FOSS4G'13

Should we not upload them?  Part of the problem with repositories is that people never quite find the time to stick things in.  If we want them in ELOGeo (which would be great), then we should probably make it happen. We have the abstracts, we just need the slides........... 

Though we have the abstracts, i would suggest that we give the authors the opportunity to upload them. Two main reasons

1. It make sure that we get the explicit permission from the authors 
2. They can then modify/change or even remove their files as they wish later if needed.

This is also the reason that we want to get them do this before the conference as if we leave it after the conference (as most conferences have done), it will not happen as most authors will forget or might not get time after the event.

Suchith

1. There's nothing about this in the meeting minutes.

2. This isn't just a legacy thing, it impacts on the programme dev

3. It has an impact on workflow. Very soon the abstracts will be on the web in the provisional programme, and at another fixed time point the abstracts will need to go to the brochure designer and onto the web for the final programme. If people are changing them on ELOGeo, do we then treat those as the master copy up until those deadlines?

4. Almost separate from this, do we do any copy-editing, typo fixing etc on the submitted abstracts?

5. Do we worry about people making drastic changes in their abstracts?

6. Where's the programme team when you need them?

Think the ELOGeo thing should be legacy, but as such it only goes up AFTER the event. That keeps everything simple i think......  This means that on the run up to the event, the FOSS4G page is the definitive source of information.  Dont really want things appearing elsewhere until after the event.
  

I see no harm for people uploading thier presentation slides into ELOGeo before the event. Otherwise it is really difficult to get them archived after the event. 

For the Abstracts,  the text already submitted and which will be put in the web at provisional program is the final version as far as we are concerned, so it will not affect the workflow in any way.

But i leave it upto all of you to decide.

Suchith

I think we need to be careful about the content of presentations, we wouldn't want a presenter to change their slides and leave us with an outdated version.

I start from the position that a massive repository of slides and abstracts is of limited interest to most people and I doubt it will get much use. However we have a repository and we should encourage presenters to upload to it so including a link in the paper acceptance mail makes sense to me (we can send them a further reminder before the event when they have prepped their slide decks etc. We don't have the capacity to consider uploading 190 papers etc to elogeo. I don't think we need to be too concerned about them appearing on elogeo before the event.

In terms of what is the master version we should be absolutely clear that what they submitted to us prior to selection is the master version and we will not be accepting changes (except for the few that we asked to merge). Those versions will appear on the web site and in the programme. We will have full editorial rights to tweak abstracts for typos, grammar etc if needed and will not go through a suggestion, approval loop with the presenters.

Steven, even if we get just the workshop tutorials archived that will be great benefit for wider community.  How many people (even from 800 delegates attending FOSS4G 2013 )will get opportunity to attend all workshops (max 50 people per workshop), but if the slides and detailed tutorials are available, any body who is interested can learn it at thier own pace from anywhere (even those who couldn't attend FOSS4G).

And as you rightly said, we have the facility, so why not use it.

Also we are giving an option (not mandatory) for people interested to submit for this.

Suchith

getting the workshop tutorials into ELOGeo would be great and with 50 it is is somewhat more manageable ;)

  

I think we are all happy with encouraging presenters of papers and workshops to archive in the ELOgeo system. I don't think we should undertake to do it for them though.

Excellent. It is the author's responsibility  to upload the files to the repository. We only provide the url details in the acceptance mail etc.

I believe the workshop tutorials especially  will  directly be of benifit for our OSGeo Education efforts in the longterm.  

Suchith