- 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
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 UTC