I don't think that scanning a printout retains any metadata that was in the
electronic source so, no, this would not follow using the same logic.
I do agree that dissemination of results is one of the most important parts of
the scientific process. The argument here is, I think, what is the best way
to support dissemination.
Eating your own dog food, is a separate matter, I think. Eating your own dog
good may help with uptake, but on the other hand it may interfere with
dissemination, by making preparation of papers harder or making them harder to
review or read.
peter
On 10/06/2014 10:09 AM, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:
Following the same logic, we still could have been using paper
submissions? All you have to do is to scan them to turn them into
PDFs.
It's been a while since I was in the university, but wasn't
dissemination an important part of science? What about "dogfooding"
after all?
Martynas
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
<pfpschnei...@gmail.com> wrote:
It's not hard to query PDFs with SPARQL. All you have to do is extract the
metadata from the document and turn it into RDF, if needed. Lots of
programs extract and display this metadata already.
No, I don't think that viewing this issue from the reviewer perspective is
too narrow. Reviewers form a vital part of the scientific publishing
process. Anything that makes their jobs harder or the results that they
produce worse is going to have to have very large benefits over the current
setup. In any case, I haven't been looking at the reviewer perspective
only, even in the message quoted below.
peter
PS: This is *not* to say that I think that the reviewing process is
anywhere near ideal. On the contrary, I think that the reviewing process
has many problems, particularly as it is performed in CS conferences.
On 10/06/2014 09:19 AM, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:
Dear Peter,
please show me how to query PDFs with SPARQL. Then I'll believe there
are no benefits of XHTML+RDFa over PDF.
Addressing the issue from the reviewer perspective only is too narrow,
don't you think?
Martynas
[...]
