On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Sally Morris [ALPSP] wrote:
I am intrigued by David's last statement - please elucidate!
From: David Goodman dgood...@phoenix.princeton.edu
What will prove or disprove the case is not [ALPSP's] study, or anyone's,
but the market. If people value the features, they will
Automatic digest processor wrote:
1. ALPSP statement on BOAI
--
Date:Sun, 21 Apr 2002 17:58:35 -0400
From:David Goodman dgood...@phoenix.princeton.edu
Subject: Re: ALPSP statement on BOAI
We all know that
David Goodman wrote:
We all know that ongoing measurements
already show an almost total nonuse of conventional publications, print or
electronic, in one of the science subject areas.
Our high energy/particle physics journal (Phys. Rev. D) is serving out
10's of thousands of articles/month to
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, David Goodman wrote:
...the insistence of some
administrative bodies that the publications be in formal conventional
journals, sometimes even requiring that they be in print format...
...has nothing to do with peer review, one way or another. I agree
with Stevan on
