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

Re: suggestion for "Copyright Policy" section

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 00:17:52 +0100
To: "Christos Kouroupetroglou" <chris.kourou@gmail.com>, "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>
Cc: public-wai-rd@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.v95mz3puwxe0ny@widsith-3.local>
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:53:26 +0100, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Christos,
>
> Just to clarify: I did not say anywhere not to *reference* the papers  
> but rather not to commit ourselves to *copy* them into the WG Note.  
> Editors can choose to if they find appropriate for a given symposium.

It makes sense to have a formal reference for the papers accepted, from  
the note which summarises the event. I don't mind either way whether they  
are included in the copy of the Note itself.

cheers

chaals

> Best,
>    Shadi
>
>
> On 23.2.2012 16:11, Christos Kouroupetroglou wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I understand that accepting papers without publishing them in a
>> citable form is not an option and lowers significantly the prestige
>> and the incentives for attracting submissions in the future. I think
>> that Markel suggested the best solution up to now.
>>
>> Let's have two separate documents. The first being the proceedings
>> where all papers are included in a citable form (and we also have a
>> short presentation/introduction of them) and another being the W3C
>> note which provides the conclusions and the further research
>> suggestions of the editors and the working group in general.
>>
>> In that sense, I understand Shadi's opinion that we shouldn't commit
>> in referencing all papers from the symposium in the W3C note, since
>> not all of them may contribute significantly in the notes conclusions
>> and discussion. However, what will a research note without many
>> references to the symposium say? That we did the whole thing for
>> nothing. So the more the W3C note references to the proceedings the
>> more we show the importance of the event and the papers accepted.
>> Otherwise, we are organising a set of events without showing any
>> respect to the contributions and without actually taking them under
>> account seriously. Would you think that this is a good strategy for
>> attracting papers in the future? My point is that we shouldn't commit
>> in referencing all papers in the note (just for the shake of being
>> nice to authors), but we should try to do so in order to justify the
>> sympoium's existence.
>>
>> As for the quality of the papers and the symposium in general, I think
>> that only time and references gathered from other authors will tell.
>>
>> Last but not least I like more the second option of referencing to
>> papers of the symposium. Seeing it as a potential author this is a bit
>> more "formal" that the other and ties up better with the 2 documents
>> format.
>>
>> [2] A Niezio, M Eibegger, M. Goodwin, M Snaprud, Towards a score
>> function for WCAG 2.0 benchmarking, 2011. In Proc. of Website
>> Accessibility Metrics, Online Symposium 5 December 2011, Vigo,
>> Brajnik, O'Connor (eds.), http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics (and
>> link to http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics/paper11)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christos Kouroupetroglou
>>
>> 2012/2/23 Yehya Mohamad<yehya.mohamad@fit.fraunhofer.de>:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 23.02.2012 09:46, schrieb Shadi Abou-Zahra:
>>>
>>>> Hi Josh,
>>>>
>>>> On 23.2.2012 09:40, Joshue O Connor wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm a little confused about what the issue is. Quality seems to be a
>>>>> part of it but also it seems to be how we present the papers that we  
>>>>> do
>>>>> accept? I agree with Simon that if we accept a paper, we accept a  
>>>>> paper.
>>>>> So it should be a full citizen, and referenced in the normal manner.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is an incentive for people to submit.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think publication is being challenged. I think we all agree  
>>>> that
>>>> all accepted papers will be published as part of the proceedings (in a
>>>> referencable form and with a permanent URI).
>>>>
>>>> The question is if we then also need to always include these same  
>>>> papers
>>>> as appendices to the consolidated WG Note.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with Shadi, usually papers are published in the proceedings of  
>>> a
>>> conference, any publications beyond that try to select the most  
>>> interesting
>>> and promising papers/aspects of the conference to achieve deeper  
>>> impact. In
>>> this sense I would present it as -  all papers accepted are published  
>>> in the
>>> proceedings and the best papers will be presented in the notes-!
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Yehya
>>>
>>>
>>> Dr. Yehya Mohamad
>>>
>>> mailto:mohamad@fit.fraunhofer.de http://www.fit.fraunhofer.de/
>>>
>>> Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte Informationstechnik (FIT.UCC)
>>> [Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology (FIT.UCC)]
>>> Schloss Birlinghoven, D53757 Sankt Augustin (Germany)
>>> Tel: +49-2241-142846 Fax: +49-02241-1442846
>>> http://imergo.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan litt norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2012 23:18:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 February 2012 23:18:27 GMT