You are right. We upgraded to OJS 3.x a few months ago, which is much
better than 2.x in terms of its interface and usability, especially the
direct openness of the PDF button/link. The only drawback to us is that the
free LOCKSS Preservation Network available in 2.x is not yet available in
3.x. (https://pkp.sfu.ca/pkp-pn/). I don't know when that feature will
On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 6:22 PM Fitchett, Deborah <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Kia ora Eric,
> It presumably depends on your browser's capabilities: when I click the PDF
> links here, it opens up a page on which the PDF is embedded and I can read
> it straight away after a single click. For me that's more convenient than
> downloading it and having to open it in a PDF reader, then for the next
> article close the PDF reader and switch back to the browser, and later
> having to declutter my downloads folder. For people with browsers with
> fewer bells and whistles (or for machine input like your program) there's
> that extra click, but everything is trade-offs.
> I expect the OJS project would take feedback on better ways to architect
> their software though. (Probably more reluctantly if it involved massive
> database changes, but still...)
> From: Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Eric
> Lease Morgan
> Sent: Sunday, 26 July 2020 1:23 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Publishing announcement of Special Issue on AI,
> Machine Learning, Data Science, and Libraries
> > https://journal.calaijol.org/index.php/ijol<
> Yongming, thank you for bringing this to our attention. AI in libraries is
> a hot topic, for sure. I sincerely look forward to looking them over.
> To anybody or everybody, let's suppose I wanted to read the whole issue of
> the journal described above. How many clicks does it require to get the
> content? In this case, the answer is 2 times the number of articles, or 3
> times the number of articles if I go through the DOI. The answer is at
> least 18, if not 27. Furthermore, answer me this. What are the URLs
> pointing to the PDF versions of the articles described above?
> "C'mon, Eric, don't be a jerk. Eighteen clicks is not so bad, especially
> when you get the content for free." And my reply is, "It is not really the
> number of clicks. Instead it is about conflation." The URLs to these things
> -- as well as in many many many things across the 'Net -- are conflated.
> The 'Net overflows with "not here but there" messages; the 'Net overflows
> with "dummies" as they used to be called in libraries. You know, those
> wooden blocks put on library shelves that say, "This book has been moved to
> the Reserve Book Room until further notice." The dummies were frustrating.
> I'm sorry, but the utter truth is links break. The problem only gets
> compounded when identifiers need to be resolved or splash ("landing") pages
> get put in the way.
> I assert few people will read all of the articles in any journal if they
> have to click through 18 different times in order to read/download the
> documents. I assert even fewer people will read the whole of a conference
> proceedings. Remember when conference proceedings where distributed in a
> single volume, and you could easily peruse through the whole thing? We can
> still have such a thing, if the links were managed differently.
> In short, I wish sites wouldn't tease me all along the way, and don't make
> me hunt for the download link from the landing page. Give me the link to
> the thing, not a surrogate. "Save the time of the reader."
> P.S. I "read" the issue, and I put the results here:
> Eric Morgan
> University of Notre Dame
> "The contents of this e-mail (including any attachments) may be
> confidential and/or subject to copyright. Any unauthorised use,
> distribution, or copying of the contents is expressly prohibited. If you
> have received this e-mail in error, please advise the sender by return
> e-mail or telephone and then delete this e-mail together with all
> attachments from your system."
R. Barbara Gitenstein Library
The College of New Jersey
Email: [log in to unmask]