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 >