W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2014

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

From: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 17:28:23 +0100
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Cc: Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, "Daniel Schwabe" <dschwabe@inf.puc-rio.br>, W3C Semantic Web IG <semantic-web@w3.org>, W3C LOD Mailing List <public-lod@w3.org>, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Bernadette Hyland <bhyland@3roundstones.com>
Message-ID: <87wq8df9i0.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk>
"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> writes:
>> It does MathML I think, which is then rendered client side. Or you could
>> drop math-mode straight through and render client side with mathjax.
> Well, somehow png files are being produced for some math, which is a failure.

Yeah, you have to tell it to do mathml. The problem is that older
versions of the browsers don't render mathml, and image rendering was
the only option.

> I don't know what the way to do this right would be, I just know that the
> There are many cases where line breaks and indentation are important for
> understanding.  Getting this sort of presentation right in latex is a pain for
> starters, but when it has been done, having the htlatex toolchain mess it up
> is a failure.

Indeed. I believe that there are plans in future versions of HTML to
introduce a "pre" tag which prefers indentation and line breaks.

>> Which gets us back to the chicken and egg situation. I would probably do
>> this; but, at the moment, ESWC and ISWC won't let me submit it. So, I'll
>> end up with the PDF output anyway.
> Well, I'm with ESWC and ISWC here.  The review process should be designed to
> make reviewing easy for reviewers.

I *only* use PDF when reviewing. I never use it for viewing anything
else. I only use it for reviewing since I am forced to. 

Experiences differ, so I find this a far from compelling argument.

>> This is why it is important that web conferences allow HTML, which is
>> where the argument started. 

> Why?  What are the benefits of HTML reviewing, right now?  What are the
> benefits of HTML publishing, right now?

Well, we've been through this before, so I'll not repeat myself.

Received on Monday, 6 October 2014 16:28:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:49:25 UTC