Tim Finin wrote:
David Huynh wrote:
I think that even small things can make the SW effort feel more
welcoming, and more open, toward people with less interest in data
modeling and data linking. For example, the ISWC conferences have
been using a page layout format of one column 4.5" wide (wasting 4"
on a letter-size page). Most screenshots are landscape-oriented. So
people who want to show screenshots in ISWC papers either have to
resize their screenshots to unreadable sizes, or crop them. If
there's an opportunity to adopt a two column layout, allowing
screenshots to stretch across the columns, that would make someone
like me a little happier publishing UI work to ISWC. :-) Maybe
folks on these lists who are interested in publishing UI work to ISWC
can vote if they want a more accommodating page layout...
ISWC uses Springer to publish its proceedings as an LNCS volume,
which is done in a book sized format. This determines the formatting
requirements. This is unlikely to change as long as ISWC continues to
use Springer. Springer has been very accommodating in allowing ISWC
to simultaneously make the papers available online with free access,
which another publisher (e.g., ACM or IEEE) would probably not agree
to. So I think that it is unlikely to change anytime soon.
I agree with David; Springer's format is quite wasteful in terms of
space. I have argued elsewhere about this, and I am yet to get a good
argument in favor of Springer's format.
Actually, Springer only agreed to allow free online access because I (as
General Chair of ISWC 2006) had already negotiated with IEEE to publish
the proceedings for ISWC 2006 with them (in 2 col format). IEEE (CS
Press) does allow it as a rule. As part of of the agreement to remain
with Springer, they exceptionally agreed to allow us to publish the
proceedings online (in a separate website) with free access. So they
were accommodating simply because they would have lost the series
otherwise...
Personally, I think it is absurd for any conference dealing with the Web
to only publish its proceedings in a restricted-access website, but this
is another discussion.
Taking the opportunity, and generalizing David's point, publishing UI
work in general in printed form is very difficult, not to mention
describing some of the features in words. Nothing like having direct
experience with the actual interface...
We should be able to do better than just print in using the Web as a
(perhaps complementary) publishing medium!
Cheers
Daniel
