IEEE Spectrum January, 2008 - 14

by robert w. lucky

Technical Publications and the Internet

I

www.spectrum.Ieee.org

that there are many other
publication formats that
should indeed be reserved
as member benefits.
There are a number of
other arguments against free
access to technical publications, including the revenue
that libraries and publications bring to the institution.
I can only say that although
these are problems, I have
neither the space here nor
the relevant knowledge to
address them. A more curious barrier is the attitude
of the authors themselves.
While every author wants
as many readers as possible, it seems we are conditioned to want to see our
work in print. A work that
appears only on the Internet
doesn't seem to have the
same weight. Perhaps that

is why we call them papers.
The Internet community has been inventing new
ways to convey information
and to collaborate in understanding it-consumer
reviews, discussion forums,
blogs, community filtering,
and the Wikipedia model.
Perhaps we in the technical
institutions haven't taken
full advantage of these ideas,
and it may be that our historical model for publication is what's stopping us.
An interesting experiment that has come to my
attention is a new policy
called publish first, review
later. The idea is to cut
out the months-long process of review and publication, which seems less and
less tolerable as technology
accelerates, without per-

january 2008 * IEEE SpEctrum * na

25

greg mably

t's a joy to search and
access information so
effortlessly on the World
Wide Web-that is, until I'm
looking for a technical publication. Far too many are
hidden behind subscription
and payment mechanisms.
The great irony is that
virtually every technical
paper is held on the computer of an author who
would be thrilled to send a
free copy to anyone requesting it. But requesting every
paper that you might (or
might not) want is so inconvenient that almost no one
does this. So why aren't all
technical publications freely
accessible on the Web?
The first argument that
comes to mind is that institutions must restrict their
publications to their members to keep those members. However, I doubt
that people join the IEEE,
for instance, to receive the
Transactions-even though
many of them say they do in
surveys. I would contend-
based on no hard data
whatsoever-that engineers
join to enhance their sense
of professionalism and
that very few read the
Transactions. That doesn't
mean that its papers have
little importance, only that
the information they contain
is primarily promulgated
through social networks.
Let me be clear that I'm
speaking only about heavily
technical material and

manently renouncing the
greatest value our institution can provide: selection
among proffered materials.
Can we have it both ways-
quick publication without
barriers and knowledgeable guidance about which
papers are valuable?
I can only imagine
how such a system might
work. We might have three
Internet formats-a "provisional" magazine that would
contain newly submitted,
unreviewed papers, a "classic" magazine that would
carry only papers approved
by a group of invited reviewers, and a third magazine
for the dreaded "other" category. Whether the formats
would allow for "consumer"
reviews and discussion is
an interesting question.
The system would speed
publication and stimulate discussion, thus providing more feedback to
authors. However, the public scrutiny might discourage many aspiring authors,
who would fear the ignominy of having their papers
panned, then demoted to the
"other" category. There is
also the question of whether
a paper could be modified
or withdrawn. Are our
papers living documents
or are they to be inscribed
in immutable stone?
I realize that I have
raised more questions than
answers. Like many of you,
I am both an occasional
author and a consumer, and
I'm not even sure of what
I want in either instance. I
just feel we can improve on
the system we now have. o
http://www.spectrum.Ieee.org
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Spectrum January, 2008
