Re: scientific publishing process (was Re: Cost and access)

"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> writes:
>> Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the
>> paper, are they?
>
> For reviewing, what the authors intend is extremely important.  Having
> different rendering of the paper interfere with the authors' message is
> something that should be avoided at all costs.

Really? So, for example, you think that a reviewer with impared vision
should, for example, be forced to review a paper using the authors
rendering, regardless of whether they can read it or not?

Of course, this is an extreme example, although not an unrealistic one.
It is fundamentally any different from my desire as I get older to be
able to change font size and refill paragraphs with ease. I see a
difference of scale, that is all.


> Similarly for reading papers, if the rendering of the paper interferes
> with the authors' message, that is a failure of the process.

Yes, I agree. Which is why, I believe, that the rendering of a paper
should be up to the reader.

Phil

Received on Monday, 6 October 2014 16:33:07 UTC