Publishing articles as they are ready is fine, but as Karen alluded
to, the issue paradigm is as much about whipping authors/editor into
action and creating an event worthy of notice (a collection of
articles becoming available not just one) as it is making a printable/
shippable package. There are real reasons why the idea of issues work
beyond the print metaphor and we would do well to understand that
before chucking it. Having said all that, if we believe the idea of
issues has no use or relevance to this effort, then so be it. Let's
just do it with our eyes wide open as to the possible consequences.
On Feb 22, 2006, at 8:44 AM, Jeremy Frumkin wrote:
> Ross unleashed:
>> Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?
>> I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week,
>> nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and
>> then one
>> comes out every day for a 13 day span.
>> If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that
>> intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
>> bother with a formal schedule?
> While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal
> of Insect
> Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of
> While this is a peer reviewed journal, it took the approach not to
> actual "issues", but to publish articles once they successfully vetted
> through the peer review process. For preservation and posterity, at
> the end
> of each year we would print out all of the articles and have them hard
> The point is, Ross' suggestion is a good one, and I give it a
> hearty +1
> -- jaf
> Jeremy Frumkin
> The Gray Chair for Innovative Library Services
> 121 The Valley Library, Oregon State University
> Corvallis OR 97331-4501
> [log in to unmask]
> 541.737.3453 (Fax)
> 541.230.4483 (Cell)
> " Without ambition one starts nothing. Without work one finishes
> nothing. "
> - Emerson