Re: Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)

I totally feel the same.
I always publish pre-prints on my personal page (not arxiv, I have issues with the use of arxiv nowadays)
and usually the confs/journal I submit to have open proceedings.


From: [] on behalf of Massimo Pizzol via Groups.Io [massimo@...]
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: [hackathon2019] Post-hackathon ontology group #ontology #followup

Thanks Chris

I don’t have any problem in publishing a preprint on 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.




From: <> on behalf of "Chris Mutel via Groups.Io" <cmutel@...>
Reply-To: "" <>
Date: Sunday, 31 March 2019 at 11.20
To: "" <>
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.

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 to automatically receive all group messages.