Michael Jubb at the Research Information Network blogs about the new journal version standards released by the NISO/ALPSP JAV Technical Working Group (seriously?). I'm all for standards, even if they appear a bit late, and slightly anachronistic.
I'm not sure how long we, as a society, will continue saying something is finished, especially items like "journal" articles. The standards presume a publication date, even if they've changed the terminology:
"Journal articles record the 'minutes of science' and are intended as a fixed record
of a body of work at a moment in time chosen by the scholar. This leads us to the Version of Record as a useful definition for formalizing academic achievement."
I'm disappointed to see that they dropped concepts, such as "siblings" (related papers on the same subject, probably using the same research), which could have made some review much easier. I also think it has limited the long-term use of the terms given the relatively rapid pace at which the means of dissemination of knowledge is changing, esp. compared to the length of time it took them to come up with the standards.
The report definitely deserves more than the quick reading I've given it. The current version is less than 27 pages, and still manages to introduce the terms, their definitions, and includes some of the formal discussions that took place during the process.
Showing posts with label electronic journal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label electronic journal. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Must remember . . .
It's impossible to read everything I feel that I need to, let alone everything I want to. Add blogging, or writing, or otherwise keeping track of the reading and my thoughts about what I've read and . . . I really admire people who can do it regularly.
More things I haven't kept up with, but think are important:
--Charles W. Bailey has updated his Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography, as posted to COLLDV-L (a collection development listserv) . A well-developed list of more things that I should read! Actually, I've probably read about a third of it. Okay, maybe a quarter.
--With possibly the worst "well, duh," headline ever, the New York Times declared, Tech's Late Adopters Prefer the Tried and True." Since the article appeared in the same week that I finally broke down and replaced my perfectly good seven-year-old Compaq with a new computer, it managed to make me feel less guilty about holding on to the old machine for so long (because it still works!), and about finally abandoning it due to the uncomfortable work-arounds necessary to actually use it. It's one thing to keep a TRS-80 as a perfectly good word processor--as a customer actually did in the mid-90s when I was working at Radio Shack. It's another to try to use an orphan program on a networked computer. Good-bye, Netscape (which I deleted a few weeks ago) .
--And this Inside Higher Ed piece is likely to be revisited at a later date: Abandoning Print, Not Peer Review. This is an article about Indiana Library's new online-only journal, Museum Anthropology Review. With a super-organized editor at the helm, it sounds like it's doing well. What the article doesn't mention is the structure and the organization, not just copyeditors and graphic designers, that a University Press or other publisher brings to the table. There is an entire department at UIP that has several people who spend a good portion of every day tracking articles, making sure that changes are made, drafts are turned in, and that everything is organized by arbitrary deadlines that ensure that Indiana University and other libraries, organizations, and individuals receive their online or print scholarship in a timely and coherent manner. Like most people in publishing I love academia, and have great respect for academics, but I have no illusions about the quality or timeliness of the writing that will frequently be the result when publishers are taken out of the equation. More power to Jason Baird Jackson, the intrepid editor.
More things I haven't kept up with, but think are important:
--Charles W. Bailey has updated his Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography, as posted to COLLDV-L (a collection development listserv) . A well-developed list of more things that I should read! Actually, I've probably read about a third of it. Okay, maybe a quarter.
--With possibly the worst "well, duh," headline ever, the New York Times declared, Tech's Late Adopters Prefer the Tried and True." Since the article appeared in the same week that I finally broke down and replaced my perfectly good seven-year-old Compaq with a new computer, it managed to make me feel less guilty about holding on to the old machine for so long (because it still works!), and about finally abandoning it due to the uncomfortable work-arounds necessary to actually use it. It's one thing to keep a TRS-80 as a perfectly good word processor--as a customer actually did in the mid-90s when I was working at Radio Shack. It's another to try to use an orphan program on a networked computer. Good-bye, Netscape (which I deleted a few weeks ago) .
--And this Inside Higher Ed piece is likely to be revisited at a later date: Abandoning Print, Not Peer Review. This is an article about Indiana Library's new online-only journal, Museum Anthropology Review. With a super-organized editor at the helm, it sounds like it's doing well. What the article doesn't mention is the structure and the organization, not just copyeditors and graphic designers, that a University Press or other publisher brings to the table. There is an entire department at UIP that has several people who spend a good portion of every day tracking articles, making sure that changes are made, drafts are turned in, and that everything is organized by arbitrary deadlines that ensure that Indiana University and other libraries, organizations, and individuals receive their online or print scholarship in a timely and coherent manner. Like most people in publishing I love academia, and have great respect for academics, but I have no illusions about the quality or timeliness of the writing that will frequently be the result when publishers are taken out of the equation. More power to Jason Baird Jackson, the intrepid editor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)