Talk:Open Science for Arts, Design and Music/Guidelines

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Introduction in the project[edit]

The disciplinary fields of Arts (photography, visual and performing arts, such as dance, theatre and cinema), Design (including sub-disciplines such as visual communication, industrial design, fashion design and interaction design) and Music (including sound and aural arts) present a series of complex issues related to the reuse and distribution of artwork and of third parties content under copyright, not accessible in public domain and subject to a series of restrictions. These disciplinary fields produce a wide range of multimedia outputs, they imply action-research and practice-based research, and they collaborate with specialised national Swiss publishers. This situation makes the implementation of Open Access in the disciplinary fields of Arts, Design and Music (ADM) particularly complex. At the same time the practices developed within these fields address issues which are relevant in other disciplines. The guidelines provide support to the specific needs related to the implementation of Open Science in the disciplinary fields of ADM.

Problems and envisioned topics for the guidelines[edit]

Problem Envisioned topic for the guidelines
Necessity of producing research based on documents and images of archives and of including these documents within the research outputs (publications, exhibitions, catalogues, multimedia installations...). Managing third parties rights for content in the public domain (70 years after the death of the author); legal restrictions for images, related to heritage management; rights related to reproductions; fees; restrictions related to digital publications.
Necessity of producing research based on contemporary documents, images, audio and video and of including these documents within the research outputs (publications, exhibitions, catalogues, prototypes, artworks, multimedia installations...). Working with contemporary archives. Managing third parties rights for contemporary multimedia content (audio recordings, video, images…), freedom of panorama; finding content with open licenses, requisitioning authorizations or content under open licenses; fees.
Release of content under open licenses (CC0, CC BY and CC BY-SA) and request of authorisations to release content under open licenses.
Copyright management for collaborative productions; involvement of children and people with disabilities in performances and multimedia installations.
Copyright management for different formats (publications, exhibitions, catalogues, prototypes, artworks, interaction design, performances, video and audio recordings, music, multimedia installations…)
Preserving authors’ rights and third parties rights. Different modalities of disseminating research outputs with different forms of OA.
Necessity of producing multimedia research outputs produced by action-research and practice-based research (publications, exhibitions, catalogues, websites, multimedia installations, artworks...). Managing third parties rights for digital dissemination, printed publications, catalogues, exhibitions, multimedia installations, design, performances, artworks.
Managing the peer-review process and ethical issues for multimedia research outputs.
Production of a Data management plan for research proposals to be submitted to SNF and other grant-maker. Models of data management plans.
Archiving data and content FAIR data, data management and archiving third parties content. Issues related to media libraries and data repositories.
Necessity of training researchers to allow them to produce works they can disseminate. Syllabus for researchers in copyright management, open licenses, open access, production of a data management plan.
Necessity of training students to allow them to produce works they can disseminate. Syllabus for students in copyright management and open licenses.
Reaching maximum circulation of outputs. Different modalities of disseminating research outputs and producing knowledge transfer among the targeted disciplinary communities and among society at large.
Persisting value of printed outputs. Managing OA combined with printed outputs.
Incapacity of current institutional repositories to include multimedia formats Documenting pilot projects. Possibility of using different repositories or producing peer-reviewed institutional websites or websites produced in collaboration with publishers.
Specialised publishers and journals in the fields of ADM are not in OA or included among DOAJ Documenting pilot projects. Model of letters.

Format of the guidelines[edit]

What do we produce

Other formats - references:

iopensa (talk) 08:04, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One-page factsheets on Open Science topics with a focus on Molecular Medicine - Brief, informative, and easy-to-understand one-page factsheets on Open Science topics, Created by the Max-Delbrück-Centre for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association Design by Vetenskap & Allmänhet https://www.orion-openscience.eu/public/2019-02/201810-VA-Orion-FactSheets-V5.pdf. iopensa (talk) 08:53, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

subtitles?[edit]

shall we add a subtitle to each main block of content similar to the 'Why' section? e.g. Why : Why Open Science is important and its advantage for research and society Who : Who is using the guidelines? When : At what point of your research project/workflow are you? (or a nicer wording) What : What kind of output/material do you want to release in OA? How : Resources, tools and best practices to open your research Where : Resources, tools and best practices to open your research

I don't like the wording but its just an example Chi.barbieri (talk) 07:56, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we can go for it. Also, I added another section that can be a subpage: Why?/Open Science policies in Schwitzerland. Etothczifra (talk) 13:49, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What[edit]

feedback: following the project meeting I added 'data visualisation and infographics' 'maps': should we also add 'maps' as a separate output? 'complex objects': one partner talked about 'complex objects', which I think is what we mean by 'multimedia' Chi.barbieri (talk) 08:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks a lot! I prefer to keep "complex objects", the data sharing challenges associated with them are also discussed here: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9041746?denied= Etothczifra (talk) 11:59, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

check sensitive information, anonymization[edit]

feedback: partners want to know more about how to check sensitive information and anonymise data should we make one/two subpage/s under 'how' on this? Chi.barbieri (talk) 08:26, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm working on a section on this and was thinking about the whole section of thishttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Science_for_Arts,_Design_and_Music/Guidelines/Before could be references under the 'How' section so that it's better visible. Etothczifra (talk) 14:12, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moving/mirroring the content of the "Before" page to the "How" section[edit]

Based on the feedback at the project meeting, I came to realize that we need to make all the information broken down to phases in the "Before" section more visible, also as part of the "How" section. Cross-linking the same sub-page from two entries will work the best, for now, I just linked the "Before"/"DMP" page to "How" but a more granular linking is needed, probably on the level of phases or even subheadings within the phases (e.g. 4 Phase 4: Preparing data, resources, research outputs for publication; 4.1 Preparing sensitive data and resources for publication. Let me know whether you agree and please feel free to edit accordingly. Etothczifra (talk) 13:05, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! FYI members for the advisory board suggested to rearrange the guidelines and give prominence to the 'what' Chi.barbieri (talk) 13:31, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Who?[edit]

feedback: partners are not convinced about this section. Are there really relevant differences for the mentioned groups of people with regard to Open Science? Or is the section there just for the sake of having all Ws questions? Chi.barbieri (talk) 07:35, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OA quality check[edit]

feedback: partners have raised the issue of quality check and OA: "OA can make it difficult for users to assess the quality of the content, especially if they have little prior knowledge, e.g. students. Platforms and databases do not always offer orientation. Publishers in their role as intermediaries can regain importance in this context." Do we want to address this issue? If so where? Chi.barbieri (talk) 07:41, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good to know ad fair point! I address trust issues under "how to select a publication venue" but we can dedicate a whole subsection to that. For books, see also: https://oabooks-toolkit.org/faqs/15945667-about-open-acces-publishing/article/1140709-are-open-access-books-peer-reviewed or we can accommodate them under a section dedicated to peer review. Etothczifra (talk) 08:29, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Open_Science_for_Arts,_Design_and_Music/Guidelines&oldid=23707094"