I like Ben's suggestion of A List Apart as a model:  timely practical
articles that can still be read a year later; excellent layout and
presentation (and thus, "authority"); active discussion attached to each
article, sometimes with additional valuable ideas/info; issues and a
schedule (but a bit irregular, I think).

As someone noted, a journal only makes sense if you want to get beyond
the IRC/planet Code4Lib circle of people; otherwise, the tools are
already in place, and maybe you just need a means of archiving and
searching what's already there.

And if you want to reach others outside this inner circle (but without,
say, pandering or dumbing things down), you'll probably have more
success with a bit of structure and "editorial consciousness."
Otherwise, any outside readers might dismiss it as a short-lived vanity
project, or another blog, or view the content as suspect.  Ditto any
prospective employers authors might someday want to impress . . . .

And, as K. G. S. suggested, having at least some of the apparatus of a
"proper journal" would ensure that it actually comes out and doesn't
fizz away into a "boy, that was a good idea, [why didn't it ever happen
/ why did it only last two issues]?"

Which isn't to say it couldn't be some sort of hybrid, with an edited
featured article/tip/trick or three, + some [insert new idea here].

My (perhaps redundant) few cents.


Ben Brophy wrote:

> might be a good model. They are formal
> enough to have issue numbers, an ISSN number and an editorial board,
> but not too formal.