I'd like to second Art's feedback. Where I'd like to see this go is
into the very uncharted territory for library mags/journals -- the
truly technical rag. I'm not sure I'd be so into the standard "peer
review" structure, or if so, only for a select few articles that
seemed appropriate. Rather, I think some of the more innovative ways
to present interesting problems and solutions that Art sketched out
would be truly ground-breaking and well worth the effort.
Roy

On Feb 21, 2006, at 6:01 PM, Art Rhyno wrote:

> This is intriguing, I really like the idea of a publication that would
> have a high level of technical content, even if only to inspire
> more folks
> to consider the IT side of libraries. I would really like to see a low
> barrier way of capturing the excitement and enthusiasm that came
> through
> in the lightning talks at the conference in a journal-like setting, I
> don't know if that's possible. I also wondered about the concept of a
> "scenario of the month", some sort of technical challenge or
> problem, and
> providing a forum to describe some possible solutions with different
> tools. If you could give people like Dan Chudnov a whiteboard and Ed
> Summers a broader canvas for sketching out programming strategies in a
> journal format, that alone would instantly run circles around the
> other
> library tech publications out there.
>
> I think this is worth pursuing, and in true code4lib spirit, maybe
> it can
> push the boundaries of what is possible with a journal. For
> example, maybe
> podcasts and screen captures could be used in addition to text.
>
> Speaking as someone who can barely keep one blog active, has let
> another
> almost lapse into oblivion, and spends a lot of time cursing the whole
> notion of publishing these days. On the other hand, if you want to
> produce
> a version in paper and need it bundled with bailing twine...
>
> art
>