I'm not sure that WikiJournals are highly regarded...

Similar to how some would "fix" economic inefficiencies with a legible imposed system, instead of just letting the market work.

Hindawi CEO lays out the four elements he sees as key to proprietary companies participating effectively in building and providing infrastructure to support open science.

Openaccess parable.

repository podcast guests

on repositories today

list of open access publishing tools

updated list of scholarly publishing platforms and services

Roger calls for clear scholcomm strategy.

A literal and more general question.

Roger on the pattern of productizing scholarly workflows.

Further discussion of the Red Light, Green Light model.

Roger proposes a process for balancing costs and usage for libraries/scholcomm.

Reasons why scholarly editions aren't valued in the academy (c 2008)

FWIW, PLOS tried this with PLOS Currents. It didn't get much traction, but I think there were some good use cases around rapid communications for disease outbreaks.

A group of experts got together last year at Daghstuhl and wrote a white paper about this.

Basically the idea is that the data, the code, the protocol/analysis/method, and the narrative should all exist as equal objects on the appropriate platform. Code in a code repository like Github, Data in a data repo that understands data formats, like Mendeley Data (my company) and Figshare, protocols somewhere like protocols.io and the narrative which ties it all together still at the publisher. Discussion and review can take the form of comments, or even better, annotations just like I'm doing now.

Part of this is because the people, besides publishers, most involved in discussions of publishing formats are librarians, who have preservation on their mind. If your job to to curate and preserve the world's knowledge, you have to think very carefully about what needs to be kept. Preservation is a surprisingly tricky subject when you get into the details of what constitutes a new version, at what level you do preservation - bit level, file level, text level, etc.

Yes, copyediting and managing review and such are valuable, and to some extent either already outsourced or replaceable by technology. However, getting your paper in front of the right people who need to read it still both requires a talented human in the loop and command of a large audience, which no one but the publishers can yet match.

Of course, as the author returns to below, publishing is much more than just hosting a PDF online somewhere. Knowing that the right people will read what you publish is still worth quite a bit, and publishers command the largest audience. That's hard to replicate!

Fair point, but this is changing. Have you checked out the submission flow at Heliyon?