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.
Are there reputable or significant journals that got lost? The introduction fails to answer, I read a bit further but gave up...
(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.)
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).
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).
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.
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: Dec 07 2023 at 06:38 UTC