Did Stephen find it because of the ACM somehow? Robby
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > ACM conference also classify your paper so > that people who look for related work and > may not have quite the right keywords find > it anyway. > > ;; --- > > Yesterday Stephen found a paper on tracing > in a lazy language that, despite its title, > and despite claims in the introduction, > comes awfully close to what John published > in essence in ESOP '01. > > But they wrote it in 98 or so. > > Why didn't we find it? The authors published > in some obscure Australian conference. > > > > On Sep 30, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Jon Rafkind wrote: > >> So what exactly is the benefit of publishing with ACM these days? Is it just >> to prove that your paper was peer reviewed? >> >> On 09/30/2011 12:02 PM, John Clements wrote: >>> On Sep 30, 2011, at 10:07 AM, John Clements wrote: >>> >>> >>>> In case you didn't catch Stephanie Weirich's post of this on >>>> plus.google.com, here's some very interesting information about ArXiv and >>>> ACM and where copyrights intersect. >>>> >>>> It may be that you can avoid much of this by only publishing "draft" >>>> versions of your paper on ArXiv; I Am Not A Lawyer. >>>> >>> Oh for heaven's sake. Neglected to post the link. >>> >>> >>> http://r6.ca/blog/20110930T012533Z.html >>> >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _________________________________________________ >>> For list-related administrative tasks: >>> >>> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev >> >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev > > > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
