Re: [Fwd: Re: [seul-edu] Software for journal publish]

[Alan Chen <alan@digikata.com>]

On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 09:09:48AM -0500, jeremy hunsinger wrote:
> I think it is interesting how many seem to think that a modified portal 
> is sufficient as a system to run a peer reviewed academic journal.  I 
> haven't seen one, though i think it would be the easiest way to go.  
> however a portal isn't a publishing system, as a publishing system isn't 
> a portal, nor is a cms a publishing system, etc.
> 
> while technologically, it is a possibility.  I think that in terms of 
> appearance and design(which can be altered, i know) that the format of 
> sites such as phpwebsite, phpnuke(which is the one that i prefer), 
> geeklog, slash, etc. precludes to a great degree people who are familiar 
> with them as assuming them to be peer reviewed journals.  this is 
> because they are associated more with news and blogs in the minds of 
> many people and not with academic work.  which is why upon publishing on 
> online journal, the publishers consistently choose a different system.
> 
> the argument that "it works" doesn't work, because the thing that it has 
> to do is  "appear to be" and in the case of having a peer reviewing 
> system, it has to also map onto the expectations of peer reviewers.  
> iow, audience,audience, audience

What do you think of the more generalized web frameworks?  Zope,
OpenACS, et al.. are all pretty agnostic in terms of workflow and
presentation.  They require customization work, but I think can be
adapted to a wide range of requirements. Barring an open source
release from your organization :), they seem like to best choice for
the original poster.

-- alan

-- 
Alan Chen
Digikata LLC
alan@digikata.com
http://digikata.com