[OSGeo-Discuss] Call for Papers for FOSS4G 2013 Academic Track

Massimiliano Cannata massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
Mon Jan 28 09:35:17 PST 2013


Hi all,
I step back too.
I don't want to rise problems or whatever, and I think that LOC can decide
what they think is better, and.... after all its their conference ;-)

I have already clearly stated my point of view, and I have just to add that
in Denver the Journal was the same that is proposed for Nottingam (TGIS)
and in my opinion publishing 6 months after the conference is not a drama.

My little 1 cents..
Maxi


 but just remind that the conference of Sept. 2013 in my opinion should
present work done in 2013 an

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
> wrote:

> Hi Jo,
>
> Indeed I fully agree with you.
>
> There seemed to be some confusion on past vs present.  My goal was only
> to clear that up.
>
> I'll step back and let the Academic committee decide on all that.
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> On 13-01-28 10:59 AM, Jo Cook wrote:
> > Hi Jeff and the rest of the list,
> >
> > I'm speaking from a position of ignorance about this, but surely the
> > academic track submission process will need to change from year to year
> > depending on the journal that papers are to be submitted to? Surely the
> > process is driven mainly by the demands and deadlines of the journal,
> > rather than any arbitrary date chosen by a committee?
> >
> > I think the only way you could set the dates and process in stone would
> > be to guarantee publication in the same journal each year (as well as
> > the OSGeo journal).
> >
> > Happy to be corrected on any of these points though!
> >
> > Jo
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Jeff McKenna
> > <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >     Here's another thought for our "lessons learned" wiki:  For the next
> >     FOSS4G event, the first step in the Academic submission process
> could be
> >     an "extended abstract" due for something like Feb 1st.  How I am
> coming
> >     up with that idea?  On this past Friday was a deadline for a
> "CoastGIS"
> >     event, and all presentation abstracts were to follow an "extended"
> >     abstract template (min 2 pages max 4 pages, including listing your
> >     peer-reviewed sources); selected extended abstracts will be invited
> to
> >     submit full papers.  Could this be the first step someday for a
> FOSS4G
> >     Academic track?  I've leave that to the FOSS4G Academic leaders to
> >     discuss (again I am not one of those leaders).
> >
> >     For the record here was the "extended" abstract template (sorry for
> the
> >     M$ file, I have no relation to this event):
> >
> http://coinatlantic.ca/coastgis2013/docs/CoastGIS_2013_Extended_Abstract_Template.doc
> >
> >     Thanks for listening.
> >
> >     -jeff
> >
> >
> >
> >     On 13-01-27 11:49 AM, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> >     > Hello Barend, Venka, Andy, Max, Nick, and Puneet,
> >     >
> >     > First I want to thank the Academic chairs Barend and Franz-Josef
> for
> >     > volunteering for the management of the difficult process of the
> >     > selection of papers for the FOSS4G 2013 event.  I am impressed by
> >     their
> >     > passion and dedication to getting papers published in the
> Transactions
> >     > in GIS journal, this is very important.
> >     >
> >     > I want to make a strong reminder to all of the FOSS4G 2013 local
> >     > committee (academic or otherwise) to make sure to be adding to your
> >     > "Lessons Learned" wiki page as you travel down this path (the time
> >     to be
> >     > adding thoughts is now not later when you have forgotten: as a
> >     > documenter, I know those that say "oh I'll do that later" never
> >     ever do,
> >     > ever).  Please begin writing your thoughts for 2013 at:
> >     > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2013_Lessons_Learned  You will
> >     notice
> >     > that is is blank for 2013.   These thoughts are very important to
> >     share,
> >     > as future local committees will be reviewing these (take a look at
> all
> >     > the wonderful lessons learned from previous events linked from that
> >     > page, really wonderful to have).  Thank you, and future event
> >     committees
> >     > will thank you.
> >     >
> >     > Regarding the Academic track call for papers for 2013, of course
> >     we must
> >     > respect the local committees decisions.  I am listening to Barend's
> >     > thoughts, as well as long-time FOSS4G academic leaders like Venka
> and
> >     > Massimiliano.  I feel that the 2013 committee could consider their
> >     > feedback, and possibly extend the deadline by a month to March
> >     1st.  It
> >     > would give researchers some breathing room to prepare their papers,
> >     > which, yes is earlier than past FOSS4G events but if we all want
> >     papers
> >     > within these journals we must respect these early deadlines.  Of
> >     course
> >     > the local committee doesn't have to make an extension, I am only
> >     making
> >     > a suggestion.
> >     >
> >     > Another idea, or reminder, I have for the committee is to be as
> >     open as
> >     > possible; for example, there is a mailing list setup just for
> FOSS4G
> >     > Academic discussions (I believe this was probably last used in
> >     2010, but
> >     > it is there to discuss openly with academic FOSS4G leaders).
>  Again,
> >     > there is no official requirement for local committees to use these
> >     > mailing lists.
> >      http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-academic
> >     >
> >     > Finally, I just now went back to examine the FOSS4G 2011 Academic
> >     Track
> >     > process used.  In fact that year I was also on the Academic
> Selection
> >     > committee, which was led wonderfully by the hard-working Rafael
> >     Moreno.
> >     >  On February 1st a "Call for Papers" was released for the Academic
> >     > track, and the call was actually for abstracts (yes google
> >     archives can
> >     > trick you sometimes, as the title was for "Call for Papers" but if
> you
> >     > read the release the first step was abstract submission).  The
> >     deadline
> >     > for academic abstracts was April 15th.  We received approximately
> 60
> >     > academic abstracts (note that the day before the deadline, on April
> >     > 14th, we only had 9 submissions so far - Paul Ramsey would be
> nodding
> >     > his head at this, as this is very common, the many submitted right
> at
> >     > the deadline).  Rafael then instructed us to have our abstract
> >     rankings
> >     > back to him by May 16th.  From those rankings the plan was: the
> >     top 11 +
> >     > 2 (backup) were invited to submit a paper for TGIS; the next 11 + 2
> >     > (backup) were invited to submit a paper for the OSGeo Journal.
> >     > According to my email archives the deadline for those full papers
> was
> >     > July 30th; and we received a total of 17 full papers.  The rest
> >     > (history) should be discussed on the FOSS4G Academic list with the
> >     > academic leaders (I am not one), but I hope this little history
> >     summary
> >     > helps the 2013 committee move forward.
> >     >
> >     > Again thanks for the hard work of the 2013 local committee.
> >     >
> >     > And thank you all for your FOSS4G passion (Puneet was right to put
> it
> >     > all in perspective).
> >     >
> >     > -jeff
> >     > OSGeo President
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > On 13-01-25 7:26 AM, b.j.kobben at utwente.nl
> >     <mailto:b.j.kobben at utwente.nl> wrote:
> >     >> Dear Venka and Massimiliano,
> >     >>
> >     >> I feel we have to defend the Foss4G2013 AT a bit here (as AT
> >     co-chairs we
> >     >> should ;-)
> >     >>
> >     >> It is actually not true that "Previous FOSS4G's had abstract
> >     review by the
> >     >> academic committee
> >     >> and selected authors were asked to submit full papers closer to
> the
> >     >> conference dates."
> >     >> Both in the 2010 and 2011 conferences we had submission of full
> >     papers,
> >     >> not abstracts.
> >     >>
> >     >> The reason for this is that academics nowadays need to publish,
> >     if we want
> >     >> or not, and that means we have to offer a possibility of official
> >     >> publishing for the AT papers. The only way to achieve that is
> >     have journal
> >     >> outlets secured well beforehand and for that you need to set up a
> >     "Journal
> >     >> Type" submission and reviewing system, which means selection of
> full
> >     >> papers. Having to first select promising abstract, then ask these
> >     people
> >     >> to write full papers, and then have these properly peer-reviewed,
> all
> >     >> before the conference publication deadline, would mean we'd need
> >     an even
> >     >> earlier deadline.
> >     >> This by the way is nowadays accepted academic practice at
> >     conferences that
> >     >> offer Jopurnal publication outputs.
> >     >>
> >     >> I agree that 7 months before the conference seems like a very
> early
> >     >> deadline, but for the reviewing process, the editing and
> >     processing of
> >     >> accepted papers and preparation of manuscripts for publication, it
> >     >> actually is quite a tight time table. Note that the advantage is
> >     that if
> >     >> your paper is accepted, you are assured of it being actually
> >     published at
> >     >> the conference date, something may academics are keen for...
> >     >>
> >     >> Note also that the normal (non AT) tracks at Foss4G continue to
> offer
> >     >> submission and reviewing based on abstracts.
> >     >>
> >     >> We will have this year (as in previous years) an Academic
> >     Committee. These
> >     >> are the people that will be asked to do the full paper reviewing,
> >     and we
> >     >> have just this week invited candidates and have asked them to
> >     agree to do
> >     >> this important task. The list will appear on the site once the
> >     reviewing
> >     >> process starts.
> >     >>
> >     >> I hope this answers some of your questions.
> >     >>
> >     >>
> >     >> For further questions, comments and remarks, please don't
> hesitate to
> >     >> contact the Academic Track co-chairs:
> >     >>
> >     >> * Franz-Josef Behr (Stuttgart University of Applied Sciences):
> >     >> franz-josef.behr at hft-stuttgart.de
> >     <mailto:franz-josef.behr at hft-stuttgart.de>
> >     >> * Barend Köbben (ITC-University of Twente): kobben at itc.nl
> >     <mailto:kobben at itc.nl>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
*Massimiliano Cannata*

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruszione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14****

Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09****

massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch

*www.supsi.ch/ist*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20130128/f8a5c8a3/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Discuss mailing list