Re: With footnotes (was Re: Open Access to Journal of Web Semantics (JWS))

Dear Alexander and other likewise participants in the discussion,

I think this discussion lacks information about  (1) how the preprint server of JoWS is operated and
(2) how archival services need to be operated in general. Hence, I think you should inform yourself
before you utter strong claims.

(1) The preprint server of JoWS is under full control by the community. It is financially supported by Elsevier.
Authors do not pay a dime to have their paper there.

(2) Setting up an archival service is simple (indications are also given in the thread below, dozen more nice ideas fly around). 
Running an archival service is conceptually difficult and costly.
The issue is not even the amount of money by itself (about >10K per year for a moderate size journal like JoWS). 
The issue is that there are no established ways to channel money into such a task (the service provider cannot 
charge the head librarian for such a thing, unless it is a kind of publisher). Note: nothing stops the community from improving
the preprint server. If you offer free work to do it, I guess you will be very welcome. 

JoWS has found an excellent compromise with Elsever in order to offer a valuable service to the community at large,
if you want more: roll-up your sleeves! 

Kind regards,
Steffen Staab
JoWS EiC 2008-2014





> Am 09.08.2017 um 11:11 schrieb Alexander Garcia Castro <alexgarciac@gmail.com>:
> 
> First two paragraphs about the important issue and then my response about the pre print offered by the journal that Ian talks about. 
> 
> Publishers are now taking on the pre prints very actively. I should say here that pre prints owned by publishers are not in control of the community. If this part of the infrastructure is also in control of service providers then the only important asset that we researchers produce will be 100% controlled by someone else. Yes, I know that some people will argue that papers are not the only asset that we produce. Unfortunately  papers are the only asset that counts because everything in academia is paper centric. We are witnessing how  little by little service providers take control of everything we produce (all sorts of research objects). all the assets and therefore all the generated value and by doing so they gain an unnecessary influence in the market as a whole. They also have under control the metrics derived from those assets. IMHO lab information management systems, specialised gits, data repositories, etc must remain under our control; simply because this is critical infrastructure.
> 
> Once again, if moving scholarly communication forward is the real objective then we need a part of the infrastructure fully under our control. pre prints maintained by universities are somewhat "rigid" and dont allow the necessary  "hacking" that is needed in order to move away from the current system.  IMHO the Open Science Framework (OSF) offers a viable alternative. Perhaps not as decentralised as some would like but away enough from being in control of some few service providers. Also, open enough as to make experimentation easy. I see this OSF option as a platform for hacking and that is why I have strongly argued that we, the semantic we and ontology community, need a pre print server. hope this resonates with some people. 
> 
> As for the pre print Ian talks about
> 
> The pre print is at http://www.websemanticsjournal.org/index.php/ps/issue/archive <http://www.websemanticsjournal.org/index.php/ps/issue/archive> and
> 
>  "The Preprint Server provides readers with free electronic access to article preprints of the Journal of Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web at Elsevier."
> 
> so, what is the difference between a pre print and the final print? do u have to pay in order to have a paper archived at the pre print? does this pre print only archives papers published in the journal? 
> 
> Also, having a DOI is not such a big deal; ZENODO, not a formal pre print server, assigns DOIs to the things that u upload. So, if having a DOI is such a big deal one could simply upload the paper to ZENODO, get the DOI and then have it also anywhere else -yes, this is the decentralisation we currently have.
> 
> Pre prints are much more flexible than what the journal that Ian talks about offers, for instance: 
> 
> "PsyArXiv provides support for multiple versions of a file, within-browser rendering of manuscripts, inclusion of supplementary files, data, and code, appropriate metadata, and links to resulting journal articles including DOIs"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@cs.ox.ac.uk <mailto:ian.horrocks@cs.ox.ac.uk>> wrote:
> An important correction:
> 
> Articles on the preprint server are post-review, and differ from the published version only w.r.t. formatting.
> 
> Ian Horrocks
> Editor in Chief
> Journal of Web Semantics
> 
> 
> 
> > On 8 Aug 2017, at 20:27, Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca <mailto:info@csarven.ca>> wrote:
> >
> > On 2017-08-08 19:16, Ian Horrocks wrote:
> >> I would like to remind everyone that JWS provides free open access via its preprint server:
> >>
> >> http://www.websemanticsjournal.org/ <http://www.websemanticsjournal.org/>
> >>
> >> You can find there not only the latest articles but an archive of all articles published in the journal going back to Vol 1, No 1 (2003).
> >>
> >> Ian Horrocks
> >> Editor in Chief
> >> Journal of Web Semantics
> >
> >
> > I would like to remind everyone that JWS provides free [1] open access
> > via its preprint server [2]:
> >
> > http://www.websemanticsjournal.org/ <http://www.websemanticsjournal.org/>
> >
> > You can find there not only the latest articles but an archive [3] of
> > all articles published in the journal [4] going back to Vol 1, No 1
> > (2003) [5].
> >
> >
> > [1] Nothing is free and this is not a charity from Elsevier. Public
> > institutions/libraries that subscribe to Elsevier's service have already
> > paid for the "free" service. How much? Ask your head librarian about the
> > confidentiality clause.
> >
> > [2] These works precede peer-review and are not considered to be
> > "published". It is not "citable" when played by the rules. It is not the
> > canonical work.
> >
> > [3] This is equivalent to the institutional repositories or open
> > archives. See eprints.org <http://eprints.org/>, hal.inria.fr <http://hal.inria.fr/>, sw.deri.ie <http://sw.deri.ie/>, dpsace.mit.edu <http://dpsace.mit.edu/>,
> > svn.aksw.org <http://svn.aksw.org/>, dataverse.org <http://dataverse.org/>, ... arxiv.org <http://arxiv.org/>, and many others. Already
> > paid by taxes or funded privately.
> >
> > [4] If authors want to have a "preprint" (and more) published online,
> > your institution most likely has you covered - also paid by your taxes.
> > Moreover, your institution probably provides a Webspace for you. Talk to
> > your department or library about your needs.
> >
> > [5] This journal required and maintained lowest standards for "Web" and
> > "Semantics" via desktop/print-centric solutions - nothing to do with the
> > native Web stack, but everything to do with fitting into Elsevier's
> > workflows and business. The Web Semantics journal *company* failed to
> > cultivate knowledge representation within its own realm since 2003.
> >
> > -Sarven
> > http://csarven.ca/#i <http://csarven.ca/#i>
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Alexander Garcia
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexander_Garcia <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexander_Garcia>
> http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/75943.html <http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/75943.html>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexgarciac <http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexgarciac>
>