Timeline for Making latex sourcefiles publicly available by default
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2015 at 10:05 | vote | accept | FrankMert | ||
| Jun 18, 2015 at 12:40 | comment | added | Willie Wong | If you use LaTeX source, arXiv will frequently detect that and refuse to allow you to upload just the PDF. So rather than it being "very common practice", the uploading of source files is almost required. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 12:03 | comment | added | FrankMert | All in all, that means one cannot really post to arxiv (including source code) without risking the chance to publish with some publishers, while the source code itself seems to make no difference here. This is really bad. So you either arxiv and hope you won't find yourself in the position wanting to publish with this one particular publisher, or you don't arxiv which keeps you all the options open. Downside, you're not arxiving. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 11:56 | comment | added | jakebeal | @FrankMert In addition to Andrew's link (which shows a tiny subset), the SHERPA/RoMEO database may be informative. It's not addressing exactly the same question, but there is a strong correlation. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 11:53 | comment | added | Andrew is gone | @FrankMert This is both field-specific and journal-specific. In general terms, most publishers are okay with preprints, and very few have an explicit blanket ban, but often individual journals will prohibit them. Have a look at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… for a sense of the variation here. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 11:53 | comment | added | Moriarty | @jakebeal do the publishers dislike authors publishing preprints, or only with authors publishing the paper's source code? | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 11:51 | comment | added | Moriarty | I'm not aware of any publishers that actually make the distinction between the allowed file formats of a published preprint. In my experience it's very rare that a paper which is written in LaTeX is uploaded to the arXiv without the source code. Looking at the new submissions on all the arXiv subs, the very vast majority of submissions already include the source files (and most of the rest probably weren't written in LaTeX). It already is best practice. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 11:51 | comment | added | jakebeal | @FrankMert This is entirely field-specific. For example, in computer science, there is generally no problem. In biology, however, there is usually a problem. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 11:40 | comment | added | FrankMert | Good to hear that this is common practice in some fields already! Ignoring whether it makes sense or not, do publishers in general have problems with arxiv preprints (pdf+source+graphics)? I think the main concern of authors is, that some might have a problem with it and others not and noone is going to check every potential publisher their work might be submitted to -- hence, the work ends up not being arxived. If this is not the case, this best practive should definitely be pushed in other fields to become best practice! | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 11:36 | history | answered | Moriarty | CC BY-SA 3.0 |