Are you an Editor, Author, or Journal Manager in need of help? Want to talk to us about workflow issues? This is your forum.
Moderators: jmacgreg, michael, vgabler, John
This forum is meant for general questions about the usability of OJS from an everyday user's perspective: journal managers, authors, and editors are welcome to post questions here, as are librarians and other support staff. We welcome general questions about the role of OJS and how the workflow works, as well as specific function- or user-related questions. What to do if you have general, workflow or usability questions about OJS:
1. Read the documentation
. We've written documentation to cover from OJS basics to system administration and code development, and we encourage you to read it.
2. take a look at the tutorials
. We will continue to add tutorials covering OJS basics as time goes on.
3. Post a question
. Questions are always welcome here, but if it's a technical question you should probably post to the OJS Technical Support
subforum; if you have a development question, try the OJS Development
is in OJS a way to make some versions available for one publication.
Our problem ist that in one of our published article was found some mistakes and we need to publish a corrected version.
Does OJS provide some mechanism to publish more the one version (and also mark it?)
For the moment we have the idea to publish in the same issue the article twice - with a mark, that the second is the corrected version.
Any ideas are welcome!
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:14 am
Have you considered uploading the old version as a supplementary file under the revised version?
Public Knowledge Project Team
- Posts: 9050
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:56 pm
We've handled this in the past by uploading the corrected PDF as another galley copy. When we upload the PDF, we put as the title of the document something like "corrected PDF" or "version of record." Then you have one article record with both versions available under a single record with the same DOI, but it's pretty clear which version is the correct one. We'll often also add a link after the metadata abstract to the erratum relating to the corrections that we publish in the next issue. That way it's pretty clear what the article's history is. I also, though, think the idea of moving the earlier version to the supplementary files section could work (but the change would be less obvious).
- Posts: 95
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:22 pm
Return to OJS Editorial Support and Discussion
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot] and 2 guests