1. hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io

Re: Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

Massimo Pizzol
 

Thanks Chris

I don’t have any problem in publishing a preprint on archiv.org or similar open for comments, and prior to submission to a journal. But until this preprint is ready I am not comfortable in having a publicly accessible working paper, so my preference is still for a google docs with contributors only.

 

Massimo

 

From: <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io> on behalf of "Chris Mutel via Groups.Io" <cmutel@...>
Reply-To: "hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io" <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io>
Date: Sunday, 31 March 2019 at 11.20
To: "hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io" <hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

 

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 13:29, Massimo Pizzol <massimo@...> wrote:

I would prefer using Goole docs for a draft. if this is to become a sci paper it can't be a public document but it should be accessible to contributors only and via invitation.

 

Sorry to post something somewhat off-topic, but this statement is not

correct - peer-reviewed publications can absolutely be developed in

the open, and even some vintage pay-for-access journals such as ES&T

will allow you to publish pre-prints on e.g. archiv.org

paper would be the supporting documentation for the choices and use of

the ontology, I would strongly recommend that it a) be developed in

the open, so that people can read up on its use, and any new changes

that you might make, and b) be submitted to an truly open access

journal such as ERL or PLOS One.

 

 

 
Join hackathon2019@bonsai.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.
More
Home Messages Hashtags About Features Pricing Updates Terms Help Twitter