[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
Hi Stefan, all
I think the best would be to have a talk page like on WP for
every submission where people can create and respond to
different threads, indicating not just their name but also the
time of comment - otherwise if people add comments to a text it
could very soon become a big mess and hard to find one's way
around... We could still have a copy of the submission where
actual changes could be included as the process evolves but I
think discussion should be kept separate. Just my two cents,
cheers
Mathieu
----- Original Message -----
From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
Date: Sunday, April 11, 2010 6:25 pm
Subject: [jox] New submissions and reviewing (was: Re: Accounts
created)To: journal oekonux.org
Hi Mathieu and all!
6 days ago Mathieu ONeil wrote:
I have entered a submission in the indicated part of website
-
more of an activist text so not realy ripe for formal review.
I
think what is needed is critique and comments though.
And a way to do this properly. There are mainly these ways
which come
to my mind:
1. Use the comments feature
Plone has a comment feature. At the end of
each
page you can add a
comment. This allows replies to comments
also.
However, this makes
it hard to refer to a particular part of the
reviewed text. Also
AFAICS comments are not subscribeable so new
comments are not sent
by email.
2. Add a `Talk` page
We could add a `Talk` page to each
submission like
the `Talk` page
in Wikipedia. Again it is a bit difficult to
refer
to particular
parts.
3. Make comments in the submission
This would mean that the original submission
is
edited by the
reviewers. Could be done but clutters the
original
submission. In
any case a reviewer must leave a signature
or so.
4. Make comments in a copy of the submission
We could simply copy a submission to another
page
and ask for
comments there. That would leave the
original
intact but allows for
comments in the appropriate places. Again
reviewers
need to leave a
signature so it is clear who made what comment.
I think option 4 is the best one.
The more I think about it the more I believe that responses,
dialogue between authors, joint statements etc are what we can
contribute to the peer production discussion, on top of peer
reviewed papers natch!
Yes - like Tony suggested.
I think it could be good practice to let everyone on this
list
know whenever people post a substantive paper / comment on the
website? What do others think?
That is part of what I addressed by
6 days ago Stefan Merten wrote:
> There is also the topic of receiving
notification for
changes. I'm
> looking into a possibility to automatically
subscribe a
group to all
> changes in a certain sub-tree but have not
figured out
completely how
> to do this. If you don't want to wait you can
subscribe
yourself by
> using the "Mail subscription" portlet in the
right
panel. Make sure
> that you subscribe "Scientific Committee"
recursively
so you get
> notifications from the whole sub-tree.
Group subscription to a subtree is somewhat difficult - I'm just
asking the developer of the notification tool how he meant his
documentation...
However, it is easy to set up a fake account with the email
address of
this list and this way subscribe this whole list to change
notifications. I just did this so changes are at least sent
here [#]_.
( Mathieu: Password for user `mlist` is the same as for the mailing
list.)
.. [#] Normally this is considered bad practice because
subscriptions> like this should not be done by
a mailing list. But
at the moment
it is probably better this way.
Grüße
Stefan
****
Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University
email: mathieu.oneil[at]anu.edu.au
web: http://adsri.anu.edu.au/people/visitors/mathieu.php
[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal