From Aaron Sloman Tue Sep 6 16:23:18 BST 2005
To: cosy
Subject: CoSy Technical reports

In talking about how we present our unpublished papers in the deliverables, Jeremy has suggested that for papers that we wish to have listed that are not published we should submit them to Ceinwen to include as a School Computer Science or Cognitive Science technical report for inclusion here

That would give our documents an official looking number etc.

However, I stopped using that system years ago, because gzipped postscript is of little use to most people nowadays and the submission process is a bit clumsy (e.g. you have to get a report number from Ceinwen and give her both an abstract and the postscript file). I have been arguing for several years that we should replace the system.

It is much simpler if we manage our own report series. It turns out that we had an empty directory called 'papers' on the cosy web site, so I have put some links in there and produced a draft web site

divided into Technical Reports and Discussion Notes, with links to various pdf files and hastily produced sample entries, using 'XXXX' for details to be added.

At present things are a bit messy in various ways.

I am not sure of the best format for the publication details: should we have bibtex-style entries, or more conventional formats?

For now I have two template files that can be used for producing new entries

/bham/common/info/www/research/projects/cosy/papers/tr-template accessible at:
and /bham/common/info/www/research/projects/cosy/papers/dp-template accessible at:

These can be made more elaborate.

We could also move towards using one of the more sophisticated packages for self-archiving that are available, but right now that would take a lot more time.

If people are happy with this, a link could go on our local cosy web page, replacing the ad-hoc list headed

Some recent reports and discussion papers

Also a section could be added to the papers directory for a list of our presentations, which are currently in a separate directory

Does anyone have comments on

- the general idea

- the tentative layout

- the current set of categories

Does does anyone have a paper, discussion paper, or presentation to add to what's on there?

(I may add some things later.)

We could restrict discussion papers to things that we want to be accessible only locally, but I suspect there are a lot of things we would be happy to be made more visible for criticism.

Ideally we should find a way to automatically mirror this on the wiki. Any suggestions?