Magazine: Difference between revisions

From MozillaWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(90 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Background  ==
== Background  ==


*http://www.spreadfirefox.com/node/4128
Scope and mission
*http://www.slideshare.net/guest1d9a404a/mozilla-magazine-june-2009
 
*http://www.slideshare.net/MarcoCasteleijn/mozillamagazine
OpenWebJournal is an independent on-line community focused on advancing openness, innovation and opportunity on the web by publishing peer-reviewed articles, and other media, of contributors for and against these ideas. The target audience are early adapters to new Internet technologies, the main stream users of the Internet and fans of the Open Initiative and Open Source Software.  
*Production [Idea phase]
 
*Mozillamagazine.com (website under construction) [http://mozillamagazine.com/]
- OpenWebJournal’s primary mission is to contribute to the evolution of the Internet, while defining the interface between research, developers and users -


== People  ==
== People  ==


*[[User:Up North|Marco Casteleijn]] (Project lead, Creative Director)  
*[[User:Up North|Marco Casteleijn]] (Project lead, Creative Director)  
*[http://www.triacle-bc.com/ Andre Juffer] (Entrepreneur & Software engineer)
*[[User:Paulbooker|Paul Booker]] (Drupal consulting | Ubuntu / Slicehost administrator) (Sponsored by Appcoast)  
*[[User:Paulbooker|Paul Booker]] (Drupal Developer | Ubuntu / Slicehost administrator) (Sponsored by Ian Hayward)  
*[http://monosymptoms.org/ mono]
*[[User:Graphicsguru|Jamey Boje]] (Creative input)  
*[[User:Graphicsguru|Jamey Boje]] (Creative input)  
*[http://www.ianhayward.com Ian Hayward] (Entrepreneur & Mozilla sponsor)  
*[http://www.ianhayward.com Ian Hayward] (Appcoast Director & Open Source Entrepreneur)  
*[[User:Bogomil|Bogomil Shopov]]
*[http://robinmonks.com Robin Monks] (Former SFX 1.0 admin, current Drupal developer and technical writer)
*[http://robinmonks.com Robin Monks] (Former SFX 1.0 admin, current Drupal developer and technical writer)  
 
*[http://www.jeremyglassenberg.com/ Jeremy Glassenberg]
== Collaborators ==
 
*Jason Hibbets (project manager on Brand Communications + Design team (basically an internal agency) at Red Hat and the lead administrator for opensource.com)
*Carlo Frinolli (creative director http://nois3lab.it)
*Otto de Voogd (owner of www.7is7.com; Mozilla community member)
*Ken Saunders (owner of accessfirefox.org/ and mouserunner.com; Mozilla community member)


== People Needed  ==
== People Needed  ==
Line 32: Line 37:
*External Authors (to be Peer reviewed)
*External Authors (to be Peer reviewed)


== The Magazine  ==
*Graphic designer


*Consists of Content
== The Journal  ==
*Content is Editorial (with help from Internal Authors) or from Peer Reviewed Authors
*Content has different forms [Paul: What are the differences?]


*Consists of Content made and written by the community
*Content is from Peer Reviewed Authors/Artists/Designers
*Content is text, video, audio, art and photo
*Some minor Content is Editorial and
*Different roles can be identified:<br>
*Different roles can be identified:<br>


#Administrators {they take care of the site}  
#Administrators {they take care site related issues, such as maintenance}  
#Moderators {they moderate comments/subscribers}  
#Moderators {they moderate comments/subscribers/blogs} '''(a)'''
#Editors {they take care of how Content is displayed} '''(a)'''<br>  
#Editors {they take care of how Content is displayed, this includes layout of the magazine, different blocks, updates of the "look" over time etc...} '''(b)'''<br>  
#Authors {they submit Content} '''(b)'''<br>  
#Authors {they submit Content} '''(c)'''<br>  
#Subscribers {registered users with something to say (comments)}'''(c)'''
#Subscribers {registered users with something to say (comments)}'''(d)'''


Roles a+b+c can be combined. <br>  
Combinations of roles a, b, c, and d are possible. <br>


*There is input and output:
*There is input and output:
Line 54: Line 61:
#- Content submitted by Authors (also in an editorial role)  
#- Content submitted by Authors (also in an editorial role)  
#- Automated list of newly submitted titles ("the buzz")  
#- Automated list of newly submitted titles ("the buzz")  
#- Automated list of Mozilla related news
#- Automated list of top 10 lists (most commented article)  
#- Automated list of top 10 lists (highest rated by votes; most read; linked to)  
#- Blog network of Subscribers
#- Automated list of comments to comments (optional and are comments to microblogged comments welcome?)
#- Automated list of top 10 lists (most commented blog)


output: <br>  
output: <br>  


#- Frontpage (per Issue); table of content
#- Frontpage (one before, one after log-in), overview of latest articles, most commented articles, featured article,other? 
#- Articles (Editorial and per subsection Peer Reviewed) as HTML and as downloadable PDFs  
#- Articles (Editorial and per subsection Peer Reviewed) as drupal nodes (and as downloadable PDFs??)
#- Comments (also Disqus module and microblogged (if user chooses so)  
#- Comments (also Disqus module and microblogged (if user chooses so)  
#- Submitted as a whole to Magcloud (example)
#- DOI number to research articles
#- DOI number  
#- Abstracts to external publisher?<br>
#- Abstracts to external publisher?<br>


=== Editorial Sections  ===
=== Editorial Sections  ===


*In this Issue
*/Featured /
*News and Views  
*/News and Views? /
*Opinion and Comment (correspondence; Commentary; Book Reviews)  
*/Opinion and Comment (correspondence; Commentary; Book Reviews) /
*Feature
*/Jobs/Adds?
*Jobs/Adds?
 
[[Image:MM_Collages2.png|200x105px]]<br>
 
*A Editorial Collage with a theme picked from the articles. The collage will consist of Editorial Content and summaries of peer-reviewed Articles submitted in the past which fit this theme.
*The Collage will have an 'In this Collage' Page
*The Collage will have 'Views and Commentary'
*Each Collage will have its own flavor, but will be published 1-4 times a year and also uploaded to Magcloud.
 
<br>


=== Peer Review Sections  ===
=== Peer Review Sections  ===


*<u>Social impact.</u> The Internet is a social integral part of modern daily life. The authors may comment on (review), or show in original work (research), these aspects in relation to education, communication, collaboration, business, entertainment and society as a whole.
The Journal consists of the following topics:</br>
''(this may change, but seems ok right now)''


*<u>Personalization and New Tools</u>. The Internet is used by individuals. Fundamental rights such as privacy, security, personalization of Internet tools, transparency, and data traffic are topics to be discussed from an original (research) standpoint. New software tools may also fit this scope.
'''Social impact'''
The Internet is a social integral part of modern daily life. The authors may comment on (in a review), or show in original work (in a research article), these aspects in relation to  education, communication, collaboration, business, entertainment and society as a whole.<br>


*<u>Reviews of available Mozilla Tools</u>. Critical reviews of tools made available by members in the Mozilla landscape, especially in relation to other compatible tools will give valuable feedback in relation to Mozilla’s mission statement(s).
'''Own Web and New Tools'''
The Internet is used by individuals. Fundamental rights such as privacy, security, personalization of Internet tools, transparency, and legal ownership of data(traffic) are topics to be discussed from an original (research) standpoint.  New software tools may also fit this scope.


*<u>Commercial involvement</u>. Companies are hereby invited to give their view, research and involvement in the development of the Internet. The authors may not have to agree with the Mozilla Manifesto, a healthy dialogue between different approaches may give new insights in the metrics of the Internet.
'''Reviews of Open Web Tools'''
Critical review of Open Web tools, especially in relation to other compatible tools will give valuable feedback in relation to openness, innovation and opportunity on the web.


*<u>Shorts</u>. No not the pants! We mean very short original opinions which fit into the mission statement of the magazine in the form of a 1-2 frame comic, original artwork, letters, photo’s (with caption), videos/cartoon (max. 10 sec, for Internet publishing only), or code (keep it short and simple).<br>
'''Commercial involvement'''
Companies are hereby invited to give their view, research and involvement in the development of the Internet. Companies may develop Open Internet Tools or Closed Applications. The authors may not have to agree with the mission of Openness on the Internet, a healthy dialog between different approaches will give new insights in the metrics of the Internet.


These items need a more "hip" name for the magazine (y/n)  
'''Brief
'''<br>
Short original opinions which fit into the mission statement of the Journal in the form of a 1-2 frame comic, original artwork, letters, photo’s (with caption),  videos/cartoon (max. 10 sec, for Internet publishing only), letter of intent for kick-starter projects, or code (keep it short and simple).


=== Processes  ===
=== Processes  ===


*Content Life Time: <br>  
*Content Life Time: <br>  
*[[Image:Content publishing process.png|800x487px]]  
[[Image:Content publishing process.png|800x487px]]<br>
*Author Content Upload:<br>[[Image:Author content upload.png|800x65px]]<br>
[[Image:Author content upload.png|800x65px]]<br>


#<u>Checklist</u>: In this page the author is asked if the Author checked the following aspects (a more clarified explenation will be given per item):<br>- Do you have all email addresses of all co-authors?<br>- Have you read the detailed instructions for Authors?<br>- Have you prepared a Cover Letter including a suggestion for 3 Peer Reviewers?<br>- Do you have all the Manuscript files in acceptable format?<br>- Are you one of the Authors of the article (if not you cannot submit)?<br>- Do you agree with the conditions of submission and the Mozillamagazine copyright and licence&nbsp;&nbsp; agreement?<br>
In regards to the work-flow module and the underlying processes, the work flow of OpenPublish will be used to start with.  
#The <u>contact details</u> of the Authors are entered. Returning Authors can log-in; new users will fill out a form. A registered Authors gets automatically a log-in as subscriber or adds the role as Author to its Subscriber's role.<br>
#Here the Author will create a profile for his story (<u>Manuscript details</u>) by adding the following:<br>- Choose a subject area.<br>- Add 5 keywords (tags).<br>- Choose type of article (Commentary, Original (Research), Review, Graphical, Video).<br>- Add Title (with max words)<br>- Add Abstract (with max words)<br>- Choose amount of Authors<br>- Number of Figures<br>- Number of Additional files (Supplementary Material)<br>
#<u>Cover letter</u> and details:<br>- Please paste or type in your cover letter explaining why we should publish your manuscript (alternatively upload a document).<br>- Suggest up to 5 (min 3) Peer Reviewers (Name; email address, affiliation)<br>- Exclude up to 5 (optional) Peer Reviewers (Name; email address, affiliation), particularly if they are direct competitors.
#<u>Author details</u> (with the possibility to add/remove Authors)<br>- Add Name; email address; affiliation<br>- Choose contacting Author
#<u>Upload</u> (with the option to remove them before confirming)<br>- Main article<br>- Figures<br>- Additional Files
#<u>Done</u><br>- Provides an overview of forms filled and names of uploaded documents and an "ok I really Done" button to finalize the process<br>


*Peer Reviewing:<br>[[Image:Review_content_MM.png|800x74px]]<br>
[[Image:workflow.png|800x430px]]<br>  


#<u>Checklist:</u> In this page the Reviewer is asked if the Reviewer checked the following aspects (a more clarified explenation will be given per item):<br>- Is this really you?<br>- Have you read the detailed instructions for Reviewers?<br>- Do you agree with the conditions of Reviewing and the Mozillamagazine copyright and licence agreement?<br>
//What a form should contain according to the flow diagram above.  
#Here the Reviewer will see the <u>Manuscipt details</u> as submitted by the Author and can download the file(s) as submitted:<br>- The Reviewer is asked if he/she is willing to review the article.<br>- The Reviewer is asked if he/she has (to his/her knowledge) the expertise (yes/partially/no) to review this article.<br>- If less then 3 Reviewers remain the Author and the Editor(s) are notified, the Author has then to re-enter additional Reviewers.<br>
#The <u>contact details</u> of the Reviewer are entered. Returning Reviewers can log-in; new users will fill out a form. A registered Reviewers gets automatically a log-in as subscriber or adds the role as Author to its Subscriber's role. Reviewers can choose here (or later in their profile) to be anonymous (not the default).<br>
#The Reviewer is asked to make a <u>dicision</u> within 14 days:<br>a) to unconditionally accept the manuscript or proposal;<br>b) to accept it in the event that its authors improve it in certain ways;<br>c) to reject it, but encourage revision and invite resubmission; <br>d) to reject it outright.<br>- The Reviewer will add a justification for the decision.<br>- If the Decision is (a) for all 3-5 Reviewers the Manuscript is opened for the Editor(s) for editing to final publication.<br>
#The Reviewers fills its <u>comments </u>in a field, which after submitting, are emailed to all Author(s).<br>
#The Author(s) opens the <u>notification</u> page, after subsequent long-in/registration, and selects the comments from the (anonymous) Reviewer. Comments can be printed.<br>
#The Author re-submits the <u>corrections</u> (revised manuscript in full) within 30 days.<br>
#The Reviewers who had comments are notified via email and is asked to make a <u>dicision </u>within 7 days:<br>a) to unconditionally accept the manuscript or proposal;<br>b) to reject it outright.<br>- No justification is needed.<br>- If the decision is (a) all Reviewers the Manuscript is opened for the Editor(s) for editing to final publication.<br>- If the decision is (b) for any Reviewers the Author is notified by the Editor(s) via email and the manuscript is deleted from the database.


*Editing and Publishing:<br>(to be filled later; ideas are very welcome!)<br>
#<u>Creating content</u>When an Authors creates an Article he/she is asked to fill a downloadable form and needs to be filled and submitted to the Editors.
 
*Peer Reviewing:<br>
 
#A peer reviewer user should be created in the OpenPublish format or individual nodes get a special access for the reviewers<br>
#Comments to the article should be done in drupal, but not published later when the article is published (if the reviewer wishes so).
 
*Editing and Publishing:<br>
 
#Checklist: The Editor has to check the following aspects (a more clarified explanation will be given per item):<br>- Is this really you?<br>- Are the Reviewers not of the same affiliation as the Author(s)<br>- Is the Manuscript missing anything (Review information, Figures, Supplementary material, etc...)?<br>- Is the Manuscript rejected? If so: see Rejected Manuscripts Process.<br>
#The Author should be able to see a Printing Proof page.<br>
#The Author re-submits the corrections, if needed, (revised manuscript in full) within 7 days. Can drupal track changes?
#Editor will publish the article to the site<br>
#The full version is viewable for the subscribers and readers.<br>


<br>
<br>
Line 124: Line 145:
== Status  ==
== Status  ==


*Idea phase (sep. 2009)  
*Idea phase (Dec. 2010)  
*URL purchased (thanks Paul!)  
*URL OpenWeJournal.com and OpenWebJournal.org are purchased (Jan. 2011)
*Social media (facebook, twitter, mozillaca, hyves, friendfeed account made)  
*Social media (facebook, twitter, social@mozilla, Diaspora, ...) created.
*Drupal site in basic format is up (sep. 2009)
*Drupal site in basic format is up (Dec. 2010) based on OpenPublish
*Sandbox: Text for menu Items: [Please Review (pR)]/[Corrections Needed (CN)/[Done (D)]
*Community building needed and initiated (Jan. 2011)
*Basecamp in OpenAtrium set-up (ask for invites)
*MagCloud account created (March 2011)
*Discussions, Bookpages are created --> transform to Cases (in Case tracker)


== Meetings  ==
== Meetings  ==


*[http://www.spreadfirefox.com/node/5161 www.spreadfirefox.com/node/5161] Some initial marketing aspects will be discussed  
*[http://www.spreadfirefox.com/node/5161 www.spreadfirefox.com/node/5161] Some initial marketing aspects will be discussed  
*(Daily) Discussions are running on http://www.mozillaca.com, please request a login if needed. You will find a&nbsp;!mozillamagazine group there...<br>
*(Daily) Discussions are running on http://www.mozillaca.com, please request a login if needed. You will find a&nbsp;!mozillamagazine group there with old discussions. Please refer to @openwebjournal in all current discussions (also in twitter) <br>
*Please find the developers discussions on our mailing list, just join in and give us your ideas!: openwebmagazine@googlegroups.com
*Or read along: http://groups.google.com/group/openwebmagazine
*NOTE! We have move the discussions from google groups to: http://basecamp.openwebspaces.com/openwebjournal/<br>


== Feature requests  ==
== Feature requests  ==


*Peer reviewed section for specific content  
*Peer reviewed section for specific content  
*http://www.slideshare.net/MarcoCasteleijn/mozillamagazine  
*http://www.slideshare.net/MarcoCasteleijn/mozillamagazine (background info; very old, we moved away from a Mozillamagazine to a open web journal)
*Color scheme and unique clean look (Fonts; graphics)
*Own Drupal theme: color scheme and unique clean look (Fonts; graphics)
*More final feature list will be public here when we know...


<br>
==Related Links:==


<br>
[http://openwebjournal.org OpenWebJournal]
 
<div class="right" >
<br>
 
<br>

Latest revision as of 11:59, 29 July 2012

Background

Scope and mission

OpenWebJournal is an independent on-line community focused on advancing openness, innovation and opportunity on the web by publishing peer-reviewed articles, and other media, of contributors for and against these ideas. The target audience are early adapters to new Internet technologies, the main stream users of the Internet and fans of the Open Initiative and Open Source Software.

- OpenWebJournal’s primary mission is to contribute to the evolution of the Internet, while defining the interface between research, developers and users -

People

  • Marco Casteleijn (Project lead, Creative Director)
  • Paul Booker (Drupal consulting | Ubuntu / Slicehost administrator) (Sponsored by Appcoast)
  • mono
  • Jamey Boje (Creative input)
  • Ian Hayward (Appcoast Director & Open Source Entrepreneur)
  • Robin Monks (Former SFX 1.0 admin, current Drupal developer and technical writer)

Collaborators

  • Jason Hibbets (project manager on Brand Communications + Design team (basically an internal agency) at Red Hat and the lead administrator for opensource.com)
  • Carlo Frinolli (creative director http://nois3lab.it)
  • Otto de Voogd (owner of www.7is7.com; Mozilla community member)
  • Ken Saunders (owner of accessfirefox.org/ and mouserunner.com; Mozilla community member)

People Needed

  • Moderators
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editor(s) {Social Impact}
  • Editor(s) {Personification and New Tools}
  • Editor(s) {Reviews of Available Mozilla Tools}
  • Editors(s) {Commercial involvment}
  • Editors(s) {Shorts}
  • Internal Authors
  • Suggested Peer reviewers (for each section; please add you name if you are available)
  • External Authors (to be Peer reviewed)
  • Graphic designer

The Journal

  • Consists of Content made and written by the community
  • Content is from Peer Reviewed Authors/Artists/Designers
  • Content is text, video, audio, art and photo
  • Some minor Content is Editorial and
  • Different roles can be identified:
  1. Administrators {they take care site related issues, such as maintenance}
  2. Moderators {they moderate comments/subscribers/blogs} (a)
  3. Editors {they take care of how Content is displayed, this includes layout of the magazine, different blocks, updates of the "look" over time etc...} (b)
  4. Authors {they submit Content} (c)
  5. Subscribers {registered users with something to say (comments)}(d)

Combinations of roles a, b, c, and d are possible.

  • There is input and output:

input:

  1. - Content submitted by Authors (also in an editorial role)
  2. - Automated list of newly submitted titles ("the buzz")
  3. - Automated list of top 10 lists (most commented article)
  4. - Blog network of Subscribers
  5. - Automated list of top 10 lists (most commented blog)

output:

  1. - Frontpage (one before, one after log-in), overview of latest articles, most commented articles, featured article,other?
  2. - Articles (Editorial and per subsection Peer Reviewed) as drupal nodes (and as downloadable PDFs??)
  3. - Comments (also Disqus module and microblogged (if user chooses so)
  4. - DOI number to research articles
  5. - Abstracts to external publisher?

Editorial Sections

  • /Featured /
  • /News and Views? /
  • /Opinion and Comment (correspondence; Commentary; Book Reviews) /
  • /Jobs/Adds?

MM Collages2.png

  • A Editorial Collage with a theme picked from the articles. The collage will consist of Editorial Content and summaries of peer-reviewed Articles submitted in the past which fit this theme.
  • The Collage will have an 'In this Collage' Page
  • The Collage will have 'Views and Commentary'
  • Each Collage will have its own flavor, but will be published 1-4 times a year and also uploaded to Magcloud.


Peer Review Sections

The Journal consists of the following topics:
(this may change, but seems ok right now)

Social impact The Internet is a social integral part of modern daily life. The authors may comment on (in a review), or show in original work (in a research article), these aspects in relation to education, communication, collaboration, business, entertainment and society as a whole.

Own Web and New Tools The Internet is used by individuals. Fundamental rights such as privacy, security, personalization of Internet tools, transparency, and legal ownership of data(traffic) are topics to be discussed from an original (research) standpoint. New software tools may also fit this scope.

Reviews of Open Web Tools Critical review of Open Web tools, especially in relation to other compatible tools will give valuable feedback in relation to openness, innovation and opportunity on the web.

Commercial involvement Companies are hereby invited to give their view, research and involvement in the development of the Internet. Companies may develop Open Internet Tools or Closed Applications. The authors may not have to agree with the mission of Openness on the Internet, a healthy dialog between different approaches will give new insights in the metrics of the Internet.

Brief
Short original opinions which fit into the mission statement of the Journal in the form of a 1-2 frame comic, original artwork, letters, photo’s (with caption), videos/cartoon (max. 10 sec, for Internet publishing only), letter of intent for kick-starter projects, or code (keep it short and simple).

Processes

  • Content Life Time:

Content publishing process.png
Author content upload.png

In regards to the work-flow module and the underlying processes, the work flow of OpenPublish will be used to start with.

Workflow.png

//What a form should contain according to the flow diagram above.

  1. Creating contentWhen an Authors creates an Article he/she is asked to fill a downloadable form and needs to be filled and submitted to the Editors.
  • Peer Reviewing:
  1. A peer reviewer user should be created in the OpenPublish format or individual nodes get a special access for the reviewers
  2. Comments to the article should be done in drupal, but not published later when the article is published (if the reviewer wishes so).
  • Editing and Publishing:
  1. Checklist: The Editor has to check the following aspects (a more clarified explanation will be given per item):
    - Is this really you?
    - Are the Reviewers not of the same affiliation as the Author(s)
    - Is the Manuscript missing anything (Review information, Figures, Supplementary material, etc...)?
    - Is the Manuscript rejected? If so: see Rejected Manuscripts Process.
  2. The Author should be able to see a Printing Proof page.
  3. The Author re-submits the corrections, if needed, (revised manuscript in full) within 7 days. Can drupal track changes?
  4. Editor will publish the article to the site
  5. The full version is viewable for the subscribers and readers.


Bugs

  • Not relevant yet

Status

  • Idea phase (Dec. 2010)
  • URL OpenWeJournal.com and OpenWebJournal.org are purchased (Jan. 2011)
  • Social media (facebook, twitter, social@mozilla, Diaspora, ...) created.
  • Drupal site in basic format is up (Dec. 2010) based on OpenPublish
  • Sandbox: Text for menu Items: [Please Review (pR)]/[Corrections Needed (CN)/[Done (D)]
  • Community building needed and initiated (Jan. 2011)
  • Basecamp in OpenAtrium set-up (ask for invites)
  • MagCloud account created (March 2011)
  • Discussions, Bookpages are created --> transform to Cases (in Case tracker)

Meetings

Feature requests

  • Peer reviewed section for specific content
  • http://www.slideshare.net/MarcoCasteleijn/mozillamagazine (background info; very old, we moved away from a Mozillamagazine to a open web journal)
  • Own Drupal theme: color scheme and unique clean look (Fonts; graphics)
  • More final feature list will be public here when we know...

Related Links:

OpenWebJournal