Re: Publication of scientific research

Rob Warren <warren@muninn-project.org> writes:

> On 25-Apr-13, at 10:41 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
>> Scientists would rather eat their dogs than give up their favoured
>> editing environments.
>
> And chew off their own (or their RA's) foot as well.
>
> Most conference submission / reviewing software already asks for the basic
> meta-data boilerplate to help the reviewing process (authors, title,
> affiliation, etc...) and this is manually entered before the paper is ready.
>
> Why don't we generate the meta-data directly from this process and not bother
> with the hand editing of anything? 

http://www.russet.org.uk/blog/2366

The metadata on the HTML for this article comes directly from the
metadata that I entered into arXiv. 

I still prefer the situation where the metadata comes directly from the
file with the content in it.

> It would not be a stretch to get people to submit their citations file
> (Bibtex, RIS, etc...) along with the paper at camera ready and script
> the conversion to something semantic web friendly?
>
> This would neatly create the publications, citation and author graph in a
> stroke.

Yes, that would be nice.

>
>> Solution 2. Make it valuable to the authors.
>
> Outcome 1: Make it valuables to the social bookmarking / citation websites
> downstream to load directly into their systems and increase the visibility of
> the publication.


Yes. Again, the same page provides a bibtex download (which I use for
citing my own work). 

Phil

Received on Thursday, 25 April 2013 15:15:04 UTC