Hugh Glaser, Ian Millard, and Les Carr have self-archived "RKBExplorer: Repositories, Linked Data and Research Support" in the ECS EPrints Repository.

Here's an excerpt:

RKBExplorer (http://rkbexplorer.com/) is a system for publishing Linked Data to Semantic Web standards, also providing a browser that allows users to explore this interlinked Web of Data, primarily in the domain of scientific endeavour. As part of the activity, we have harvested the metadata from a number of the larger ePrints repositories into http://eprints.rkbexplorer.com, and republished it as Linked Data. This allows the RKBExplorer browser to present a unified view of these repositories and related data from other sources such as dblp and dbpedia (a Semantic Web version of Wikipedia). Users can thus investigate concepts related to the ePrints people and articles, such as related people, projects and institutions.

Alma Swan has self-archived her presentation "Keynote: Remember Repositories? They Were All the Rage" in The ECS EPrints Repository.

The National Library of Medicine's Reference & Web Services Section is recruiting a Systems Librarian.

Here's an excerpt from the ad:

As a member of our staff, you will have the opportunity to:

• Develop and support Web 2.0 technologies like blogs and wikis
• Manage websites, including http://www.nlm.nih.gov
• Manage and support applications such as Vivisimo, NLM's search engine application and TeamSite, NLM's primary web content management system
• Collaborate with the MedlinePlus management team to ensure usability and customer satisfaction on http://medlineplus.gov, NLM's consumer health website
• Serve as technical liaison to NLM's IT department

Depending on the news source, the Harvard University Press has cut either six or seven positions.

Read more about it at "Layoffs and Restructuring Hit Harvard U. Press" and "Reorg at Harvard University Press Eliminates Six Positions."

Cardiff University's Information Services Directorate is recruiting a Project Manager for the Integrated Workflow for Institutional Repository Enhancement Project.

Here's an excerpt from the ad:

Cardiff University's Information Services Directorate (INSRV) provides a full range of IS, IT and Library services, supporting staff and students in their academic, research and business functions. MWE is a large IT project involving the deployment of Portal Services, Collaborative Tools and Business Integrations to Cardiff University's users, and will transform the day-to-day working experience of staff and students. The Institutional Repository (ORCA—Online Research @ Cardiff) is a digital repository for the University's research publications, making the full text freely available where possible.

The I-WIRE Project will develop a workflow and toolset, integrated into the MWE research portal, for the submission, indexing, and re-purposing of data and full text for staff publications in ORCA. You will have a significant role in the successful delivery of this externally-funded project.

The Chesapeake Project has released its Two-Year Pilot Project Evaluation.

Here's an excerpt:

The Chesapeake Project began as a collaborative, two-year pilot program with the goal of preserving born-digital legal information published directly to the Web. It was implemented in early 2007 by the Georgetown Law Library and the State Law Libraries of Maryland and Virginia. Having successfully completed its pilot phase, The Chesapeake Project' legal information archive is now expanding.

The following document comprises the final evaluation and account of The Chesapeake Project's accomplishments during its two-year pilot phase, spanning from February 27, 2007, to February 28, 2009.

During this time, the project's digital archive was populated with more than 4,300 digital items representing nearly 1,900 Web-published titles, the vast majority of which have no print counterpart. Each of these titles were harvested from the Web, stored within a secure digital archive and assigned permanent archive URLs. Today, each archived digital title remains accessible to users, despite whether or not the original digital files have been altered or removed from their original locations on the Web.

A 2008 analysis of the digital archive's content showed that more than eight percent of the titles archived by The Chesapeake Project had disappeared from their original URLs within the project's first year, but remained accessible thanks to the project's efforts. The current evaluation demonstrates that this figure has increased significantly over the past year. In fact, as of March 2009, nearly 14 percent of the project's archived titles—approximately one in seven—have disappeared from their original locations on the Web.

Anne Gentil-Beccot, Salvatore Mele, and Travis Brooks have self-archived "Citing and Reading Behaviours in High-Energy Physics. How a Community Stopped Worrying about Journals and Learned to Love Repositories" in arXiv.org.

Here's an excerpt:

Contemporary scholarly discourse follows many alternative routes in addition to the three-century old tradition of publication in peer-reviewed journals. The field of High- Energy Physics (HEP) has explored alternative communication strategies for decades, initially via the mass mailing of paper copies of preliminary manuscripts, then via the inception of the first online repositories and digital libraries.

This field is uniquely placed to answer recurrent questions raised by the current trends in scholarly communication: is there an advantage for scientists to make their work available through repositories, often in preliminary form? Is there an advantage to publishing in Open Access journals? Do scientists still read journals or do they use digital repositories?

The analysis of citation data demonstrates that free and immediate online dissemination of preprints creates an immense citation advantage in HEP, whereas publication in Open Access journals presents no discernible advantage. In addition, the analysis of clickstreams in the leading digital library of the field shows that HEP scientists seldom read journals, preferring preprints instead.

A survey presented at a recent Wiley-Blackwell Executive Seminar on "Journals Publishing: Policy and Practice in an Uncertain Market" shows that scholarly societies are surprisingly optimistic about the effect of the global downturn on their publishing operations.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Sixty percent of professional and scholarly societies believe that the global economic downturn might be a stimulus to introducing efficiencies within their organizations, while 57% think it might provide opportunities for launching new activities or services for their members, according to a new study presented at the Wiley-Blackwell Executive Seminar held at the Royal Society, London, on June 19th 2009.

The study, carried out by Wiley-Blackwell, the leading publisher for professional and scholarly societies, examined the potential impact of the economic downturn on its society publishing partners. Sixty-eight percent characterized the global economic downturn as moderately negative, while 17% stated that it will have minimal negative impact or may even be beneficial.

Asked to rank the expected impact of the economic downturn on each category of their organization’s revenues or assets, more than 75% of society officers believed that there would be a very or slightly negative impact on their membership dues and conference income, with the most concern expressed about endowments and investments. Thirty-two percent did not anticipate any change in income from publishing, forty-seven percent believed it could be slightly affected, while 17% percent felt this area may be very affected.

In terms of strategies to ride out the economic crunch, 41% said that they would consider downsizing while a further 41% said they would consider expanding. More than half (54%) felt that the way to navigate the recession was outsourcing some of their core activities, such as publishing. Two-thirds thought that their publishing needs would not change during the recession, while one-third thought they would. . . .

The survey, carried out by Wiley-Blackwell in Spring 2009, was completed by 47 officers from scholarly and professional societies ranging in size from less than 500 members to more than 25,000, and from a variety of subject disciplines. The majority of respondents were based in Europe and the United States.