- From: Daniel Schwabe <dschwabe@inf.puc-rio.br>
- Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:10:23 -0300
- To: Tim Finin <finin@cs.umbc.edu>
- CC: David Huynh <dfhuynh@alum.mit.edu>, public-lod@w3.org, semantic-web@w3c.org
Tim Finin wrote: > > David Huynh wrote: >> I think that even small things can make the SW effort feel more >> welcoming, and more open, toward people with less interest in data >> modeling and data linking. For example, the ISWC conferences have >> been using a page layout format of one column 4.5" wide (wasting 4" >> on a letter-size page). Most screenshots are landscape-oriented. So >> people who want to show screenshots in ISWC papers either have to >> resize their screenshots to unreadable sizes, or crop them. If >> there's an opportunity to adopt a two column layout, allowing >> screenshots to stretch across the columns, that would make someone >> like me a little happier publishing UI work to ISWC. :-) Maybe >> folks on these lists who are interested in publishing UI work to ISWC >> can vote if they want a more accommodating page layout... > > ISWC uses Springer to publish its proceedings as an LNCS volume, > which is done in a book sized format. This determines the formatting > requirements. This is unlikely to change as long as ISWC continues to > use Springer. Springer has been very accommodating in allowing ISWC > to simultaneously make the papers available online with free access, > which another publisher (e.g., ACM or IEEE) would probably not agree > to. So I think that it is unlikely to change anytime soon. I agree with David; Springer's format is quite wasteful in terms of space. I have argued elsewhere about this, and I am yet to get a good argument in favor of Springer's format. Actually, Springer only agreed to allow free online access because I (as General Chair of ISWC 2006) had already negotiated with IEEE to publish the proceedings for ISWC 2006 with them (in 2 col format). IEEE (CS Press) does allow it as a rule. As part of of the agreement to remain with Springer, they exceptionally agreed to allow us to publish the proceedings online (in a separate website) with free access. So they were accommodating simply because they would have lost the series otherwise... Personally, I think it is absurd for any conference dealing with the Web to only publish its proceedings in a restricted-access website, but this is another discussion. Taking the opportunity, and generalizing David's point, publishing UI work in general in printed form is very difficult, not to mention describing some of the features in words. Nothing like having direct experience with the actual interface... We should be able to do better than just print in using the Web as a (perhaps complementary) publishing medium! Cheers Daniel
Received on Tuesday, 19 August 2008 14:11:18 UTC