Re: DISCLAIMER (was Re: [CfP] Journal of Web Semantics (JWS) - Special Issue on Ontology Engineering)

On 2017-08-07 11:57, Krzysztof Janowicz wrote:
> On 08/07/2017 11:34 AM, Sarven Capadisli wrote:
>> On 2017-08-05 12:59, Harry Halpin wrote:
>>> While normally I consider the desire to publish scientific papers in
>>> HTML as quite silly given the lack of support of MathML by major
>>> browsers and the need to use LateX in computer science,
>> Grab coffee.
>>
>> I think that this is not a showstopper because the alternative is not:
>>
>> * resort to LaTeX/Word..
>> * resort to handing publicly funded work to a company
> 
> This has nothing to do with LaTeX versus HTML.
> 
>> * resort to paying fees to get access back to the work
> 
> Same here.

I did not raise HTML in that argument. The point was to probe the
obvious options. What the journal (and the publisher) requires for
participation is a fact. I think we can work with or improve the
imperfections if and only if we invest our energy towards alternative
options, ie. starting with moving away from the "publishing industry".

>> * resort to numbing Web researchers from using the native Web stack
>>
>> Again, that's precisely what the Web Semantics journal is doing and
>> encouraging. Shameful.
> 
> This kind of strong wording is damaging your mission. It also paints an
> inaccurate picture of the publishing industry.
I don't think focusing on my tone is going to be fruitful.

Happy to discuss what the journal offers to the academics of this
community beyond first and foremost obeying the publisher's needs. The
measurable damage that the Web Semantics journal (et al) is doing to the
"mission" is that, Web academics (as well as teams and labs) lack
experience to represent and disseminate their knowledge using the native
Web stack. Not only are they divorced from that responsibility, we all
pay for the consequences of the options that are given to us.
Researchers are also robbed from improving their and team's knowledge
over time.

The Web enables anyone to be a "publisher". It doesn't require
permission or a middle person. What does the "publishing industry"
provide that we can't achieve and better?

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