We’re considering a migration of our journal from OJS-2.4 to OJS-3.1. Apart from technical issues, there’s a conceptual issue I’d like to clarify. It’s not entirely clear what the optimal organization for our journal could be in terms of sections and components, in OJS-3.
Our journal has 2 submission tracks:
- A conference call track, for submissions related to a yearly conference. These will be published in a dedicated issue
- An open call track, for submissions that don’t respond to a specific call. These will be grouped in an issue whenever a critical number of them has reached the publication stage.
(I could imagine a special issue track as well, for submissions responding to a thematic call.)
The main point for having these submission tracks is the need to assign different (guest) editors to articles submitted in either of these tracks.
Furthermore, each submission track can accept articles in three submission categories:
- research articles
- project / tool notes
- data sets
Issues can have articles from all categories, and should have dedicated review forms. I guess that’s what sections in OJS are meant for. I notice how OJS-3 has introduced “article components”, but if I understand correctly, these can’t be assigned dedicated review forms, can they?
So, given these requirements, we currently (in OJS-2) have defined sections for each combination of submission track and category, thus combining the ability to assign dedicated section editors and review forms. Is this still the best way to organize this kind of journal in OJS-3, or are there better templates or best practices these days?
Thanks for any help!
Ron