[MOBY-dev] Moby 1.0 manuscript inappropriate for PLoS Comp Bio

[Mark Wilkinson]

I'm already planning to submit Moby to the NAR WS issue, which is another  
reason I am loathe to submit it there for the 1.0 publication.

SCFBM is fine too, but I think PLoS ONE might be a better location due to  
the broader audience.  I havn't heard any objections, so I'm going to go  
ahead and submit it there today.

Cheers all!

M




On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 05:17:35 -0700, Duncan Hull <duncan.hull at cs.man.ac.uk>  
wrote:

> Mark Wilkinson wrote:
>> That's a possibility... but it appears that UBC is not a
>> member-institution for NAR, which bumps the publication charges way  
>> high -
>
> NAR is expensive, but a logical place for BioMOBY would be their annual
> web server issue [1].  The deadline for the 2007 issue is long gone, but
> there is always next year (deadline in December 2007, publication June  
> 2008)
>
> http://www.nodalpoint.org/2006/12/01/nar_web_server_issue_2007
>
> publication turnaround times are a glacial... 6 months!
>
> Howabout Source Code for Biology and Medicine?
>
>
> Duncan
>



-- 
--
Mark Wilkinson
Assistant Professor, Dept. Medical Genetics
University of British Columbia
PI Bioinformatics
iCAPTURE Centre, St. Paul's Hospital
Tel:  604 682 2344 x62129
Fax:  604 806 9274

***CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE***
This electronic message is intended only for the use of the addressee and  
may contain information that is privileged and confidential.  Any  
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication by  
unauthorized individuals is strictly prohibited. If you have received this  
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply  
e-mail and delete the original and all copies from your system.