Henry was the first Nature Network blogger to answer a few questions about science blogging that we discussed in the Nature Network Bloggers forum. Some more posts can be found here and here. 1. What is your blog about? I am interested in how the internet is changing the way we publish and communicate science. I write from the perspective of someone that consumes and sometimes produces science.

The Article Authoring Tag Set of the National Library of Medicine (NLM DTD for short) creates a standardized format for new journal articles that can be used by authors to submit publications to journals and to archives such as PubMed Central.[1] The Microsoft Word Article Authoring Add-in that was released earlier this year reads and writes this format.

Working in science is as much about reading papers as it is about writing papers. There are usually two ways you can come across an interesting scientific paper: * Active Searching. Literature search on a particular topic * Passive Browsing. Scanning the literature in regular intervals for papers of interest The focused active search is typically used when you collect information for a research project or write a paper or grant proposal.

Ben Goldacre: Bad Science. Published September 2008 by Fourth Estate Ltd. Paperback, 352 pages, ISBN 0007240198 Ben Goldacre, blogger of the Bad Science[1] column in the Guardian newspaper, in September published a book based on material from his blog. Just like the newspaper column, the book is primarily intended for a general audience rather than the trained scientist or medical doctor.

Today is Open Access Day1, intended to broaden awareness and understanding of Open Access. Many science bloggers have written about Open Access today,and links to a lot of these blog posts have been collected by Bora Zivkovic2 or are found in the FriendFeed room set up for the day3.

The 2008 Nobel Prizes will be announced next week, starting with the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine on Monday. There will be a live webcast on Monday at 9:30 AM GMT for those interested1. As every year just before the announcement, speculation about this year's winners is in full swing. M. William Lensch, here on Nature Network correctly predicted last year's winners2, and this year he is trying it again3.

Good software solves a problem. When one journal after another switched to PDF as electronic document format, and journals started to appear only in electronic form, storing papers as printouts in folders became impractical. But the PDF files will soon start to clutter the hard drive, despite efforts to organize them by topic, year or author. At least for Macintosh users, Papers is one practical and elegant solution to this problem.

This blog post is about presentations.

The German Academic International Network (GAIN) ¹ informs German researchers working in North America about research opportunities in Germany. The implied intention is to lure German researchers back to Germany.

Conference 2.0 – A scheduled meeting of people sharing a common interest that takes advantage of Web 2.0 ¹ concepts. Scientific conferences are essential both for the exchange of ideas and for networking. But they don’t have to be organized the same way as 10-20 years ago. Web 2.0 tools now allow much broader user participation before, during and after the conference.

In the last few months we have seen an ever increasing number of new social networking (Web 2.0) sites for scientists. Good Web 2.0 tools for scientists primarily try to solve a problem. But by adding a social aspect, they will gain useful features that would otherwise not be possible. Eva Amsen has recently written a great blog post about this1.