Print

Print


Then again, we [http://jpe.library.arizona.edu] publish up to 60 articles a year  with no  specialist software applications at all - a basic webpage, articles go from Word to PDF, and all reviewing is done by sending personal emails. We could be slightly more efficient using OJS, perhaps. 

I guess we are 'old school' - it has been like this since 1994 when the first issue came out. 


Dr. Simon Batterbury |  Professor of Political Ecology, LEC, Lancaster University, UK, Europe. [log in to unmask]

Principal research fellow| School of Geography | University of Melbourne, 3010 VIC, Australia | simonpjb @ unimelb.edu.au | http://www.simonbatterbury.net




From: Radical Open Access <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of RADICALOPENACCESS automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 11:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RADICALOPENACCESS Digest - 13 Jan 2018 to 14 Jan 2018 (#2018-6)
 
There are 2 messages totaling 5444 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. WordPress and digital repositories (2)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Sun, 14 Jan 2018 14:15:13 -0000
From:    Piotr Otrêba <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: WordPress and digital repositories

Mathew,

 

In my case (i) editor-in-chiefs assign other (section) editors and (ii) all editors assign/create reviewers. As an admin, I shouldn’t have to create reviewer accounts. So they should also have some possibility to manage user accounts, at least of some types. This complicates a bit the workflow I imagine, and I haven’t been searching for any user management extensions for WordPress so far. Alternatively, as I wrote earlier, maybe we don’t need reviewers accounts at all? Maybe some secure link being sent to reviewer to a page with the work and some simple form would fit the bill? OJS allows such an option (but nevertheless reviewer needs account, s/he just doesn’t have to use it to proceed with review).

 

I wouldn’t seek for just simpler version of OJS made with WordPress. I would see the need for two independent solutions (well, they could be dependent, it’s just a matter of developing). The first tool would be just for reviewing purposes, allowing to handle reviews for more than one editorial team (= journal). The second would be for repository. Why such distinction? Because repository could contain additionally other materials, not necessarily only those reviewed. Just one repository for all types of materials. I find it practical from my experience with publishers. I use OJS, but it’s closed for other works, like books, proceedings, reports, so on. Then we need to set up, e.g., DSpace for those other types of publications/materials. Pointless… I would prefer to have these two independent tools. There would be also some publisher main website, where all editorial policies would be included.

 

I’m not a coder, well from time to time I do coding for some simpler tasks, but if I could help somehow with such project, let me know. And I keep on searching for tools letting me accomplish my plans, at least for some time yet. I’d like to avoid having to use independent platforms for often overlapping tasks (like OJS and repository).

 

 

Best,