Computer Science and Engineering have a publication system that is quite different from that of other disciplines, in that conference proceedings have great importance and partially take the role of journal papers (see e.g. this answer or this question).
As an outsider from a neighbouring field, I can see some disadvantages of this system:
- tight time constraints in authoring and refereeing actively impact the quality of publications: a paper is not submitted or accepted "when it is good enough", but rather when the deadlines force people to act.
- there is a certain duplication of content between conference and journal papers.
- travel fees (pre-pandemic, at least) add an unnecessary component to publication costs, and raise the entry bar for researchers from some countries.
On the other hand, I find it harder to pinpoint clear advantages of the system. If you wanted to convince my field to switch to this system, what arguments would you use? What are its scientific benefits? How does it lead to a better research ecosystem?
This system is relatively recent, so one would hope that it solves some issues with the older model.
Feel free to challenge the frame if you disagree with some of the disadvantages stated above --- that would answer my question, too.