W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > May 2016

Re: CFP: First International Workshop on Reproducible Open Science (RepScience 2016)

From: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 08:04:22 -0400
To: Oscar Corcho <ocorcho@fi.upm.es>, "Oscar Corcho (UPM)" <ocorcho@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Public LOD <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web W3C <semantic-web@w3.org>, e-ciencia@upv.es
Message-ID: <5731CE46.3080002@csarven.ca>
On 2016-05-10 06:51, Oscar Corcho wrote:
> ###### Paper Submission ######
>
> Authors are invited to submit original, unpublished research papers.
> Submitted manuscripts will have to be in the range of 4000-5000 words and
> edited with OpenOffice Writer or Microsoft Word, following the "Matters of
> style" section in the author guidelines for D-Lib Magazine.
>
> Papers submitted to the workshop will undergo a single-blind peer-review
> process by Program Committee members. Accepted papers will be published as
> a special issue of the D-Lib Magazine journal, in the first Quarter of
> 2017. To be published on the proceedings, accepted contributions should be
> revised according to the reviews and consider the feedback from the
> workshop. Moreover, at least one author is required to register and
> present the paper at the workshop.

Why is this workshop encouraging "reproducible" "open science" via paper 
and desktop/print centric tools and formats?

Is the intention to "reproduce" still based on classical methods? For 
example, how do you propose that the accepted works of this workshop are 
reproduced?

What do you think about taking the initiative towards this "paradigm shift":

http://csarven.ca/linked-research-scholarly-communication

If that is of interest, what do you think it would require for this 
workshop to embrace that?

-Sarven
http://csarven.ca/#i
Received on Tuesday, 10 May 2016 12:04:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 25 May 2016 10:59:46 UTC