3 ms·
I don't know for this specific publisher, but in research, usually: - scientific editors… are researchers paid by a university - copy editing… is done by the
by jraph 4y ago
I don't know for this specific publisher, but in research, usually:
- scientific editors… are researchers paid by a university
- copy editing… is done by the authors
- typesetting… is done by the authors
- reviews… are done by the other researchers paid by their respective university
Okay, the infrastructure remains. The needs are: a simple website serving PDF files and pages with the metadata. You can even let something like HAL, Arxiv or Sci-Hub do that.
- justinclift 4y agoCompetent infrastructure is very rarely that simple. At least throw in some backups. And someone to manage them / know how they work. ;)
- jraph 4y agoIndeed. But that does not require the costs paid by authors to submit a paper, and by the readers. What's more, universities already have this kind of infrastructure.
- justinclift 4y ago> What's more, universities already have this kind of infrastructure. Ha! While "technically" true, many (most?) university's (at least in Australia) have IT infrastructure that was last run competently sometime around when dinosaurs roamed. Saying that from having worked at some (as a contractor), and having non-IT friends at others... whom are constantly frustrated about this stuff. :/
- fsh 4y agoThis does not match my experience in science publishing. Scientific journals usually have at least a few paid full-time and part-time editors. They also do their own copy editing and typesetting of the manuscripts. The differences between the arXiv versions and the published versions are usually quite noticeable.