categories - Category Theory list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Barr <barr@math.mcgill.ca>
To: Categories list <categories@mta.ca>
Subject: Applied Categorical Structures
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 09:04:34 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1Hwfe9-00042l-Jl@mailserv.mta.ca> (raw)

Dear colleagues:

After thinking about it, I cannot restrain myself from responding to
Ross's message that the procedings of CT07 will be published by Applied
Categorical Structures.  What I say here is what I would do.  I cannot
recommend what other people should do (especially people without tenure,
who are in a peculiar position).

I am not going to CT07 (I cannot face crossing the pond in sardine class)
nor am I planning to publish a paper in the proceedings.  But if I were, I
would certainly not publish it in ACS.  The proceedings of the Kleislifest
in 2000 were published by ACS but my paper went into TAC.

ACS is published by Kluwer (now a subsidary of Springer).  Kluwer is one
of the "gang of five"  publishers that are sucking all the life (not to
mention money) out of mathematical publication.  The journal is not
subscribed to by McGill nor by any other university in Montreal.  I would
actually be surprised if any university in Canada or more than a small
handful in the US subscribe.  It is no wonder since they charge, as far as
I can tell, in the neighbourhood of $3 a page so that the annual
subscription of nearly 100 pages costs nearly $3000.  The author of a
paper published there is legally enjoined from posting it on his own web
site.  What a perversion of the whole idea of intellectual property (a
somewhat dubious concept in any case, especially the way it is practiced
today).  Imagine, we do all the work, they make all the profit, and then
tell us we cannot distribute it freely.

When I publish, my interests are served best by the widest possible
distribution.  If it is category theory, that means TAC.  (Unfortunately,
my most recent work has been in point-set topology, which has no such
alternative.)  TAC is freely (in both senses) available and leaves the
intellectual property where it belongs, with the author.  But even if TAC
is unsuitable for your work, there are reasonable alternatives.  Two of my
recent papers have been published in the Canadian Journal and one in an
inexpensive Japanese journal.  Even tenure committees might be impressed
by those places.  Of course, nothing I do would ever be acceptable in
"prestige" journals, but that gets into issues that Ronnie Brown has
recently expressed better than I can.

Michael






             reply	other threads:[~2007-06-07 13:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-06-07 13:04 Michael Barr [this message]
2007-06-08 16:41 RJ Wood

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=E1Hwfe9-00042l-Jl@mailserv.mta.ca \
    --to=barr@math.mcgill.ca \
    --cc=categories@mta.ca \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).