Discussion of authorship by the D0 Collaboration

Help: Forums, postings and threads

Forums, postings and threads

Click on the Forum title, e.g. on the "Forums by Category" page, to read a sequence of postings to the Forum and its threads all in one page. If you are only interested in one thread or the thread following a specific posting, click the thread or the posting, which takes you to a smaller page, which contains only the part you are interested in and may be easier to navigate.

Layout of the posting thread(s)

The posting threads can be shown with/without the text of the postings ("Inline depth"). In addition the depth of the thread can be controlled ("Outline depth"). For both cases several values are provided, which can be toggled. Note that the displayed values are those, which can be chosen, they do not correspond to the actual display status of the thread(s).

Add message

Add a new posting thread to this Forum

Show subscribers

Click "Show subscribers" to get the List of all subscribers, who receive e-mail from postings to this Forum, if they have not explictly unsubscribed from a posting thread. This includes:

Subscribers to the forum
Explicit subscribers to the posting or any of its ancestors
The author of the posting (if he has not unsubscribed)
The authors of any ancestor posting (if they have not unsubscribed)

Some browsers display old pages from the cache

Some browsers (e.g. Firefox) display a page from the cache even though the page has been updated. As a result, one may not get the latest messages in the forum's outline or the logon ID of the previous session appears on the upper right corner. If one suspects that he or she does not get the latest content of a page, try clearing up the personal data from the browser's cache as the following:

Tools -> Clear Private Data -> Clear Private Data (from browser Firefox)

Tools -> Delete Private Data (from browser Opera)

then reflesh the current page to get the latest content.

Details on "Inline depth" and "Outline depth"

Threads and the follow-up messages are numbered. There is one line per posting, normally starting with the posting number. The URLs of a posting and its responses reflect the depth of the follow-up postings. Watch the URLs to see how this is done. Depending on the chosen display options, the thread-display may be incomplete; the number of messages at the next level is, however, displayed, e.g. "…3 message(s)". You may not see all contributors unless you choose "All".

Messages are "chained" if there are only replies at the first level, i.e. 1/1.html, 1/1/1.html etc. In case of "chained" messages the message number is replaced by the icon and there is no indentation.

Inline: Display the subject line only or also the text of the posting(s); for the choice "All" the "Outline" choices are switched off.

Argument Default value Alternative Comment

1 0 1 no text / full text of posting

2 1 All text for level 1 only / text for All postings

Argument	Default value	Alternative		Comment
1	0	1		no text / full text of posting
2	1	All		text for level 1 only / text for All postings

Outline: Choose the depth of the posting thread, successive toggle controls provide increasing detail.

Argument Default value Alternative Comment

1 2 1 2 levels / 1 level (original posting)

2 3 2 3 levels / 2 levels

3 3 All 3 levels / all levels (all postings)

Argument	Default value	Alternative	Comment
1	2	1	2 levels / 1 level (original posting)
2	3	2	3 levels / 2 levels
3	3	All	3 levels / all levels (all postings)

It looks like in the copy of the mail I got sign s misinterpreted by 
server and line(s) after this sign are missed. So, below is version 
without "sign.

Dear WG members!

The D0 Collaboration had its annual meeting a week ago with Institutional Board 
meeting to discuss different Collaboration wide issues. One of them was my 
report about C11 authorship WG progress and discussion of the D0 authorship 
rules. Below is outcome on major questions discussed. Vote was taken on each 
question with ~50 reps of the Collaboration institutes present (out of ~74 
total). The vote was "not official" and outcome is not changing any of the 
current D0 authorship rules, rather we wanted to understand D0 Institutional 
Board  position on
authorship:

1. Alphabetical or non-alphabetical listing of authors: ~90 percent voted 
for simple alphabetical listing with no exceptions.

2. Voluntary sign up as started by the Belle Collaboration: opinions here 
split, with ~70 percent voting for this proposal.

3. Proposal to "partition collaboration into smaller units for publications": 
100 percent of IB reps voted it down.

So, position of the D0 Collaboration on the above issues is rather clear. We 
plan to have formal proposal for changes of the D0 authorship rules as soon as 
C11 authorship WG report is released.

As a reference: ~50 percent of the D0 collaboration is from non-US groups 
(mainly Europe) and more then 50 percent of the D0 members are involved in 
LHC collaborations, so above numbers might provide "exit poll" expectations.

Dmitri.

Forums, postings and threads

Discussion of authorship by the D0 Collaboration - updated version