Hi Keith,
I didn't actually notice you as one of the many, but as you volunteer
some general comments...
> I don't think there are that many unknown issues about publications
> and their potential uses for research and researchers. We would all
> like to be members of communities of peers in which our work could
> be correctly located within a context of significance such that our
> work was seen to acknowledge and build on the work of others and
> such that our work was taken up by others in a similar way.
In our field there are plenty of misunderstandings about the nature of
peer review, the need for third party interrogation, the validity of
disseminated results that arise, and what constitutes a 'publication'
or the need for an enduring record. It is less apparent with journals
but much more so with digital technologies. One example is that few
seem to have figured out how to make websites acceptable from a peer
review viewpoint. Another is the lack critical judgement, among some,
over Wikipedia.
There is even the problem with e-repositories that, as any old stuff
can be put into them, following scholars may not have the benefit of
knowing whether there has been any third party interrogation of the
work. I have even seen conference papers lodged in such repositories
that I know were not presented and did not form part of any proceedings!
It's a confusing world for young researchers.
> The forming and maintaining of communities is a mystery.
It is a mystery to me why you should say that. :o)
David
.........................................................................
David Durling FDRS PhD http://durling.tel
.........................................................................
|