- From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
- Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 13:51:29 +0200
- To: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>, semantic-web@w3.org
I guess I am totally missing the point (and sorry for that) but I do not understand why this is about HTML versus LaTeX instead of being about different paradigms of academic publishing. These two issues are related but not the same. I want to change scientific publishing in terms of the workflows, not the representation layer. Jano > So, I don't actually view the publishers as an "enemy". I just think > they are insignificant. I don't agree but that is probably a non-technical and not SW related discussion. On 08/07/2017 01:30 PM, Sarven Capadisli wrote: > On 2017-08-07 12:47, Krzysztof Janowicz wrote: >> On 08/07/2017 12:19 PM, Alexander Garcia Castro wrote: >>> Krzysztof , why is this picture of the publishing industry inaccurate? >>> there must be some truth there because it is not just Sarven the one >>> with this perception -others are, however, less vociferous. Maybe we >>> need less political correctness with businesses that provide a service >>> to us (the message being we can remove/change them) and more >>> rightfulness with the community of researchers as a whole. >> Because the 'publishing industry' is not our enemy. The relation between >> the publishing industry and science is very complex with beneficiaries >> from both sides and a careful balance that we have to strike and >> renegotiate as time progresses. This relationship goes back more than >> 300 years. If we paint a one-sided image of this relation, we are not >> doing ourselves a favor. Instead, we should work with them to actively >> shape this relationship. In many domains such as Computer Science, the >> publishing industry's role is declining (which I believe is good) and >> this puts us into a unique position and explains the rapid development >> within the industry. Calling the behavior of one side shameful (and >> their work junk) is not what one would call an invitation. > The publishers agenda: increase profit margin. Its consequences are what > the researchers and citizens pay for in sociotechnical terms in the > meantime. > > So, I don't actually view the publishers as an "enemy". I just think > they are insignificant. We should invest our energy towards building and > using solutions that we actually need. > >>> As a disclaimer: I dont receive any money from the publishing >>> industry. I am not an editor for any journal and at this moment I dont >>> have any business relation with the publishing industry other than >>> paying APCs for something that I really dont understand what am I >>> paying for. >> I am an editor of a journal and I work with the publishing industry and >> I believe in understanding an industry before criticizing them. So far, >> Pascal Hitzler and I have fostered open and transparent reviews, open >> access to manuscripts in all stages, open and free *full *metadata, and >> Linked Data usage by said industry. I believe that this a more fruitful >> way to bringing change. > > Thank you for your commitment and achievements. > > If you don't mind, I'd like to dig further, my reply: > > * http://csarven.ca/web-science-from-404-to-200#semantic-web-journal > * > http://csarven.ca/web-science-from-404-to-200#semant-web-dog-food-and-scholarlydata > > Bottom line: we are in 2017 and the Semantic Web community is still > being told to use desktop/print options. There is nothing above and > beyond some metadata (eg title, authors, abstract, document-centric > references?..) to takeaway. How do I find something interesting or > non-trivial? > > Is this still relevant: > https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html#Universality ? > > What's the canonical or the authoritative URI for the works? > > What would it take SWJ to welcome contributions that are represented in > native Web formats, and even published at personal or institution > Webspaces as the canonical representations? I've asked SWJ this in the > past, but didn't receive a response, so I'm asking again in mid 2017. Is > there a plan that's documented and publicly accessible? As far as truly > "eating our own dogfood", what changed since SWJ's existence (2009?) How > can we communicate our work any different today? > > Will 2018 be the year for the "Semantic" "Web" scholars? > > -Sarven > http://csarven.ca/#i > -- Krzysztof Janowicz Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
Received on Monday, 7 August 2017 11:51:59 UTC