Improve documentation of the review process

[acocac]

Before review

• Work in progress
• Ready for review
• Need help!

Description

The PR aims to improve guidelines and details of the submission and reviewing process. It also make some general changes for improving the user experience of the notebook as follows:

• Refactor Table of Content, with shorter and self-descriptive titles in the left panel.
• Add new chapter for publishing
  • About
  • Guidelines
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Editors
    • Editors-in-chief
    • Community
• Rename EnvDS book to EDS book.
• Remove unused sections:
  • digital twins (never published)
  • statistics (afterword)
  • glossary (afterword)

Motivation and Context

Fixes #115

How has this been tested?

No major changes. Local run in MacOS to build the plain markdowns.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• New notebook and/or content
• Documentation notebook/content update
• Other (please describe):
• Feature change (upgrade version)

Checklist:

• My code follows the code style of this project: Python
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING doc
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have added tests to cover my changes
• I have tested the changes and verified that they work and don't break anything (as well as I can manage)

Additional information

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for the-environmental-ds-book ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	ecb175e
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/the-environmental-ds-book/deploys/640677d59110680008c9c1cc
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-117--the-environmental-ds-book.netlify.app/publishing/about/aims-and-scope
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

[acocac]

@EstherPlomp thanks for your great inputs and feedback of the Open Peer Review guidelines for EDS book notebooks. I've addressed all your comments, please let me know if you have any additional observations. The optimal timings for publication when notebook starts the REVIEW stage are 2 weeks review, 2 weeks changes, 1 week reviewers approval. These timings are based on PyOpenSci.

[review-notebook-app]

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

---

Powered by ReviewNB

[acocac]

@annefou thanks for contributing to the proposed guidelines and sections covered in this PR. I went through your comments and addressed most of them. Everything is ready for you to review it again.

[annefou]

Really nice guidelines; much more comprehensive and clearer. Thanks a lot!

[acocac]

Thanks everyone for your contribution I'll merge it in preparation to #126.