[okfn-discuss] OKCon 2009: CFP + submissions system

Mon Nov 2 14:06:02 UTC 2009

Hi *,

Wow, good progress. I was just little time offline :-)  Thank  you  
Jonathan, Sören, and Rufus.

Okay, I had a look on the different sites and here are my comments:

First question. If I use this link: http://www.okfn.org/okcon/ and  
then try to go back to the page, I end here http://www.okfn.org/okcon/cfp
Is it just to keep the page "invisible" until it is finished?

On Oct 31, 2009, at 8:54 AM, Rufus Pollock wrote:

> 2009/10/30 Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray at okfn.org>:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've made some edits to the OKCon 2010 call for proposals (copied
>> below), and propose we get this out ASAP!
>
> Great work Jonathan.
>
> I've got some changes to the announce. some I've mentioned below but
> I've mostly just gone and edited the the wiki:
> http://wiki.okfn.org/okcon/2010/cfp/

What do you think, if we link the call (i.e. the term in the call) to  
the Open Knowledge definition (http://www.opendefinition.org/).  
Another minor detail is that the submission details appeared before  
the submission dates etc. I changed the order.

>
>> # Open Knowledge Conference 2010: Call for Proposals
>
> I suggest here we have our standard bullet points here:
>
> * when: Saturday 24th April 2010
> * where: London, UK
> * website: http://www.okfn.org/okcon/
> * last year: http://www.okfn.org/okcon/2009/

I think this a very good idea. Well, but I couldn't find the last  
bullet point? Well, if this was just a suggestion then I vote for it :-)

>
>> ## Introduction
>
> This looks a big improvement but could do with a bit more sharpening.
> I've edited direct on the wiki page ...
>
> [...]

I'd like to discuss the order of the topics. At the moment it is:
1. Technology
2. Law, Society and Democracy
3. Culture and Education
4. Science and Research

If technology is the most important topic at this conference then  
fine, but the introduction gives (at least me) another impression.  
What do you think?

>
>> ## Important Dates
>
> This should at or near the top ....
>
>>    * Submission deadline: December 15th 2009
>>    * Reviewing and discussion period: December 15th 2009 - January  
>> 31th 2010
>>    * Notification of acceptance: January 31th 2010
>>    * Camera-ready papers due: February 31th 2010
>>    * Research track at OKCon: April 2010

I think so too! Another possibility would be to split or copy it. For  
example the submission deadline could be part of the header (when,  
where etc.) and then the all submission details are at the same  
position as now.

>
> [...]

Okay, about the submission template. Maybe it is a bit over-engineered  
but what do you think if we adapt a professional template such as  
IEEE, ACM or Springer? At the moment, only the structure is given, but  
wouldn't be nice to have one consistent layout? Well, please tell me  
your plans with the proceedings? Will there be a website with all  
papers or do we provide are open access book or ...?

What is about the logo? I had a look on the poll and I think we have  
one finalist. :-) Shouldn't we this include in the call?

In my point of view is the paper length unbalanced. Short papers  
should have 2- 4 pages and full papers 5-10 pages. Well, what do you  
think about full papers with 6 - 8 pages?

And finally for our internal organization: Maybe a list would be  
appropriate with an overview about who will send the CfP to which  
mailing list.

Well, these are my few comments.

Greetings from lovely Pittsburgh,
Claudia

>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss