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

On 2014-10-08 14:10, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> Done.
>
> The goal of a new paper-preparation and display system should, however,
> be to be better than what is currently available.  Most HTML-based
> solutions do not exploit the benefits of HTML, strangely enough.
>
> Consider, for example, citation links.  They generally jump you to the
> references section.  They should instead pop up the reference, as is
> done in Wikipedia.
>
> Similarly for links to figures.  Instead of blindly jumping to the
> figure, they should do something better, perhaps popping up the figure
> or, if the figure is already visible, just highlighting it.
>
> I have put in both of these as issues.

Thanks a lot for the issues! Really great to have this feedback.

I have resolved and commented on some of those already, and will look at 
the rest very shortly.

I am all for improving the interaction as well. I'd like to state again 
that the development was so far focused on adhering to the LNCS/ACM 
guidelines, and improving the final PDF/print product. That is to get on 
reasonable grounds with the "state of the art".

Moving on: I plan to bring in the interaction and framework to easily 
semantically enrich the document as well as the overall UX. I have some 
preliminary code in my dev branch, and will bring it forward, and would 
like feedback as well.

Thanks again and please continue to bring forward any issues or feature 
requests. Contributors are most welcome!

-Sarven
http://csarven.ca/#i