Corrections (errata) to published papers are often published well after the original paper, but can be crucial to scientists using the information contained in the original (for example, to prevent the spread of misleading or incorrect information). Thus, corrections coexist with original papers. On the other hand, online journal papers are being given increasing importance, complementing or even taking the place of paper journals as a source of information for scientists.

In this paper, the author studies the current state-of-the-art with regard to the treatment of errata in online journals. The domain area chosen for the experiments is the physical sciences.

Forty-three online journals were surveyed. The presence of hyperlinks between original papers and errata, and their presentation and consistency, were examined. A comparison with paper journals was also established. Results show a high degree of variability, by which the author supports the recommendation of standards as the main conclusion of the study.

The author’s interest is undoubtedly justified by the importance of good location strategies for errata for readers (researchers), and by the need to explore the state-of-the-art with regard to some important publications and publishers.

Different target audiences may read this paper from different perspectives: publishers or librarians (mainly those working with the journals used for the study) will be interested in the results and conclusions. Other readers may be interested in reproducing the experiments in other disciplines.

If there is something missing here, it is an explicit indication of the existence of similar studies for other disciplines, such as in the biomedical field. The author indicates that this field has a longer tradition in the treatment of errata; it is amazing that nothing similar has been done.