Publishing systems--who will decide what's best?

[Mary Summerfield <msummerfield@yahoo.com>]

How does (or will) the scholarly community define 'best 
practices' for peer review and for other aspects of publication 
of research?

What role does efficiency for the authors, editors, and reviewers 
play on the review side?  Like anyone dealing with journal 
publication, I've heard lots of laments from those players about 
the difficulties of using various peer review systems.

How important are various features on the Web platform for 
researchers that might assist the researcher in finding and using 
articles, books, databases, etc.?  What will make the researcher 
and instructor more efficient and effective in these aspects of 
their work and possibly more productive overall?  Who will decide 
what investment in distribution platforms and content markup is 
worthwhile for which disciplines and types of content?

How will our community make these decisions about how the ecology 
of scholarly and professional publishing will evolve?

  Mary Summerfield


From: 'jean.claude.guedon@umontreal.ca' 
<jean.claude.guedon@umontreal.ca>
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Sent: Tue, March 2, 2010 4:31:53 PM
Subject: Re: Open Access to Research Is Inevitable, Libraries Are 
Told

It is SciELO and the url is http://www.scielo.org

I just checked it and it works.

There are subsites for national collections and it would not be
surprising if scielo.cl were down.

Also, the whole argument below is premised on the viewpoint of 
publishers. and their vision of best practices. However, the 
'best' in practices should be construed in the perspective of 
optimal scientific communication, and not the perspective of 
publishers.

jcg