Thanks, Biswajit.
Yet, I think they (the editors) might be forgiving of any prior discussion in an informal way here at iMechanica, right? I mean suppose I discuss some (even most) aspects of a paper, but without putting it in the form of a preprint as such. May be, it's just an internal report that still needs to be enhanced and polished with a more scholarly kind of discussion, etc. Suppose I share it here (or via my personal Web site, with the distribution qualified with the most restrictive Creative Commons license, more restrictive than iMechanica's). How would the editors then typically view such a thing?
... As a matter of fact, I have an example or two in mind.
I was thinking of putting on the Web a 3-page extended abstract for a planned paper. I had submitted the abstract at an international conference held in India. It got accepted there. However, since I could not find the time to finish the planned work, I withdrew it, well in time. (The work was about development of a toy pedagogical software, and the extended summary reads mostly like a somewhat detailed functional spec. Not too detailed, but enough for a smart programmer to be able to build something like that separately on his own.). Suppose none steals it---none else implements it or sends any paper based on this idea. Suppose I then prepare a full-length paper and send it to a journal. How are the editors likely to view it? What if I put the extended abstract here at iMechanica (and not at my personal Web site)?
A second example concerns development of my idea concerning the physical meaning of the concept of potential. Suppose I post a preliminary draft here and invite discussions. If an idea is conceptually novel, it's better to anticipate the views/objections that other people might have so that these can be addressed in a better manner in the paper. So, I post it here in that spirit. I then refine it and send it to a journal in the mechanics field (not too sure which one, but assume that some such a commercial journal does exist). How about this example? How would the editors typically look at it?
I mean, all papers are not of the same kind. I can understand if someone puts up a paper disclosing a lot of crucial experimental data or an entire mathematical model including its derivation, on the Web (e.g. here at iMechanica), and then submits it to the journal, and if they don't like that kind of a prepublication. In the first case, there can be tricky issues to do with the funding agency's rights and the Journal's. In the second, there can be the issue of novelty being lost. So, objections in such cases can be understandable. (For the mathematical derviation, perhaps not even in this case, provided no funding agency is involved and you are distributing it with the most restrictive CC license from your personal Web site). In any case, my two examples seem to be different. Any thoughts?
--Ajit
- - - - -
[E&OE]
Thanks, Biswajit.
Yet, I think they (the editors) might be forgiving of any prior discussion in an informal way here at iMechanica, right? I mean suppose I discuss some (even most) aspects of a paper, but without putting it in the form of a preprint as such. May be, it's just an internal report that still needs to be enhanced and polished with a more scholarly kind of discussion, etc. Suppose I share it here (or via my personal Web site, with the distribution qualified with the most restrictive Creative Commons license, more restrictive than iMechanica's). How would the editors then typically view such a thing?
... As a matter of fact, I have an example or two in mind.
I was thinking of putting on the Web a 3-page extended abstract for a planned paper. I had submitted the abstract at an international conference held in India. It got accepted there. However, since I could not find the time to finish the planned work, I withdrew it, well in time. (The work was about development of a toy pedagogical software, and the extended summary reads mostly like a somewhat detailed functional spec. Not too detailed, but enough for a smart programmer to be able to build something like that separately on his own.). Suppose none steals it---none else implements it or sends any paper based on this idea. Suppose I then prepare a full-length paper and send it to a journal. How are the editors likely to view it? What if I put the extended abstract here at iMechanica (and not at my personal Web site)?
A second example concerns development of my idea concerning the physical meaning of the concept of potential. Suppose I post a preliminary draft here and invite discussions. If an idea is conceptually novel, it's better to anticipate the views/objections that other people might have so that these can be addressed in a better manner in the paper. So, I post it here in that spirit. I then refine it and send it to a journal in the mechanics field (not too sure which one, but assume that some such a commercial journal does exist). How about this example? How would the editors typically look at it?
I mean, all papers are not of the same kind. I can understand if someone puts up a paper disclosing a lot of crucial experimental data or an entire mathematical model including its derivation, on the Web (e.g. here at iMechanica), and then submits it to the journal, and if they don't like that kind of a prepublication. In the first case, there can be tricky issues to do with the funding agency's rights and the Journal's. In the second, there can be the issue of novelty being lost. So, objections in such cases can be understandable. (For the mathematical derviation, perhaps not even in this case, provided no funding agency is involved and you are distributing it with the most restrictive CC license from your personal Web site). In any case, my two examples seem to be different. Any thoughts?
--Ajit
- - - - -
[E&OE]