Message 00584 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00565 Message: 19/38 L13 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [jox] Debrief and clarification process



fine with me. to have draft+reviews bundled together does make sense. we should note somewhere that 'background info = original draft submission and reviewers reports', otherwise no one will guess what is it.

forgot to mention in the original response that the same logic of signals applies to this: we don't decide on behalf of readers, we give signals instead and they decide i.e. we expose background info and leave to readers to decide.

perhaps we should add an extra signal, "significant changes after the reviews", or something like that (could be named better), to help readers decided whether it's worth reading the background info bundle.

OK, well I think this could be resolved by a clear hierarchisation of
available data for each research paper: - download article - download
signals - download background information (original draft submission
and reviewers reports)


Would that be OK?

______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal



Thread: joxT00565 Message: 19/38 L13 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00584 [Homepage] [Navigation]