienceLab.2013a.“CodeasaResearchObject.”https://mozillascience.github.io/code-research-object/.
———.2013b.“CodeasaResearchObject:ANewProject.”https://mozillascience.org/code-as-a-research-object-a-new-project.
References 369
Nentwich,Michael.2003.“CyberscienceandKnowledgeRepresentation.”InCyberscience. Research in the Age of the Internet,editedbyMichaelNentwich,253–315.Vienna:AustrianAcademyofSciencesPress.http://www.austriaca.at/3188-7toc.
Newfield,Denise.2013.“Transformation,TransductionandtheTransmodalMoment.”InThe Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis,editedbyCareyJewitt,2nded.,100–114.London,NewYork:Routledge.
Newman,Paul,andPeterCorke.2009.“EditorialDataPapersofHighQualityDataSets.”The International Journal of Robotics Research28(5):587–87.doi:10.1177/0278364909104283.
Neylon,Cameron.2009.“HeadintheClouds:Re-ImaginingtheExperimentalLaboratoryRecordfortheWeb-BasedNetworkedWorld.”Automated Experimentation1( January):3.doi:10.1186/1759-4499-1-3.
———.2012.“OAandtheUKHumanities&SocialSciences:WrongRisksandMissedOpportunities.”Science in the Open.December12.http://cameronneylon.net/blog/oa-and-the-uk-humanities-social-sciences-wrong-risks-and-missed-opportunities/.
vanNoorden,Richard.2014.“PublishersWithdrawMoreThan120GibberishPapers.”Nature News,February.doi:10.1038/nature.2014.14763.
Norris,Sigrid.2009.“ModalDensityandModalConfigurations.”InThe Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis,editedbyCareyJewitt,78–91.NewYork:Routledge.
———.2011.Identity in (Inter)Action, Introducing Multimodal (Inter)Action Analysis.Berlin,Boston:DeGruyterMouton.
Nowviskie,Bethany.2015.“DigitalHumanitiesintheAnthropocene.”Digital Scholarship in the Humanities30(suppl_1):i4–i15.doi:10.1093/llc/fqv015.
Nüst,Daniel,MarkusKonkol,EdzerPebesma,ChristianKray,StephanieKlötgen,MarcSchutzeichel,JörgLorenz,HolgerPrzibytzin,andDirkKussmann.2016.“OpeningReproducibleResearch.”InEGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts,18:EPSC2016–7396.Vienna:SAO/NASAAstrophysicsDataSystem.http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016EGUGA..18.7396N.
Nüst,Daniel,MarkusKonkol,EdzerPebesma,ChristianKray,MarcSchutzeichel,HolgerPrzibytzin,andJörgLorenz.2017.“OpeningthePublicationProcesswithExecutableResearchCompendia.”D-Lib Magazine23(1/2).doi:10.1045/january2017-nuest.
O’Halloran,Kay.2004.Multimodal Discourse Analysis: Systemic Functional Perspectives.London;NewYork:Continuum.
———.2008.Mathematical Discourse: Language, Symbolism and Visual Images.London,NewYork:Continuum.
———.2011.“MultimodalDiscourseAnalysis.”InThe Bloomsbury Companion to Discourse Analysis,editedbyKenHylandandBrianPaltridge,120–37.ContinuumCompanions.London;NewYork:BloomsburyAcademic.
O’Halloran,Kay,andVictorLimFei.2014.“SystemicFunctionalMultimodalDiscourseAnalysis.”InInteractions, Images and Texts: A Reader in Multimodality,editedbySigridNorrisandCarmenDanielaMaier,11:135–50.Boston:deGruyterMouton.
O’Halloran,Kay,andBradleyA.Smith.2011.“MultimodalStudies.”InMultimodal Studies: Exploring Issues and Domains,editedbyKayO’HalloranandBradleyA.Smith,1–15.Chi-chester:Routledge.
O’Hearn,JoLynn,MayChau,LaurieBridges,BonnieE.Avery,JaneNichols,RuthVondracek,andMargaretMellinger.2017.“FutureoftheJournal.”
O’Toole,Michael.2006.“OperaLudentes:TheSydneyOperaHouseatWorkandPlay.”InMultimodal Discourse Analysis: Systemic-Functional Perspectives,editedbyKayO’Halloran,11–28.London:Continuum.
Odewahn,Andrew.2015.“EmbracingJupyterNotebooksatO’Reilly.”O’Reilly Media.May7.https://beta.oreilly.com/ideas/jupyter-at-oreilly.
370 Beyond the Flow
Odewahn,Andrew,KyleKelley,andRuneMadsen.2014.“PublishingWorkflowsforJupyter.”http://odewahn.github.io/publishing-workflows-for-jupyter.
OpenHumanitiesPress.2015.“OpenHumanitiesPress.”http://openhumanitiespress.org/.OpenKnowledgeFoundation.2015.“TheOpenDefinition–OpenDefinition–DefiningOpen
inOpenData,OpenContentandOpenKnowledge.”http://opendefinition.org/.OpenPhacts.2012.“TheOpenPHACTSNanopublicationGuidelines.”http://www.nanopub.
org/guidelines/1.8/.OpenAIREplus,ed.2013.“OpenAIREGuidelines3.0Documentation.”https://guidelines.
openaire.eu/en/latest/.Ossenbruggen,Jacco,LyndaHardman,andLloydRutledge.2006.“Hypermediaandthe
SemanticWeb:AResearchAgenda.”Journal of Digital Information3(1).http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/article/viewArticle/78/77.
Owen,JohnMackenzie.2002.“TheNewDisseminationofKnowledge:DigitalLibrariesandInstitutionalRolesinScholarlyPublishing.”Journal of Economic Methodology9(3):275–88.doi:10.1080/1350178022000015113.
———.2006.The Scientific Article in the Age of Digitization.Dordrecht:Springer.Palmer,CaroleL.,LaurenC.Teffeau,CarrieM.Pirmann,andOCLCResearch.2009.
“ScholarlyInformationPracticesintheOnlineEnvironmentThemesfromtheLiteratureandImplicationsforLibraryServiceDevelopment.”Dublin,Ohio:OCLCResearch.http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2009/2009-02.pdf.
Pampel,Heinz,andSünjeDallmeier-Tiessen.2014.“OpenResearchData:FromVisiontoPractice.”InOpening Science,editedbySönkeBartlingandSaschaFriesike,213–24.Berlin:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_14.
Pan,Ding.2010.“AnIntegrativeFrameworkforContinuousKnowledgeDiscovery.”Journal of Convergence Information Technology5(3).doi:10.1.1.306.9546.
Parsons,MarkA.,andPeterA.Fox.2013.“IsDataPublicationtheRightMetaphor?”Data Science Journal12:WDS32–WDS46.
Pavlopoulos,GeorgiosA.,EvangelosPafilis,MichaelKuhn,SeanD.Hooper,andReinhardSchneider.2009.“OnTheFly:AToolforAutomatedDocument-BasedTextAnnotation,DataLinkingandNetworkGeneration.”Bioinformatics25(7):977–78.doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btp081.
Pebesma,Edzer,DanielNüst,andRogerBivand.2012.“TheRSoftwareEnvironmentinReproducibleGeoscientificResearch.”Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union93(16):163–63.doi:10.1029/2012EO160003.
Peek,RobinP.,andJeffreyP.Pomerantz.1998.“ElectronicScholarlyJournalPublishing.”Annual Review of Information Science and Technology33.
Pellegrini,Tassilo.2017.“SemanticMetadatainthePublishingIndustry–TechnologicalAchievementsandEconomicImplications.”Electronic Markets; Heidelberg27(1):9–20.doi:10.1007/s12525-016-0238-x.
Penev,Lyubomir,DonatAgosti,TeodorGeorgiev,TerryCatapano,JeremyMiller,VladimirBlagoderov,DavidRoberts,VincentSmith,IrinaBrake,andSimonRyrcroft.2010.“SemanticTaggingofandSemanticEnhancementstoSystematicsPapers:ZooKeysWorkingExamples.”ZooKeys50(1).doi:10.3897/zookeys.50.538.
Perez,Fernando,andBrianGranger.2013.“AnOpenSourceFrameworkforInteractive,CollaborativeandReproducibleScientificComputingandEducation.”https://ipython.org/_static/sloangrant/sloan-grant.html.
Perkel,JeffreyM.2018.“Datavisualizationtoolsdriveinteractivityandreproducibilityinonlinepublishing.”Nature554(7690):133–34.doi:10.1038/d41586-018-01322-9.
Peroni,Silvio.2014a.“TheDigitalPublishingRevolution.”InSemantic Web Technologies and Legal Scholarly Publishing,editedbySilvioPeroni,7–43.Law,GovernanceandTechnologySeries15.Berlin:Springer.
References 371
———.2014b.“TheSemanticPublishingandReferencingOntologies.”InSemantic Web Technologies and Legal Scholarly Publishing,121–93.Law,GovernanceandTechnologySeries15.Berlin:Springer.
Peters,Dale,andNorbertLossau.2009.“DRIVER:BuildingaSustainableInfrastructureforGlobalRepositories.”The Electronic Library29(2):249–60.
Pettifer,Steve,PhilipMcDermott,JamesMarsh,DavidThorne,A.Villeger,andTeresaK.Attwood.2011.“Cecin’estpasunhamburger:ModellingandRepresentingtheScholarlyArticle.”Learned Publishing24(3):207–20.
Pfaff,Claas-Thido,BirgittaKönig-Ries,AnneC.Lang,SophiaRatcliffe,ChristianWirth,XingxingMan,andKarinNadrowski.2015.“RBEFdata:DocumentingDataExchangeandAnalysisforaCollaborativeDataManagementPlatform.”Ecology and Evolution5(14):2890–7.doi:10.1002/ece3.1547.
Pham,Quan,SeverinThaler,TanuMalik,IanFoster,andBorisGlavic.2015.“SharingandReproducingDatabaseApplications.”Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment8(12):1988–91.doi:10.14778/2824032.2824118.
Phelps,ThomasA.,andRobertWilensky.1996.“TowardActive,Extensible,Net-workedDocuments:MultivalentArchitectureandApplications.”InProceedings of the First ACM International Conference on Digital Libraries,9:100–108.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/226931.226951.
vanderPoel,K.G.2007.“Verkenningvandeinteressevanwetenschappelijkeonderzoekers.”Utrecht:SurfFoundation.
Poo,Mu-ming,andChung-I.Wu.2017.“NewApproachestoPublishingScientificReportsatNSR.”National Science Review4(4):511–11.doi:10.1093/nsr/nwx073.
Poole,AlexH.2015.“HowHasYourScienceDataGrown?DigitalCurationandtheHumanFactor:ACriticalLiteratureReview.”Archival Science15(2):101–39.doi:10.1007/s10502-014-9236-y.
Príncipe,Pedro,NajlaRettberg,EloyRodrigues,MikaelK.Elbæk,JochenSchirrwagen,NikosHoussos,LarsHolmNielsen,andBrigitteJörg.2014.“OpenAIREGuidelines:SupportingInteroperabilityforLiteratureRepositories,DataArchivesandCRIS.”Procedia Computer Science,12thInternationalConferenceonCurrentResearchInformationSystems,33:92–94.doi:10.1016/j.procs.2014.06.015.
Puschmann,Cornelius,andMarcoBastos.2015.“HowDigitalAretheDigitalHumanities?AnAnalysisofTwoScholarlyBloggingPlatforms.”PLOS ONE10(2):e0115035.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115035.
Puschmann,Cornelius,andMerjaMahrt.2013.“ScholarlyBlogging:ANewFormofPub-lishingorScienceJournalism2.0.”InScience and the Internet,editedbyAlexanderTokar,MichaelBeurskens,SusanneKeuneke,MerjaMahrt,IsabellaPeters,TimovanTreeck,KatrinWeller,andCorneliusPuschmann,1sted.,171–182.Düsseldorf:DüsseldorfUni-versityPress.
Raatikainen,Panu.2001.“ExploringRandomnessandTheUnknowable.”Notes of the AMS48(9).
Ramsay,Stephen,andGeoffreyRockwell.2012.“DevelopingThings:NotesTowardanEpistemologyofBuildingintheDigitalHumanities.”InDebates in the Digital Humanities,editedbyMatthewK.Gold,75–84.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
Rasch,Miriam.2017.“StateoftheArt.”InstituteofNetworkCultures.http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11884/9c673d83-b009-4f5d-b43e-ea7b33c9ba8a.
Rees,Jonathan.2010.“RecommendationsforIndependentScholarlyPublicationofDataSets.”CreativeCommonsWorkingpaper.SanFrancisco.http://neurocommons.org/report/data-publication.pdf.
Reilly,Susan,WouterSchallier,SabineSchrimpf,EefkeSmit,andMaxWilkinson.2011.“ReportonIntegrationofDataandPublications.”http://epic.awi.de/31397/.
372 Beyond the Flow
Renear,Allen,andCaroleL.Palmer.2009.“StrategicReading,Ontologies,andtheFutureofScientificPublishing.”Science325(5942):828–32.doi:10.1126/science.1157784.
ResearchCouncilsUK.2015.“BigData-ResearchCouncilsUK.”http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/infrastructure/big-data/.
Rettberg,Najla,andBirgitSchmidt.2012.“RepositoryCommunitiesinOpenAIRE:Expe-riencesinBuildingupanOpenAccessInfrastructureforEuropeanResearch.”InCon-ference Papers of the 7th Open Repositories.Edinburgh:UniversityGeorgeSquare.
deRibaupierre,Hélène,andGillesFalquet.2014.“User-CentricDesignandEvaluationofaSemanticAnnotationModelforScientificDocuments.”InProceedings of the 14th International Conference on Knowledge Technologies and Data-Driven Business,40:1–40:6.I-KNOW“14.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/2637748.2638446.
Richards,JulianD.2018.“InternetArchaeologyandDigitalScholarlyCommunication.”InCultural Heritage Infrastructures in Digital Humanities,editedbyJulianD.Richards,AgiatisBenardou,ErikChampion,CostisDallas,andLornaHughes,36–47.London:Routledge.
Robertson,BenjaminJ.2013.“TheGrammatizationofScholarship.”Amodern,no.1(February).http://amodern.net/article/the-grammatization-of-scholarship/.
Robertson,Tim,MarkusDöring,RobertGuralnick,DavidBloom,JohnWieczorek,KyleBraak,JavierOtegui,LauraRussell,andPeterDesmet.2014.“TheGBIFIntegratedPublishingToolkit:FacilitatingtheEfficientPublishingofBiodiversityDataontheInternet.”PLOS ONE 9(8).doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0102623.
Rodriguez-Gonzalez,Alejandro,MarcosMartinez-Romero,MikelEganaAranguren,andMarkD.Wilkinson.2014.“NanopublishingClinicalDiagnoses:TrackingDiagnosticKnowledgeBaseContentandUtilization.”In2014 IEEE 27th International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems,335–40.Piscataway:IEEE.doi:10.1109/CBMS.2014.82.
Roos,Marco,SeanBechhofer,JunZhao,PaoloMissier,DavidNewman,DavidDeRoure,andM.ScottMarshall.2010.“ALinkedDataApproachtoSharingWorkflowsandWorkflowResults.”InLeveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Val-idation,340–54.LectureNotesinComputerScience.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16558-0_29.
Rowsell,Jennifer.2013.Working with Multimodality: Rethinking Literacy in a Digital Age.London;NewYork:Routledge.
Ruiz-Iñiesta,Almudena,andÓscarCorcho.2014.“AReviewofOntologiesforDescribingScholarlyandScientificDocuments.”InProceedings of 4th Workshop on Semantic Pub-lishing.Vol.1155.Anissaras:CEUR.
Sanchez,Alfredo,YazminMorales,andArturoFlores.2004.“CollaborativeEnvironmentsforDigitalPublishing.”InProceedings of the Fifth Mexican International Conference in Computer Science,329–36.Piscataway:IEEE.doi:10.1109/ENC.2004.1342624.
Santana-Perez,Idafen,RafaelFerreiradaSilva,MatsRynge,EwaDeelman,MaríaS.Pérez-Hernández,andÓscarCorcho.2017.“ReproducibilityofExecutionEnvironmentsinComputationalScienceUsingSemanticsandClouds.”Future Generation Computer Systems 67:354–67.doi:10.1016/j.future.2015.12.017.
Santana-Perez,Idafen,RafaelFerreiradaSilva,MatsRynge,EwaDeelman,MaríaS.Pérez-Hernández,andÓscarCorcho.2014.“ASemantic-BasedApproachtoAttainReproduci-bilityofComputationalEnvironmentsinScientificWorkflows:ACaseStudy.”InEuro-Par 2014: Parallel Processing Workshops,editedbyLuísLopes,JuliusŽilinskas,AlexandruCostan,RobertoG.Cascella,GaborKecskemeti,EmmanuelJeannot,MarioCannataro,etal.,452–63.LectureNotesinComputerScience.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14325-5_39.
Saussure,Ferdinandde.1959.Course in General Linguistics.NewYork:PhilosophicalLibrary.
References 373
Sayers,Jentery,andCraigDietrich.2013.“AftertheDocumentModelforScholarlyCom-munication:SomeConsiderationsforAuthoringwithRichMedia.”Digital Studies/Le Champ Numérique3(2).doi:10.16995/dscn.237.
Sayers,Jentery,DevonElliott,KariKraus,BethanyNowviskie,andWilliamJ.Turkel.2015.“BetweenBitsandAtoms.”InA New Companion to Digital Humanities,editedbySusanSchreibman,RaySiemens,andJohnUnsworth,1–21.Chichester:Wiley-Blackwell.doi:10.1002/9781118680605.ch1.
Schmidt,Nora.2014.“SemantischesPubliziereniminterdisziplinärenWissenschafts-netzwerk.TheoretischeGrundlagenundAnforderungen.”Berlin:HumboldtUniversity.https://edoc.hu-berlin.de/handle/18452/2773.
Schneider,Jodi,PaoloCiccarese,TimClark,andRichardD.Boyce.2014.“UsingtheMicropub-licationsOntologyandtheOpenAnnotationDataModeltoRepresentEvidenceWithinaDrug-DrugInteractionKnowledgeBase.”InProceedings of the 4th International Conference on Linked Science-Volume 1282,60–70.Aachen,Germany,Germany:CEUR.
Schneider,Jodi,CarolCollins,LisaE.Hines,JohnR.Horn,andRichardD.Boyce.2014.“Mod-elingArgumentsinScientificPaperstoSupportPharmacists.”InArgDiaP 2014: From Real Data to Argument Mining.Warsaw:HAL.https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01076327/.
Schreibman,Susan,RaySiemens,andJohnUnsworth,eds.2016.A New Companion to Digital Humanities.Chichester:Wiley-Blackwell.
Sefton,Peter.2009.“TowardsScholarlyHTML.”Serials Review35(3):154–58.doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2009.05.001.
Seringhaus,MichaelR.,andMarkB.Gerstein.2007.“PublishingPerishing?TowardsTomorrow’sInformationArchitecture.”BMC Bioinformatics8( January):17.doi:10.1186/1471-2105-8-17.
Sernadela,Pedro,EelkevanderHorst,MarkThompson,PedroLopes,MarcoRoos,andJoséLuísOliveira.2014.“ANanopublishingArchitectureforBiomedicalData.”In8th International Conference on Practical Applications of Computational Biology & Bioinformatics (PACBB 2014),277–84.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07581-5_33.
Sernadela,Pedro,PhilLopes,andJoséLuísOliveira.2013.“ExploringNanopublicationsIntegrationinPharmacovigilanceScenarios.”In2013 IEEE 15th International Conference on E-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom 2013),728–30.Piscataway:IEEE.doi:10.1109/HealthCom.2013.6720773.
Shaw,Ryan,MichaelBuckland,andPatrickGolden.2013.“OpenNotebookHumanities:PromiseandProblems.”InDigital Humanities 2013 Book of Abstracts.Lincoln:UniversityofNebraska.http://dh2013.unl.edu/abstracts/ab-297.html.
Shotton,David.2009.“SemanticPublishing:TheComingRevolutioninScientificJournalPub-lishing.”Learned Publishing22(2):85–94.doi:10.1087/2009202.
———.2012.“TheFiveStarsofOnlineJournalArticles-aFrameworkforArticleEvaluation.”D-Lib Magazine18(1/2).doi:10.1045/january2012-shotton.
Shotton,David,andSilvioPeroni.2012.“FaBiOandCiTO:OntologiesforDescribingBiblio-graphicResourcesandCitations.”Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web17(December):33–43.doi:10.1016/j.websem.2012.08.001.
Shotton,David,AlexandruConstantin,SilvioPeroni,StevePettifer,andFabioVitali.2015.“TheDocumentComponentsOntology(DoCO).”Semantic Web Journal,no.SubmittedDraft.http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/content/document-\%0020components-ontology-doco-0.
Shotton,David,AngeloDiIorio,SilvioPeroni,FrancescoPoggi,andFabioVitali.2013.“Rec-ognizingDocumentComponentsinXML-BasedAcademicArticles.”InProceedings of the 2013 ACM Symposium on Document Engineering,181–84.ACM.doi:10.1145/2494266.2494319.
Shotton,David,SilvioPeroni,andFabioVitali.2012.“ScholarlyPublishingandLinkedData:DescribingRoles,Statuses,TemporalandContextualExtents.”InProceedings
374 Beyond the Flow
of the 8th International Conference on Semantic Systems,9–16.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/2362499.2362502.
Shotton,David,KatiePortwin,GrahamKlyne,andAlisairMiles.2009.“AdventuresinSemanticPublishing:ExemplarSemanticEnhancementsofaResearchArticle.”PLoS Comput Biology5(4):1–17.doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000361.
Siebler,Kay.2016.Learning Queer Identity in the Digital Age, by Kay Siebler.London:PalgraveMacmillan.
Sierman,Barbara,BirgitSchmidt,andJensLudwig.2009.Enhanced Publications. Linking Publications and Research Data in Digital Repositories.Amsterdam:AmsterdamUniversityPress.http://dare.uva.nl/document/150723.
Simukovic,Elena.2012.“EnhancedPublications.”Berlin:HumboldtUniversität.Singh,Ripudaman,RostislavChudoba,K.Gopal,andCarstenKoenke.1998.“IMMJ:Inter-
activeMulti-MediaJournalsinScienceandTechnologyProspectsandIssues.”Ejournal8(2).
Smith,BradleyA.,SabineTan,AlexeyPodlasov,andKayO’Halloran.2011.“AnalyzingMulti-modalityinanInteractiveDigitalEnvironment:SoftwareasaMeta-SemioticTool.”Social Semiotics21(3):359–80.doi:10.1080/10350330.2011.564386.
Smith,Vincent,TeodorGeorgiev,PavelStoev,JordanBiserkov,JeremyMiller,LaurenceLivermore,EdwardBaker,etal.2013.“BeyondDeadTrees:IntegratingtheScientificProcessintheBiodiversityDataJournal.”Biodiversity Data Journal1:e995.doi:10.3897/BDJ.1.e995.
Sofronijević,Adam.2012.“PublishingAgainsttheMachine:ANewFormatofAcademicExpressionfortheNewScientist.”InScience and the Internet,editedbyAlexanderTokar,MichaelBeurskens,SusanneKeuneke,MerjaMahrt,IsabellaPeters,CorneliusPusch-mann,TimovanTreeck,andKatrinWeller,251–62.Düsseldorf:DüsseldorfUniversityPress.
Sofronijević,Adam,andAleksandraPavlović.2013.“ApplicabilityoftheNano-Pub-licationConceptforFosteringOpenAccessinDevelopingandTransitionCountries.”InProceedings of the 5th Belgrade International Open Access Conference.Belgrade:NationalLibraryofSerbia.
Sollaci,LucianaB.,andMauricioG.Pereira.2004.“TheIntroduction,Methods,Results,andDiscussion(IMRAD)Structure:AFifty-YearSurvey.”Journal of the Medical Library Association92(3):364–71.
VandeSompel,Herbert,andCarlLagoze.2007.“InteroperabilityfortheDiscovery,Use,andRe-UseofUnitsofScholarlyCommunication.”CTWatch Quarterly3(3):32–41.
VandeSompel,Herbert,PatrickHochstenbach,andTobiasDePessemier.1997.“TheHybridInformationEnvironmentandOurIntranetSolutiontoAccessIt.”InProceedings of the Fourth SA Online 1997.SouthAfrice:SAOUGArchive.http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-1056689.
VandeSompel,Herbert,AlbertoPepe,MatthewS.Mayernik,andChristineL.Borgman.2010.“FromArtifactstoAggregations:ModelingScientificLifeCyclesontheSemanticWeb.”Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology61(3):567–82.doi:10.1002/asi.21263.
Sørgaard,Pål,andToneIreneSandahl.1997.“ProblemswithStylesinWordProcessing:AWeakFoundationforElectronicPublishingwithSGML.”InProceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,6:137–46.Piscataway:IEEE.doi:10.1109/HICSS.1997.665495.
Stäcker,Thomas,ConstanzeBaum,TimoSteyer,MichaelKleineberg,AnneBaillot,BenKaden,EstherChen,Niels-OliverWalkowski,ChristianSchwaderer,andThomasErnst.2016.“WorkingPaper‘DigitalesPublizieren’.”DHd Working Paper.Wolfenbüttel:HerzogAugustBibliothek.http://diglib.hab.de/ejournals/ed000008/startx.htm.
References 375
Star,SusanLeigh,andJamesR.Griesemer.1989.“InstitutionalEcology,“Trans-lations”andBoundaryObjects:AmateursandProfessionalsinBerkeley’sMuseumofVertebrateZoology,1907–39.”Social Studies of Science19(3):387–420.doi:10.1177/030631289019003001.
Steinkrüger,Philipp,ed.2016.“RIDE|AReviewJournalforScholarlyDigitalEditionsandResources.”AccessedOctober25.http://ride.i-d-e.de/.
Stiegler,Bernard.2006.“AnamnesisandHypomnesis.PlatoastheFirstThinkeroftheProletarianisation.”Ars Industrialis.http://arsindustrialis.org/anamnesis-and-hypomnesis.
———.2010.Hypermaterialität und Psychomacht.Zürich:Diaphanes.———.2011.“DigitalasBearerofAnotherSociety.”Digital Transformation Review1( July):
44–50.———.2012.“DieAufklärungintheAgeofPhilosophicalEngeneering.”Computational
Culture,no.2(September).Stirling,Allan,andJamesBirt.2014.“AnEnrichedMultimediaEBookApplicationtoFacilitate
LearningofAnatomy.”Anatomical Sciences Education7(1):19–27.doi:10.1002/ase.1373.Stöckl,Hartmut.2013.“SemioticParadigmsandMultimodality.”InThe Routledge Hand-
book of Multimodal Analysis,editedbyCareyJewitt,2nded.,275–86.London,NewYork:Routledge.
Stolley,Karl.2016.“TheLo-FiManifesto,V.2.0.”Kairos20(2).http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/20.2/inventio/stolley/index.html.
Stribling,Jeremy,MaxKrohn,andDanAguayo.2005.“SCIgen-AnAutomaticCSPaperGenerator.”https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/archive/scigen/.
Suber,Peter.2004.“OpenAccessOverview.”June21.http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm.
Svensson,Patrik.2010.“TheLandscapeofDigitalHumanities.”Digital Humanities Quarterly 4(1).
Takeda,Kenji,GraemeEarl,JeremyFrey,SimonKeay,andAlexWade.2013.“EnhancingResearchPublicationsUsingRichInteractiveNarratives.”Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences371(1983):20120090.doi:10.1098/rsta.2012.0090.
Thatcher,SanfordG.1996.“Re-EngineeringScholarlyCommunication:ARoleforUniversityPresses?”Journal of Scholarly Publishing27(3):197–207.doi:10.3138/JSP-027-04-197.
TheWhiteHouse.2013.“OpenGovernmentInitiative.”The White House.https://obamawhite-house.archives.gov/open.
Thomas,Kluyver,Ragan-KelleyBenjamin,PérezFernando,GrangerBrian,BussonnierMatthias,FredericJonathan,KelleyKyle,etal.2016.“JupyterNotebooksaPublishingFormatforReproducibleComputationalWorkflows.”InPositioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas,editedbyF.LoizidesandB.Schmidt,87–90.Amsterdam:IOSPress.doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-649-1-87.
Thomas,William.2007.“WritingADigitalHistoryJournalArticlefromScratch:AnAccount.”Digital History Project.http://digitalhistory.unl.edu/essays/thomasessay.php.
Thompson,Emily.2013.“VectorsJournal:TheRoaring“Twenties-Editor’sIntroduction.”Vectors,no.7.http://vectorsjournal.org/projects/index.php?project=98.
Thompson,Mark,andErikSchultes.2012.“UsingNanopublicationstoIncentivizetheSemanticExposureofLifeScienceInformation.”InProceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Semantic Web Applications and Tools for Life Sciences.Paris:CEUR.
Tinnell,John.2015.“Grammatization:BernardStiegler’sTheoryofWritingandTechnology.”Computers and Composition37(SupplementC):132–46.doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2015.06.011.
vanderTol,Maarten.2001.“TheAbstractasanOrientationToolinModularElectronicArticles.”Document Design2(1):76–88.
376 Beyond the Flow
Treloar,AndrewE.1999.“RethinkingtheLibrary’sRoleinPublishing.”Learned Publishing12(1):25–31.doi:10.1087/09531519950146066.
Treusch-Dieter,Gerburg.2001.“DasEndeeinerHimmelfahrt.VomFeuerderVergöttlichungzurVereisungdesDNS.EineKult-undKulturgeschichtedesAutos.”InTechnologien als Diskurse. Konstruktionen von Wissen, Medien und Körpern,editedbyAndreasLösch,DominikSchrage,DierkSpreen,andMarkusStauff,239–54.Diskursivitäten5.Heidelberg:Synchron.
VectorsJournal,dir.2008.Vectors Journal Dynamic Backend Generator.YouTube.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkxSSBMPFtA.
“VectorsJournal.”2013.http://vectorsjournal.org/issues/index.php?issue=7.Velterop,Jan.2010.“NanopublicationsTheFutureofCopingwithInformationOverload.”
Logos21(3):119–22.doi:10.1163/095796511X560006.Verhaar,Peter.2009.“ReportonObjectModelsandFunctionalities.”InEnhanced Pub-
lications. Linking Publications and Research Data in Digital Repositories,40.Amsterdam:AmsterdamUniversityPress.
Vernadskij,VladimirIvanovich.1997.Scientific Thought as a Planetary Phenomenon.Moscow:NongovernmentalEcologicalV.I.VernadskyFoundation.
Visosevica,Tanja,andAmandaMyersb.2017.“VideoEssay:TheMultimodalAssignmentofNow.”InProceedings of the 2nd Association for Visual Pedagogy Conference,167–171.Denmark:AalborgUniversity.
Voutsinos,Lavrentios.2010.“AWeb2.0OrientedReferenceDesignPatternforStructuringandStandardizingRichInternetPublications.”
W3CLibraryLinkedDataIncubatorGroup.2011.“UseCaseEnhancedPublications-LibraryLinkedData.”February.http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Enhanced_Publications.
W3CResearchObjectforScholarlyCommunicationCommunityGroup.2013.“ResearchObjectforScholarlyCommunicationCommunityGroup.”https://www.w3.org/community/rosc/.
deWaard,Anita,andJoostG.Kircz.2008.“ModelingScientificResearchArticles–ShiftingPerspectivesandPersistentIssues.”InOpen Scholarship: Authority, Community, and Sustainability in the Age of Web 2.0 - Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Elec-tronic Publishing,234–45.Toronto.doi:10.1.1.578.6751.
deWaard,Anita,andGerardTel.2006.“TheABCDEFormat.EnablingSemanticConferenceProceeding.”InSemWiki2006, First Workshop on Semantic Wikis - From Wiki to Semantics, Proceedings,editedbyMaxVölkelandSebastianSchaffert.Budva:CEUR.
Wark,Mckenzie.2013.“TotalityforKids.”Vectors,no.7.http://vectorsjournal.org/issues/7/totality.
Waters,ColinN.,JanZalasiewicz,ColinSummerhayes,AnthonyD.Barnosky,ClémentPoirier,AgnieszkaGałuszka,AlejandroCearreta,etal.2016.“TheAnthropoceneIsFunctionallyandStratigraphicallyDistinctfromtheHolocene.”Science351(6269).doi:10.1126/science.aad2622.
Weilenmann,Anne-Katharina.2014.“ANewParadigmfortheScientificArticle.”Information Services & Use34(3–4):315–19.doi:10.3233/ISU-140753.
Weiss,Rick,andJoyZgorski.2012.“ObamaAdministrationUnveils“BigData”Initiative.”The White House President Obama.March29.https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/11/19/release-obama-administration-unveils-big-data-initiative-announces-200.
Weiten,Moritz,GünterWozny,andBerndGoers.2002.“WegezumInformations-managementfürinterdisziplinäreForschungsprojekteunddieEntwick-lungeinesprototypischenSystems.”Chemie Ingenieur Technik74(11):1545–53.doi:10.1002/1522-2640(20021115)74:11<1545::AID-CITE1545>3.0.CO;2-X.
References 377
Welch,Ian,NiklasRehfeld,EuanCochrane,andDirkvonSuchodoletz.2012.“APracticalApproachtoSystemPreservationWorkflows.”Praxis der Informationsverarbeitung und Kommunikation35(4):269–80.doi:10.1515/pik-2012-0049.
Welt,HausderKulturender.2015.“FutureStorytelling.”HKW.September16.http://hkw.de/en/programm/projekte/2014/future_storytelling/future_storytelling.php.
Wheary,Jennifer,LeeWild,ChristinaWeyher,andBernardSchutz.1998.“ThinkinginElec-tronicTerms.”InProceedings. Socioeconomic Dimensions of Electronic Publishing Workshop,1998:83–87.Piscataway:IEEE.doi:10.1109/SEDEP.1998.730714.
Whyte,Angus,andPryor.2011.“OpenScienceinPractice:ResearcherPerspectivesandPar-ticipation.”International Journal of Digital Curation6(1):199–213.doi:10.2218/ijdc.v6i1.182.
Whyte,Angus,SarahCallaghan,JonathanTedds,andMatthewS.Mayernik.2013.“Per-spectivesontheRoleofTrustworthyRepositoryStandardsinDataJournalPublication.”In Abstracts of the International Association for Social Science Information Services and Technology Conference.Cologne:IASSIST.http://www.iassistdata.org/conferences/2013/presentation/3657.
Willinsky,John,AlexGarnett,andAngelaPanWong.2012.“RefurbishingtheCamelotofScholarship:HowtoImprovetheDigitalContributionofthePDFResearchArticle.”The Journal of Electronic Publishing15(1).doi:10.3998/3336451.0015.102.
Wittek,Peter.2014.“ReproducibleResearch,LiterateProgramming,IPython,andGitHub.”May16.http://peterwittek.com/reproducible-research-literate-programming-ipython-and-github.html.
Wittgenstein,Ludwig.2006.Philosophische Untersuchungen.FrankfurtamMain:Suhrkamp.Worthington,Simon.2015.Hybrid Lecture Player(version1.1).HybridPublishingLab.https://
github.com/consortium/hybrid-lecture-player.———.2016.“HybridPublishingPortfolio.”Lüneburg:LeuphanaUniversitätLüneburg.
https://hpg.io/portfolio.pdf.Worthington,Simon,andLoraineFurter.2014.A Publication Taxonomy.Lüneburg:Hybrid
PublishingConsortium.https://research.consortium.io/docs/a_publication_taxonomy/a-publication-taxonomy.html.
Woutersen-Windhouwer,Saskia,andRenzeBrandsma.2009.“ReportonEnhancedPub-licationsState-of-the-Art.”Amsterdam:AmsterdamUniversityPress.http://dare.uva.nl/record/340461.
Xu,Hao.2010.“ManagingUbiquitousScientificKnowledgeonSemanticWeb.”InAdvances in Computer Science and Information Technology,editedbyTai-hoonKimandHojjatAdeli,421–30.LectureNotesinComputerScience6059.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13577-4_37.
———.2011.“ManagingUbiquitousScientificKnowledgeObjects.”Dissertation,Trento:Uni-versityofTrento.
Xu,Hao,JingYu,WeiLiu,andLanHuang.2014.“AReviewofScientificDiscourseRep-resentationModels.”Koganai17(5):1691.
Yuan,Zhihao,DaiHaiTonThat,SiddhantKothari,GabrielFils,andTanuMalik.2018.“UtilizingProvenanceinReusableResearchObjects.”Informatics5(1).doi:10.3390/informatics5010014.
Zhao,Jun,José-ManuelGómez-Pérez,KhalidBelhajjame,GrahamKlyne,EstebanGarcia-Cuesta,AleixGarrido,KristinaHettne,MarcoRoos,DavidDeRoure,andCaroleA.Goble.2012.“WhyWorkflowsBreakandCombatingDecayinTavernaWorkflows.”In2012 IEEE 8th International Conference on E-Science,1–9.LosAlamitos:IEEEComputerSociety.doi:10.1109/eScience.2012.6404482.
Zheng,Charles,andDouglasThain.2015.“IntegratingContainersintoWorkflows:ACaseStudyUsingMakeflow,WorkQueue,andDocker.”InProceedings of the 8th International
378 Beyond the Flow
Workshop on Virtualization Technologies in Distributed Computing,31–38.VTDC“15.NewYork:ACM.doi:10.1145/2755979.2755984.
Zylinska,Joanna.2011.“ProjectObjectives.”Living Books About Life.May11.http://www.livingbooksaboutlife.org/blog/2011/05/project-objectives/.
———.2015.“PhotomediationsMachine.”http://photomediationsmachine.net/.Zylinska,Joanna,KamilaKuc,JonathanShaw,JonathanVarney,Michael
Wamposzyc,andGaryHall.2015.“Photomediations:AnOpenBook.”http://www.photomediationsopenbook.net/.
Niels-Oliver WalkowskiBeyond the Flow: Scholarly Publications During and After the Digital
In the wake of the so-called digital revolution numerous attempts have been made to rethink and redesign what scholarly publications can or should be. Beyond the Flow examines the technologies as well as narratives driving this unfolding transformation. By unpacking the confusion, heterogeneity and uncertainty that is surrounding scholarly publishing today the book asks for how a sustainable post-digital publishing ecology can be imagined.
www.meson.press
ISBN 978-3-95796-160-0
Recommended