[seqfan] Re: Listing articles under links

[franktaw at netscape.net]

Let  me get a bit more radical here. Why have two separate sections at 
all?

Originally, the "References" were to articles or authoritative 
references (e.g., Abramowitz and Stegun), and the "Links" were to 
discussion and examples - because that was what existed then. But there 
aren't many authoritative references that aren't on online any more. 
And things are only going to continue that way.

Changing the database to combine the two sections would just be a 
global change. The changes to the interface should also be pretty easy. 
The only problem I see is that this would leave the resulting section 
unsorted, and in some cases with duplicate entries. But there would be 
no need to rush to fix these; these changes could be fixed at our 
leisure as they came to our attention.

Franklin T. Adams-Watters

-----Original Message-----
From: M. F. Hasler <oeis at hasler.fr>
To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
Sent: Mon, Feb 17, 2014 6:59 am
Subject: [seqfan] Re: Listing articles under links


On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com> 
wrote:

> Many very serious scientists (especially those with tenure)
> are giving on commercial journals and publishing only
> on servers like the arXiv.
>
> In any case I don't think it is possible or desirable
> to try to separate refereed articles from non-refereed ones.
>
> There are so many low-quality journals now that being published
> in a "refereed" journal means very little!
>

I agree completely!
(esp. about low quality papers in "peer reviewed" journals)

That's why I took care to write "typically with editorial board and/or
reviewing process" vs "typically, self-publication"
and I omitted on purpose to say "peer reviewed".

I think arxiv papers should well go into the 1st category (REFS),
maybe actually any publication in the "shape" of a scientific paper,
while the LINKS should be there for other material (web pages such as
blogs, forum posts, and supporting files including graphics, 
programs,...)

Retrospectively, the distinction I wanted to suggest was rather 
concerning
the form/contents, than the "quality".

Maximilian

_______________________________________________

Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/