El 17/03/12 13:09, Mathieu ONeil escribió:
-Not sure what "epub" means?
ePub its an open file format used for e-book readers and other devices. I think we need to offer the issues in that format since PDF is a format for printing and not for reading in electronic devices.
-If I understand correctly, you are talking about a system which automatically converts html into pdf? Thanks for confirming this.
Nope.
That sounds great, but we would need to make sure the pdf structure is appropriate, ie looks like what we did for cspp 1 or at least not too different if possible.
The PDF layout used in CSPP it's good for printing but really bad for screen reading. That's why we should provide ePub version or at leat, the OpenDocument version (that can be easily converted to ePub). The CSPP's PDF also lacks of important metadata information, like keywords.
-Regarding the amount of files: I agree that there are a lot, but since this is an essential part of our opening up of the review process, which has been debated a lot by the group, I'm afraid we need to have all these files available - this only concerns research papers, not debates, comments or reports by the way so not too many articles really. So the question remains - can we fit all these files on one page?
I get that, but I don't see any reason to have the reviews of each article published as PDF files. Why not to include them in an article's subpage called "Reviews"? Eventually, we could add a "export to pdf" feature, but I think that the contents should be available in HTML as the first option. Best, -- Franco Iacomella