W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > August 2017

Re: DISCLAIMER (was Re: [CfP] Journal of Web Semantics (JWS) - Special Issue on Ontology Engineering)

From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 13:51:29 +0200
To: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>, semantic-web@w3.org
Message-ID: <db1a3664-35c7-08d2-29a9-30b609f89433@ucsb.edu>
I guess I am totally missing the point (and sorry for that) but I do not 
understand why this is about HTML versus LaTeX instead of being about 
different paradigms of academic publishing. These two issues are related 
but not the same. I want to change scientific publishing in terms of the 
workflows, not the representation layer.

Jano

> So, I don't actually view the publishers as an "enemy". I just think
> they are insignificant.

I don't agree but that is probably a non-technical and not SW related 
discussion.

On 08/07/2017 01:30 PM, Sarven Capadisli wrote:
> On 2017-08-07 12:47, Krzysztof Janowicz wrote:
>> On 08/07/2017 12:19 PM, Alexander Garcia Castro wrote:
>>> Krzysztof , why is this picture of the publishing industry inaccurate?
>>> there must be some truth there because it is not just Sarven  the one
>>> with this perception -others are, however, less vociferous. Maybe we
>>> need less political correctness with businesses that provide a service
>>> to us (the message being we can remove/change them) and more
>>> rightfulness with the community of researchers as a whole.
>> Because the 'publishing industry' is not our enemy. The relation between
>> the publishing industry and science is very complex with beneficiaries
>> from both sides and a careful balance that we have to strike and
>> renegotiate as time progresses. This relationship goes back more than
>> 300 years. If we paint a one-sided image of this relation, we are not
>> doing ourselves a favor. Instead, we should work with them to actively
>> shape this relationship. In many domains such as Computer Science, the
>> publishing industry's role is declining (which I believe is good) and
>> this puts us into a unique position and explains the rapid development
>> within the industry. Calling the behavior of one side shameful (and
>> their work junk) is not what one would call an invitation.
> The publishers agenda: increase profit margin. Its consequences are what
> the researchers and citizens pay for in sociotechnical terms in the
> meantime.
>
> So, I don't actually view the publishers as an "enemy". I just think
> they are insignificant. We should invest our energy towards building and
> using solutions that we actually need.
>
>>> As a disclaimer: I dont receive any money from the publishing
>>> industry. I am not an editor for any journal and at this moment I dont
>>> have any business relation with the publishing industry other than
>>> paying APCs for something that I really dont understand what am I
>>> paying for.
>> I am an editor of a journal and I work with the publishing industry and
>> I believe in understanding an industry before criticizing them. So far,
>> Pascal Hitzler and I have fostered open and transparent reviews, open
>> access to manuscripts in all stages, open and free *full *metadata, and
>> Linked Data usage by said industry. I believe that this a more fruitful
>> way to bringing change.
>
> Thank you for your commitment and achievements.
>
> If you don't mind, I'd like to dig further, my reply:
>
> * http://csarven.ca/web-science-from-404-to-200#semantic-web-journal
> *
> http://csarven.ca/web-science-from-404-to-200#semant-web-dog-food-and-scholarlydata
>
> Bottom line: we are in 2017 and the Semantic Web community is still
> being told to use desktop/print options. There is nothing above and
> beyond some metadata (eg title, authors, abstract, document-centric
> references?..) to takeaway. How do I find something interesting or
> non-trivial?
>
> Is this still relevant:
> https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html#Universality ?
>
> What's the canonical or the authoritative URI for the works?
>
> What would it take SWJ to welcome contributions that are represented in
> native Web formats, and even published at personal or institution
> Webspaces as the canonical representations? I've asked SWJ this in the
> past, but didn't receive a response, so I'm asking again in mid 2017. Is
> there a plan that's documented and publicly accessible? As far as truly
> "eating our own dogfood", what changed since SWJ's existence (2009?) How
> can we communicate our work any different today?
>
> Will 2018 be the year for the "Semantic" "Web" scholars?
>
> -Sarven
> http://csarven.ca/#i
>

-- 
Krzysztof Janowicz

Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060

Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu
Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
Received on Monday, 7 August 2017 11:51:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 7 August 2017 11:52:09 UTC