- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 13:15:16 -0700
- To: Diogo FC Patrao <djogopatrao@gmail.com>
- CC: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>, public-lod@w3.org
On 10/03/2014 10:25 AM, Diogo FC Patrao wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider > <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote: > > One problem with allowing HTML submission is ensuring that reviewers can > correctly view the submission as the authors intended it to be viewed. > How would you feel if your paper was rejected because one of the reviewers > could not view portions of it? At least with PDF there is a reasonably > good chance that every paper can be correctly viewed by all its reviewers, > even if they have to print it out. I don't think that the same claim can > be made for HTML-based systems. > > > > The majority of journals I'm familiar with mandates a certain format for > submission: font size, figure format, etc. So, in a HTML format submission, > there should be rules as well, a standard CSS and the right elements and > classes. Not different from getting a word(c) or latex template. This might help. However, someone has to do this, and ensure that the result is generally viewable. > > > Web conference vitally use the web in their reviewing and publishing > processes. Doesn't that show their allegiance to the web? Would the use > of HTML make a conference more webby? > > > As someone said, this is leading by example. Yes, but what makes HTML better for being webby than PDF? > > dfcp > > > > peter >
Received on Friday, 3 October 2014 20:15:55 UTC