You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Since the failure of Texture and Libero, it seems less likely that a JATS-native Javascript editor will arise for integration into OJS according to our previous JATS-centric XML strategy.
However, there are several candidates for integration that do not use JATS as a native schema and have existing communities of maintenance: FidusWriter in the scholarly sphere, and TipTap and TinyMCE from outside it.
Investigate opportunities for the integration of a body text editor.
Unknowns:
How involved should this editor be in the scholarly workflow? (While we do want to support document-centric workflow, certain aspects of it -- e.g. convincing authors to adopt a new toolkit for making revisions -- may be tricky.)
Is it better to choose a naive body-text-only editor (e.g. TipTap/TinyMCE) and leave the entirety of the scholarly metadata exclusively to OJS? Or better to use a scholarly communication informed editor (e.g. FidusWriter, which supports citation management), which has a more suitable editing toolset but a smaller community (and some overlap with the OJS database)?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Since the failure of Texture and Libero, it seems less likely that a JATS-native Javascript editor will arise for integration into OJS according to our previous JATS-centric XML strategy.
However, there are several candidates for integration that do not use JATS as a native schema and have existing communities of maintenance: FidusWriter in the scholarly sphere, and TipTap and TinyMCE from outside it.
Investigate opportunities for the integration of a body text editor.
Unknowns:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: