Publishing articles as they are ready is fine, but as Karen alluded
to, the issue paradigm is as much about whipping authors/editor into
action and creating an event worthy of notice (a collection of
articles becoming available not just one) as it is making a printable/
shippable package. There are real reasons why the idea of issues work
beyond the print metaphor and we would do well to understand that
before chucking it. Having said all that, if we believe the idea of
issues has no use or relevance to this effort, then so be it. Let's
just do it with our eyes wide open as to the possible consequences.
Roy
On Feb 22, 2006, at 8:44 AM, Jeremy Frumkin wrote:
Ross unleashed:
Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?
I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week,
then
nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and
then one
comes out every day for a 13 day span.
If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that
the
intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
bother with a formal schedule?
-Ross.
While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal
of Insect
Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of
Wisconsin).
While this is a peer reviewed journal, it took the approach not to
produce
actual "issues", but to publish articles once they successfully vetted
through the peer review process. For preservation and posterity, at
the end
of each year we would print out all of the articles and have them hard
bound.
The point is, Ross' suggestion is a good one, and I give it a
hearty +1
-- jaf
===============================================
Jeremy Frumkin
The Gray Chair for Innovative Library Services
121 The Valley Library, Oregon State University
Corvallis OR 97331-4501
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
541.737.9928
541.737.3453 (Fax)
541.230.4483 (Cell)
===============================================
" Without ambition one starts nothing. Without work one finishes
nothing. "
- Emerson
