W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-rd@w3.org > February 2012

Re: suggestion for "Copyright Policy" section

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 09:32:51 +0100
Message-ID: <4F45F9B3.5060006@w3.org>
To: simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk
CC: RDWG <public-wai-rd@w3.org>
Hi Simon,

We are publishing all accepted papers as part of the proceedings. How we 
then further use these contributions in the WG Note should not be 
predetermined upfront, in my opinion. There may be reasons to decide one 
way or the other depending on how each symposium goes.

Also, I was not necessarily referring to the quality of the papers 
though that may sometimes be an issue. I am also thinking of other 
issues, for example if we decide to accept many papers (because we 
switched to a format with less presentation time and more discussion 
time) then the WG Note would basically be a long list of appendices.

Best,
   Shadi


On 23.2.2012 09:20, Simon Harper wrote:
> Hi Shadi,
>
> ...and I disagree. If we accept a paper we are agreeing to its
> publication (as far as I'm concerned) otherwise we should not accept it,
> and if we are not able to get enough good quality papers for a specific
> seminar then maybe that says something about the topic of that seminar.
>
> Cheers
>
> Si.
>
> PS I check my email at 08:00 and 17:00 GMT. If you require a faster
> response please include the word 'fast' in the subject line.
>
> =======================
> Simon Harper
> http://simon.harper.name/about/card/
>
> University of Manchester (UK)
> Web Ergonomics Lab - Information Management Group
> http://wel.cs.manchester.ac.uk
>
>
> On 23/02/12 08:13, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> I do not think that we should have a precondition that obligates us to
>> fully include all the papers in the consolidated note, for a number of
>> reasons. I think that the editors with the group should be flexible in
>> making such a decision depending on how the symposium pans out.
>>
>> Best,
>> Shadi
>>
>>
>> On 23.2.2012 08:47, Simon Harper wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> So for me I feel that if we accept a paper we should include it -
>>> otherwise we should not accept it. Further, the argument that
>>> publications included as part of the site, ie on the web are as citable
>>> as the note - just doesn't hold up. I see the note as the proceedings of
>>> the seminar. In this case we could have 2 sections the first being by
>>> the editors, the second being each paper - referenced as a proceedings.
>>> If the site has the same status as the note then why do we have a note
>>> at all?
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> Si.
>>>
>>> PS I check my email at 08:00 and 17:00 GMT. If you require a faster
>>> response please include the word 'fast' in the subject line.
>>>
>>> =======================
>>> Simon Harper
>>> http://simon.harper.name/about/card/
>>>
>>> University of Manchester (UK)
>>> Web Ergonomics Lab - Information Management Group
>>> http://wel.cs.manchester.ac.uk
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22/02/12 22:31, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
>>>> Ref: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Talk:Mobile_Pre_CFP>
>>>>
>>>> Instead of: "Accepted papers will be published - in attributable form
>>>> - as part of the proceedings and in the ensuing publication, which
>>>> will be published using the W3C Document License."
>>>>
>>>> Consider: "Accepted papers will be published as part of the
>>>> proceedings. Accepted papers may also be referenced or included (in
>>>> full or in part) in attributable form in the ensuing publication,
>>>> which will be published using the W3C Document License."
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Shadi
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office
Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG)
Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2012 08:33:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 February 2012 08:33:19 GMT