\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{html}
% BEGIN stuff for times and dates
\newcount\hours
\newcount\minutes
\newcount\temp
\newtoks\ampm
% set the real time of day
\def\setdaytime{%
\temp\time
\divide\temp 60
\hours\temp
\multiply\temp -60
\minutes\time
\advance\minutes \temp
\ifnum\hours =12 \ampm={p.m.} \else
\ifnum\hours >12 \advance\hours -12 \ampm={p.m.} \else \ampm={a.m.} \fi \fi
}
\setdaytime
\def\theMonth{\relax
\ifcase\month\or
Jan\or Feb\or Mar\or Apr\or May\or Jun\or
Jul\or Aug\or Sep\or Oct\or Nov\or Dec\fi}
\def\theTime{\the\hours:\ifnum \minutes < 10 0\fi \the\minutes\ \the\ampm}
\def\jmcdate{ \number\year\space\theMonth\space\number\day}
% END stuff for times and dates
%******************************
%******************************
\begin{document}
\title{THE FUTURE OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION}
\author{John McCarthy, Stanford University}
\date{1996 April 2}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
Publication is gradually moving to the World Wide Web, and this
process will continue until print publication is rather rare. The
process will be faster for scientific publication, because the
relative economic advantages are greater and the technology is more
available and familiar to the scientific community. It looks like
the process will not even have to for a generation of die-hards to
be replaced.
While present technology is good enough to get the process started,
new technology will make the transition even more attractive.
There are already many on-line scientific journals, and many print
journals are already have on-line editions.
The main resistance is coming from conventional publishing
organizations that face drastic down-sizing, but since they haven't
even tried to outlaw competition (and won't succeed if they try),
the down-sizing is inevitable. Library organizations may also face
down-sizing.
Scientific publication will take many new forms.
\end{abstract}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Here are some contentions.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Publication is gradually moving on-line, and this process will
continue until print publication is rather rare.
\item Publication on CD-ROMs is a temporary phenomenon, because
on-line is better.
\item The pace of publication going on-line depends partly on both
technological and economic factors. Here are some.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The arrival of the display that can be read on the beach and
also in the bathtub.
\item The development of a radio system that permits downloading
reading material anywhere in the world---indoors or out.
\item The development of a standardized system for paying for
reading copyrighted material.
\item Since on-line publication is much cheaper than print
publication, many organizations dependent on print publication
will inevitably be reduced in personnel. These people will have
to find jobs elsewhere in the economy. Eventually, this
down-sizing will affect libraries as well as publishers. It is
important that the down-sizing not be blocked by the establishment
of monopolies motivated by the preservation of particular kinds of
jobs.
\end{enumerate}
However, the present technology and economic situation is already
adequate for a large expansion of on-line publication, and it is
already taking place.
\item The current system of paper scientific publication is a great
drag on the integration of countries into the world scientific
system that cannot afford spending millions of dollars per year per
first rate scientific libraries. Even with rich countries like the
U.S., many institutions cannot afford first class libraries. The
commercial scientific publishers offer the greatest problems, but
the scientific societies are only about a factor of two better.
\item On-line scientific publications can be supported entirely by
page charges to the authors' institutions and be entirely free to
readers. The cost will be only a small fraction of the cost of the
research that gives rise to the publication. Exceptions can be made
for unsupported research and research from poor countries. \$100 per
page should be more than adequate for journals where the articles do not
require professional editing for the insertion of pictorial material.
\item Present scientific publishers and their employees will resist
going on line, because it will greatly reduce the need for their
services, although it seems that some need for professional editing
will be required. Their idea is that on-line services will be
value-added services to print publication, so they will get more
money rather than less. I think competition with journals that are
on-line from the beginning will demonstrate that this idea is not
viable.
\item Editing for on-line reading is likely to be an art rather
different from editing for print publication. It can use color and
Web links to good advantage, and it can put up additional windows,
for example with terminology and definitions. It may be that
professional on-line editors will be able to do such a good job at
this as will justify the cost of their employment.
\item It seems unlikely that print publishers will be able to advocate
legal barriers to on-line publication, although they may defend
copyrights they presently hold.
\item Publishers have always opposed the notion of fair use, and have
consistently maintained that there is no fair use on line. There
haven't been any lawsuits about this yet, so we don't know what the
courts will presume.
\item Scientists should defend at least the following concept of fair
use. An author who has not been paid for an article should be able
to keep a copy on a publicly available, free Web page without any
interference from the publisher.
\item Scientists should insist on retaining copyright to their own
published scientific papers. Journals should merely get
``permission to publish''. In fact, authors who insist on this are
generally successful. Allowing authors to retain copyright is an
explicit official policy of the American Mathematical Society.
(Assigning copyright to the Society is also an option). Scientific
societies, e.g. AAAI and ECAI, should adopt this policy,
\item Authors may want to keep papers on their home sites. If they
do, research announcment journals will become more important.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Refereeing}
\label{sec:referee}
Publishing on line permits much smaller delays. However, the time for
referees to report is often the major delay with print publication.
Refereeing serves four functions.
\begin{enumerate}
\item It conserves the limited resource of a publication for editorial
time, printing and mailing and library shelf space. All of these
limitations go away if publication is on-line and the author, as is
increasingly the custom, does the typesetting.
\item It serves as a competitive quality filter, so that authors can
compete on how many publications in refereed journals the have
gotten accepted. Other systems, such as inclusion in specialized
lists can serve this function even better. The very best hiring and
promotion committees don't just count refereed publications, they
actually evaluate the work.
\item It makes the papers better. Authors often acknowledge
contributions of anonymous referees.
\item It has an archival function. Once published, the paper cannot
be revised by the author without a new publication. This helps
historians and provides a basis for settling disputes about
priority. On the other hand, it leads to unnecessary publication
when an old paper could be improved, but a new one has to be
written. With electronics we can have the best of both worlds.
There can be two copies of a paper---one at the journal which is
archival and another at the author's site subject to revision. The
journal can link to both.
\end{enumerate}
On-line publication will be entirely viable even if it imitates print
publication in its refereeing style, but here is a proposal that might
make it better. I call it \emph{light refereeing}, and it has a
distinguished precedent. I was curious how the unknown Einstein, an
employee of the Swiss patent office, got four papers into
\emph{Annalen der Physik} the world's leading physics journal, in the
year 1905 and wondered how long the refereeing process took. These
papers revolutionized physics, but how could the editor know that in
advance?
It seems that Einstein was not quite an unknown, having published
before in \emph{Annalen der Physik}. That journal's custom was that the
first paper submitted by an author would be carefully examined, and
Einstein's first paper had been reviewed by Max Planck. Once the
author had been blessed, his papers would be published on receipt, and
this is was the case with Einstein's four 1905 papers. Alas, we don't
get to see a referee's report on the first paper about the theory of
relativity.
Returning to the present, we can imagine the following \emph{light
refereeing} system. An author's first paper is refereed in the
standard way. Once an author is blessed his papers are lightly
refereed. Namely, they are immediately scheduled for publication
after three months, but are sent to a referee who is asked to suggest
improvements in style or content. If the referee does not respond,
the paper is published as received or as the author has spontaneously
revised it. Such a system will be more prompt than present journal
publication and may be preferable to the growing custom of using
preprint servers. Of course, the editor could decide that a
particular paper required more or less refereeing than the standard
light refereeing.
Jeff Ullman makes similar points in his
\htmladdnormallinkfoot{\textbf{}Diatribe Against Paper Journals}
{ http://db.stanford.edu/\~{}ullman/nopaper.html}, also published
in \emph{Computing Research News}, May 1996 with the title
``Web will change the role of journals''.
\vfill
\begin{latexonly}
{\tiny\noindent /@sail.stanford.edu:/u/ftp/jmc/publications.tex: begun 1995 Feb 14, latexed
\jmcdate\ at \theTime}
\end{latexonly}
\end{document}
http://db.stanford.edu/~ullman/nopaper.html