Electronic publishing
Don Gilbert
gilbertd at silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Tue Aug 7 22:26:11 EST 1990
My two cents on electronic publication:
* We had a bit of discussion on this a few months back. The
drosophila information service journal may be still looking into the
idea. Graphics are still a hang-up -- there are several "standards"
but none is standard enough to reach everyone. I think that any try
to duplicate a printed journal will need to make the data available
in several formats and let the user choose which (if any) he can
read. Plain ascii text is still the common denominator, but then
there are many biologists who don't have (or use) computers. The
time/cost for setting up such an e-publication is large because of
the multiple format problem. Contributors will not be able to send
in standard formats either. I am used to reading info on video
monitors rather than paper, and I much prefer formatted/typeset to
plain text. Average joe biologist who spends less time in front of
a computer will require printed or printable copy (this decade
anyway). Postscript or Fax printers would suit some as output
options. An e-pub for any science discipline that mimics paper pubs
would have a big problem with the mechanics of formatting, and would
have a small readership. But I also think it would be worth a try.
* I think e-publication should _not_ try to mimic paper
publication, but look to the currently successful electronic info
distribution media: e-mail, netnews and archives. The combination
of these three media allows scientists much more free and rapid
exchange of hypotheses/data/results/discussion than any month-lagged
paper media. I've been publishing my software works first and
mostly exclusively via this ether network for about 5 years now,
first thru Compuserve and recently Internet. It makes sense for
software. I publish a new work by placing it in a public archive or
two, and sending out notices (abstracts) via public bulletin board
or network newsgroup. Typically I will get responses from users
with in a few days which help solve most of the problems that I
missed (the review period). Then it is easy as pie to re-distribute
the corrected information (sometimes too easy, leading to hiccup
updates). The software (article) sits in the archive and propagates
itself through the computer net at speeds depending on its
popularity and usefulness. Noise or useless articles are self-
restricting. As people pick the software (article) up from servers,
some will fire back questions by e-mail, which I dutifully reply to
(if the program hasn't reached obsolesence yet).
Maybe this method will make sense for disemination of other science
research as people look at it more. If someone wants to try now,
please feel free to drop off articles at Iubio archive, directory
[archive.receive]. Choice of formats is your own headache (but if
it's good, someone else will translate it as needed).
Don Gilbert biocomputing office / archive for
gilbertd at iubio.bio.indiana.edu / molecular & general biology
biology dept., indiana univ., / ftp iubio.bio.indiana.edu
bloomington, in 47405, usa / (129.79.1.101) user anonymous
Don.Gilbert at Iubio.Bio.Indiana.Edu
biocomputing office, indiana univ., bloomington, in 47405, usa
More information about the Biomatrx
mailing list