On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:38 PM, koltzenburg@w4w.net wrote:
Answer 2:
articles are not "submitted" to the journal's editors but written openly on the journals' platform (and then maybe sent to a review process elsewhere as well as opening up to public review here)
My answer would be like your Answer 2 above.
Let me be clear that what I envision would be more like a "research hub" than a journal -- but in the end, it would of course include papers that could be cited (and that could be noted down on contributors' CVs). But not all contributions would have to be like that. If we extended the scope quite broadly, it would be "like Wikipedia, but without the 'no original research' clause." We'd presumably want some other rule, about "focusing on high quality research."
I might also go further:
Answer 2a:
The platform itself could be a target for experiment by contributors. So, while we could start with a standard MediaWiki installation and standard papers, the journal could also review "papers plus experiments". The experiment could take place with extensions to the basic MediaWiki installation, or in some other attached wiki. (In mathematics, there's a journal called "Experimental Mathematics" which captures a similar sort of spirit.)