Demoprints: Apologies

Christopher Gutteridge cjg at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Tue Apr 26 09:01:25 EST 2005


We are currently planning an overhaul of the demoprints site. It should=20
make things much clearer and easier.

Christopher Gutteridge -- cjg at ecs.soton.ac.uk -- +44 (0)23 8059 4833=20
University of Southampton, School of Electronics and Computer Science

> Stevan Harnad wrote:

>Apologies to those who have deposited papers in Demoprints and not=20
>seen them appear! The buffer has apparently not been processed since
>24 March 2004! I am myself now processing the backlog and I hope that
>the buffer will now be processed weekly! -- SH
>
> Richard Poynder wrote:

>>I tried [Demoprints] but had some difficulties.=20
>>[ http://demoprints.eprints.org/ ]
>>Specifically, I could not establish whether the article I was trying to
>>post had been accepted by the system.  After 20 minutes trying to work
>>this out I gave up. Perhaps this is because it is only a demo system,
>>but I think the first thing a researcher would want to do is check that
>>his paper has indeed been uploaded - by doing a search to see if it is
>>there. It might also be because I am not as technology literate as I
>>would wish, but then many researchers might be similarly handicapped!
>
>Richard, many thanks for that feedback! You are quite right that depositor=
s
>require rapid feedback and the reward of seeing of their paper in the arch=
ive
>(if there are no metadata problems to fix) as soon as possible.
>
>I note that there was a backlog of 49 deposits in the Demoprints buffer.
>I have now cleared most for deposit myself (some had errors to fix) and
>will ask Chris Gutteridge to make sure someone checks the Demoprints buffe=
r
>at least every week.
>
>A week is too slow a turnaround for a real institutional archive, however,=
 so
>I hope institutions will make sure that their buffer is processed daily or=
 even
>more often, especially in the all-important start-up phase when the idea i=
s
>to encourage and reward all self-archivers!
>
>But Richard, your own deposit did not even make it to the buffer: The sequ=
ence
>is: (1) Register (and wait for confirmation). [I assume you went through t=
his
>1-time phase successfully, if you got the the deposit stage.] (2) Deposit =
the
>metadada and the full-text of a paper. (3) Wait for confirmation that it h=
as
>been processed (usually after someone has checked that the metadata ar ok =
and
>that the full-text is indeed attached and readable).
>
>You must have left out a step in (2) because your deposit never even reach=
ed
>the buffer for checking. (Please do try again, or let me know what happene=
d!)
>
>Stevan Harnad                    =20



More information about the Jrnlnote mailing list