Screens still have real estate that you need to fit onto. You can do “click to expand” but frankly, who would look at that. You could have the full list in the bibliography section, but frankly, who reads all that: The stuff I look at is the citation abbreviation ([Miller et al 2003]), then the doi or journal/paper title to copy and paste. Everything in between gets ignored, if I read names then it’s on paper titles, not citations. I’ve also seen a tongue-in-cheek proposal to overlay all author names on top of another in citations, sadly can’t find the paper.
Typography isn’t the place where you want to attack this issue, at most you can get some token feel-good result that will be ineffective because it ignores the psychology of people looking up papers. Which is to say: You’ll do net damage to your cause because you’re spending goodwill capital on feel-good BS. If you want to have a systemic impact then attack the issue from the other end, such as cracking down on people which insert themselves as first author of every paper coming out of their department and stuff. Rule of thumb: If someone can’t do a thesis style oral defence of a paper, their name has no business being anywhere even close to the front.
Batman@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Yeah I imagine they could have some sort of click to expand functionality
SARGE@startrek.website 2 months ago
Literally even a spot bumped out on the end where they list everyone, at the very end of the paper, would be infinitely better than “et Al”
thevoidzero@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That’s what bibliography is. It’s already like that, or am I missing something?
MBM@lemmings.world 2 months ago
It sounds like you’re talking about the references, which already list all authors
Comment105@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Then what’s the issue? Sounds to me like papers already have comprehensive credits.