Tony the cheaper it can be made the better in terms of the
point i was tyring to make.
i agree that if you are only feeding pages your probably right, but if you
are going to add some of the communication and tracking features i want to have
it is going to be more involved.
also i want an ite
Trying to critically evaluate the deficiencies of a PDF or ENVOY (hands up
all those who don't know what this is) document it is easy to see that on the
first score the problem is indexing, the second problem is it's relative
keyword unsearchability, if it hasn't been produced in a page mill type
e
On Mon, 31 Aug 1998 21:08:39 -0400, Guedon Jean-Claude
wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Arthur Smith wrote:
> [...]
>> 4. Non-profits turn to government funding. For-profits cry foul and
>> unfair competition.
>
>Regarding point 4 above. So what if Elsevier cries foul in the States or
>in Canada?
T
Ok, I knew I would draw some fire for that last message.
Strangely, it doesn't seem to have made it onto the
web archive (though Stevan quoted it extensively) - I think I've
been spending too much time on this debate - is this a nefarious plot?!
I should mention again that I don't speak for my emp
Jonathan Baron wrote about:
>1. contributions from scholarly societies;
>2. subscription fees for the paper version of the journal, for
>those who still want it;
>3. subscription fees for an early version of the web edition
>(i.e., the free version is delayed by a few months).
I would be curious
I second everything Tony says below.
We *must* move away from all proprietary formats, exactly as we had better
strive to develop open source software for scholarly e-publishing.
Jean-Claude Guedon
> Tony Barry wrote:
>
> Thomas J. Walker wrote:
> >In my opinion, libraries should actively solic
On Tue, 1 Sep 1998, Jesse Martin wrote:
> Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1998 12:13:43 -0400
> From: Jesse Martin
> To: september-fo...@amsci-forum.amsci.org
> Subject: Re: Savings from Converting to On-Line-Only: 30%- or 70%+ ?
>
> Jonathan Baron wrote about:
>
> I would be curious to hear what the major re
At 7:51 AM 1998/08/31, Clinton Jones wrote:
>I believe that one of the reasons that PDF took off the way it did, was the
>fact that it was a nice halfway point between a digital document and a print
>document.
Its not even a quarter way point. PDF takes the electronic genie and puts
it back into t
At 6:48 PM 1998/08/31, Jonathan Baron wrote:
>What we've been talking about is the economics of doing regular
>journals on the web, as well as working papers.
With increasing number of working papers, seminar papers and departmental
reports going direct to the web, coupled with the increasing sop
On Wed, 2 Sep 1998 02:20:19 +1000, Tony Barry wrote:
>At 11:39 PM 1998/08/31, Stevan Harnad wrote:
>>To put it really starkly: Ultimately the prestige of refereed journals
>>depends on the referees, and they are in the pay of neither the
>>publisher nor the author in EITHER model.
>
>Its not the
Another reason for disliking pdf.
go to the library and watch students who have made xeroxes of
professional articles they have to undertand.
They will make notes in margins, circle phrases, draw lines between
concepts and copy things on to paper.
reading professional material is in a significan
11 matches
Mail list logo
