Dreamsongs Wiki

CallForPapers

Technical papers should present significant contributions to the study, use, and understanding of systems, languages, and applications based on object-oriented or associated technologies, such as components, aspects, and model-based software development techniques. Contributions may be original research results that advance the state of the art, with clear technical novelties sufficiently substantiated by the author(s), or they may be essays exploring new or paradigm shifting ideas, historical or philosophical perspectives, comparative evaluations, experience-based accounts of best practices, or other insights gathered from practical applications or theoretical explorations. Papers having both research and experiential components are encouraged. If your paper comprises a case study or anecdotal experience with a "particular" system or development project, however, consider submitting a Practitioner Report rather than a Technical Paper.

Relevant topics for OOPSLA include, but are not restricted to:

• Analysis and design methods
• Components and frameworks
• Distributed, mobile, parallel, real-time, and embedded systems and middleware
• E-commerce and workflow applications
• Language design and implementation
• Object databases and persistence
• Objects, frameworks, and components in human-computer interaction
• Objects, frameworks, and components in testing and metrics
• Patterns and software architecture
• Programming environments
• Reflectionmetaobjects, separation of concerns, and aspect-orientation/
• Generative programming and model-based development
• Software engineering and its practices
• Software tools
• New Internet infrastructures, e.g., web services, peer-to-peer, and Grid computing
• Theoretical foundations and formal methods, including but limited to types, security, encapsulation
• New paradigms, metaphors, and approaches to computing

-rpg

• Teaching OO--theoretical foundations and new approaches

-sjm

- JensColdewey

Skipping it was accidental. I perhaps lumped it into Analysis and design methods. -rpg

The call as its shown above places emphasis on the introduction of new technology. Case studies (implying empirical work) seems to be put under the Practitioner Reports umbrella. This misses academic empirical work. Since OO has (maybe) now reached a place of technological maturity, it would be good to more explicitly encourage investigative-style papers as well. Such papers would look at how things are done using OO and report findings and open areas for innovation, rather than just supplying a new tool with a small set of motivating factors?

-ElisaBaniassad

Since I wrote the call to make empirical or other sorts of non-researchy things be equal to the usual reseachy things, I'd be interested in where it goes wrong or suggestions for how to improve it. The last sentence, I'll admit, was adopted (I think) directly from the older calls, which I took to be a carve-out for the traditional Practitioners' Reports. -rpg

Maybe just a little shift? Something like

And then maybe add

• Empirical investigation of any of the above

to the list of potential topics?

--ElisaBaniassad

Here is my next proposal:

Technical papers should present significant contributions to the study, use, and understanding of programming, systems, languages, and applications based on object-oriented or associated technologies. Contributions may be original research results that advance the state of the art, with clear technical or empirical novelties sufficiently substantiated by the author(s), or they may be essays that explore new or paradigm shifting ideas, historical or philosophical perspectives, comparative evaluations, experience-based accounts of best practices, or other insights gathered from practical applications or theoretical explorations. Papers having both research and experiential components are encouraged. If your paper consists only of a case study or anecdotal experience with a particular system or development project, however, consider submitting a Practitioner Report rather than a Technical Paper.

I am thinking that the call should not list potential topics, since that ends up limiting what people might send-that is, people might tend to try to submit in one of the pre-defined areas. This could be limiting. -rpg

Two question about things that are implicit here:

• I presume that Onward! will not return in 2005? The essays call covers the Onward content well.
• I presume you're not considering a separate intruiging technologies session. E.g. this call doesn't invite papers describing emerging technologies that may change best practice within the next 3-5 years.

Actually, no:

• I plan on Onward! continuing. The essays are for non-incremental science.
• Aren't emerging slash intriguing technologies part of Onward!? I always thought they were.

Onward! will have its own committee and call.

I agree on the wording. Can you improve it? -rpg

Ok I'll try, but probably not for a while. Hopefully before JAOO.

For now, I'll say I don't see what an OOPSLA Essay is, especially compared to an Onward! paper. I could try and write something but it would be tricky without knowing how these were envisioned, and how they sit vis-a-vis Onward and technical papers.

I also wonder about a rubric along the lines of An OOPSLA paper must be written to present the current state of the art, and to summarise the paper's contributions, in a way that is intellible to a general reader with a research background in object-orientation, programming languages, and systems, but who may not be an expert in the paper's subspeciality.

Found this, from slashdot:

-CristaLopes