search

transpose-publishing / policies-database

Database of journal policies: TRANsparency in Scholarly Publishing for Open Scholarship Evolution
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
20 stars 12 forks source link

Schema updates based on initial usage #29

Closed dhimmel closed 6 years ago

dhimmel commented 6 years ago

Closes https://github.com/transpose-publishing/policies-database/pull/27 (supersedes) refs https://github.com/transpose-publishing/policies-database/issues/20

Contains squashed commits from https://github.com/transpose-publishing/policies-database/pull/27

dhimmel commented 6 years ago

@jpolka this is ready for review. It applies the schema updates from https://github.com/transpose-publishing/policies-database/pull/27 (and a few minor schema tweaks from me). The migration seems to have succeeded.

The only thing I haven't done is the newlines. Removing newlines is still possible, but I wanted to confirm that it is desirable? Have you deleted all the newlines and seen if you prefer that style? If so, I'll go ahead and delete.

jpolka commented 6 years ago

Hey @dhimmel - while I think the files look better when colorized with the new lines removed, I definitely agree that they are less readable when in edit mode! So maybe leave them in?

The headings look fantastic. It might be nice to make them stand out a little more by some variant of the below - what do you think?


# Does the journal make it clear in the reviewer invitation email that co-reviewers can contribute? (yes/no)
co-review-invited:

# -------------------------------------------------
# PEER REVIEW TRANSFER
# Peer review transfer url (valid url)
transfer-url:

# Policy on transfer of peer reviews (free text)
transfer-policy:

# -------------------------------------------------
# REVIEW FORM
# url to a copy or description of the peer review form (valid url)
review-form-url:

# What are the titles of the sections of the review form? (free text)
review-structure:

# Are there separate fields for technical & impact evaluation? (yes/no)
separate-structure:

# Is there a dedicated place in the submission form to identify co-reviewers? (yes/no)
co-review-field:

# -------------------------------------------------
# PEER REVIEW CREDIT
# Peer review credit policy url (valid url)
credit-url:
dhimmel commented 6 years ago

So maybe leave them in?

Okay, I think they probably do more good than harm.

The headings look fantastic. It might be nice to make them stand out a little more by some variant of the below - what do you think?

Okay I did something similar in https://github.com/transpose-publishing/policies-database/pull/29/commits/0ab05fa94945965f60598108ed51bd7ebb0ca1a5