Home > Meta > Board, correspondence, errata, etc.

Board, correspondence, errata, etc.

Things have been moving quickly over the past few days.  We’ve added more members to the editorial board, and the board has been discussing the form this journal should take.

I’ve set things up to publish posts in the following categories:

  • Research papers, as you might expect.  We also have a separate section for short research papers.
  • Letters.  This is technical correspondence and discussion.  The IR community doesn’t have a solid forum for this at the moment.
  • Errata and corrigenda.  Another missing feature in the IR community.
  • Reviews of books and conferences.  SIGIR Forum has this as well, but it would be nice if it were more timely.
  • Surveys.  Everyone’s doing these nowadays (sometimes calling them books), we’ll see where it goes.
  • Meta.  You’re probably tired of those by now.

Another idea we’ve been discussing is rapid release of in-progress research papers.  The ordinary case for a research paper is that after submission, the board solicits reviews, and makes a publication decision based on those.  We intend a quicker turnaround than a traditional journal but it’s not quite web speed.

So alternatively authors could elect to have their submission posted while it is still in review.  The editorial board would decide that the paper is within scope enough that we would publish it if the reviews recommended it, then we post it right up on the blog in an “In progress” section.  The paper gets reviewed as above, but at the same time, the in-review version is available, folks can download it, read it, and comment on it.  Authors would want to do this for the quick feedback and community discussion.  And we want it because it adds to the review process.  There are still a few issues to be hammered out but I’m hoping this will go live soon.

Advertisements
Categories: Meta Tags: ,
  1. March 31, 2010 at 10:20 pm

    If you haven’t yet, you might consider archiving the contents of this journal on arXiv.org, rather than hosting it yourself. That also eliminates the need to invent a new citation scheme, and allows you to use tools such as scirate.com to handle commentary and ratings.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: