The U.S.A and European nanosafety communities have a longstanding history of collaboration. On both sides there are working groups, NanoWG and WG-F (previously called WG4) of the NanoSafety Cluster. I have been chair of WG4 for about three years and still active in the group, though in the past half year, without dedicated funding, less active. That is already changing again with the imminent start of the NanoCommons project.

Hi all, welcome to this winter solstice challenge! Umm, to not give our southern hemisphere colleagues not a disadvantage, as their winter solstice has already passes, you’re up for a summer solstice challenge! Introduction So, you know ImpactStory and Altmetric.com (if not, browse my blog); these are wonderful tools to see what people are doing with your work.

It takes effort to move scholarly publishing forward. And the traditional publishers have not all shown to be good at that: we’re still basically stuck with machine-broken channels like PDFs and ReadCubes. They seem to all love text mining, but only if they can do it themselves. Fortunately, there are plenty of people who do like to make a difference and like to innovate. I find this important, because if we do not do it, who will.

SWAT4LS was once again a great meeting. I doubt I will find time soon enough to write up notes, but at least I can post the eNanoMapper poster I presented, which is available from F1000Research:

In 2010 Samuel Lampa and I started a pet project: collecting pK _a data: he was working on RDF extension of MediaWiki and I like consuming RDF data. We started DrugMet. When you read this post, this MediaWiki installation may already be down, which is why I am migrating the data to Wikidata. Why?

Last week the huge, bi-annual ACS meeting took place (#ACSSanDiego), during which commonly new drug (leads) are disclosed.

Adding chemical compounds to Wikidata is not difficult. You can store the chemical formula (P274), (canonical) SMILES (P233), InChIKey (P235) (and InChI (P234), of course), as well various database identifiers (see what I wrote about that here ]). It also allows storing of the provenance, and has predicates for that too. So, to enter a new structure for a compound, you should enter the compound information to Wikidata.

Source: Wikipedia. CC-BY-SA April this year I blogged about an important SPARQL query for many chemists: getting CAS registry numbers from Wikidata. This is relevant for two reasons: CAS works together with Wikimedia on a large, free CAS-to-structure database Wikidata is CCZero The original effort validated about eight thousand registry numbers, made available via Wikipedia and the Common Chemistry website.

If you are a scientist you have heard about the ORCID identifier by now. If not, you have been focusing on groundbreaking research and isolated yourself from the rest of the world, just to make it perfect and get that Nobel prize next year.

The Royal Society of Chemistry and Wikipedia just released an interesting press release: This leaves me with a lot of questions. I asked these in a comment awaiting moderation: Details on how to apply to access can be found here.

I previously wrote about the JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) which has become a de facto standard for sharing data by web services. I personally still prefer something using the Resource Description Framework (RDF) because of its clear link to ontologies, but perhaps JSON-LD combines the best of both worlds. The Open PHACTS API support various formats and this JSON is the default format used by the ops.js library.