5 thoughts on “Our application form is changing

  1. It’s Great…!
    Unification of author names and persistent identifiers of journal articles would be an essential component for the Source Journals covered in DOAJ.

    Regards
    Jiban K. Pal

  2. Thank you! It’s very good to give a hard look to the application form fields and the data model, because DOAJ has ambitious goals and the application form must not raise unnecessary barriers.

    I have some experience performing rather advanced DOAJ searches to surface journals people may want to use and importing DOAJ data into Wikidata. From this background, I have some comments on fields 8, 32, 33.

    8) I agree that this doesn’t need to be asked and updated manually, but it’s important for authors and other users to know whether a journal uses free/libre and open source software or not. If you an author, this is often the easiest way to make sure that the content will keep being accessible in certain ways, if you care about it. If you are a reviewer and you are looking for a journal where to volunteer, you may also like to use a software you know and like (or to avoid one you hate). So, please keep either a binary FLOSS/proprietary, or an option from a closed list (OJS, Janeway, ARPHA, you name it), fetched automatically.

    32) This field is currently hard to use, but the information would be valuable if reliable. There’s some discussion at . Please engage to find out where we can keep this sort of information for everyone to share.

    33) This is a bit like 8). The data currently contained is often of little use, but the authors may be interested in knowing whether the journal produces JATS or other machine-readable output. Knowing that a journal handles more than doc and PDF is often a proxy for knowing whether they have a decent full-text handling system (cf. format-free journals https://asntech.github.io/format-free-journals/ ) or they live in the middle ages like most of the giant publishers.

Comments are closed.