Many thanks to Jeroen Bosman for his response - we value the opportunity to clarify these points for the cgf's readers. Our answers are presented with Jeroen's questions:
1) Is it correct that there are no article processing charges (APC's) levied? If so, it is interesting to know who is carrying the cost. Is this institutionally financed? ---- There are no APCs. The journal is free to authors and free to readers. There is no publisher or sponsoring organisation and the moderate costs of our commercial web hosting and domain name maintenance are paid voluntarily by the editors. The journal uses OJS (Open Journal Systems) software made freely available by the Public Knowledge Project.
2) What is the copyright? The website does not answer that. Will articles be CC-BY or CC-BY-NC/ND? I favour CC-BY, but know there is some resistance to that. ---- Follow the links on the website under "submissions" to "copyright notice" and you will find that we state that the journal uses CC-BY. http://www.literarygeographies.net/index.php/LitGeogs/about/submissions#copyrightNotice
3) Is the publisher working on indexing in Google Scholar and the BASE Bielefeld Open Access search engine? Of course indexing by Scopus and WoS is something for the longer run. ---- There is no publisher, only the editorial team. We are working on indexing.
4) Will papers get a DOI? That is increasingly becoming a prerequisite for thrustworthy archiving. ---- Yes, the journal will have an ISSN and papers will get a DOI. However, as ISSN requests can only be made within 3 months of the anticipated first issue we have not yet started this process.
Finally I would like to suggest to do away with issue numbers. Just publish papers as they come. ---- We considered this option and decided to start with issue numbers. We may reconsider this at some future time, but at present this is our policy.
Please forgive me to also ask for open (anonymous) peer review. In my view peer review is either very good and deserves to be out in the open or it is in the dark and then we do not know whether it is good or not that good. All those hours of hard work coming up with a good review report deserve to be credited and for that the review needs to be open. This is already a strong trend in biology, geology and medicine journals. ---- We take it that this refers to the transparent review process (as used for example by the European Molecular Biology Organization) in which there are no confidential referee remarks and anonymous referee reports and editorial correspondence are all published. We do not feel this model would be appropriate for Literary Geographies. We did consider using the ACME method, in which authors and reviewers can choose whether or not to reveal their own names, but we decided to start off with a conventional double-blind peer-review process. We plan to keep our reviewers fully informed of the review process (i.e. results and remarks by other reviewers) and we also plan to acknowledge the work contributed by our reviewers on the journal website.
We are happy to answer further questions, here or through emails. Thanks again
The editors
|