Karl Palmskog (Aug 30 2020 at 18:05): Karl Palmskog (Aug 30 2020 at 18:05):Here is what looks like a very timely paper given our discussions around preserving Coq stuff:
We found 192 OA journals that vanished from the web between 2000 and 2019, spanning all major research disciplines and geographic regions of the world. Our results raise vital concern for the integrity of the scholarly record and highlight the urgency to take collaborative action to ensure continued access and prevent the loss of more scholarly knowledge.
Paolo Giarrusso (Aug 30 2020 at 22:57):Are there reputable or significant journals that got lost? The introduction fails to answer, I read a bit further but gave up...
Paolo Giarrusso (Aug 30 2020 at 22:59):(I don't know how to measure either criteria, but it seems the authors' job to convince me that the lost journals aren't all, say, predatory ones.)
Karl Palmskog (Aug 31 2020 at 08:24):unfortunately there is no agreed-on definition of "predatory". Some journals have lots of bells and whistles and fancy editorial boards but are "author pays" and are anecdotally known to fudge the review process in favor of publication (e.g., consistently overrule critical reviewers).
Karl Palmskog (Aug 31 2020 at 08:28):also, I would argue that quite a lot of Coq-relevant literature is not published in reputable or significant journals/conferences. We are fortunate that HAL is preserving a good fraction of this literature (but only for work with at least one author in France).
Théo Zimmermann (Aug 31 2020 at 10:48):but only for work with at least one author in France
Is that really a true restriction? Last time I looked I did not see any hint that there was such restriction on HAL. Anyone can create an account, so I would encourage you to create one and submit some of your past work to test this hypothesis.
Karl Palmskog (Aug 31 2020 at 10:55):I would encourage you to create one and submit some of your past work to test this hypothesis.
OK, I'll try tonight.
Last updated: May 31 2023 at 03:30 UTC