Open textbooks - what do you think?
1over137.wordpress.com
1over137.wordpress.com
OTOH, if we're really looking to write good course texts, then let's remember what a text is all about. It is, of course, first and foremost, something to read to get a thorough introduction to a topic. But it is also a reference. From an instructor's point of view, it is often a source of homework exercises.
Also (here's a tough one) it generally functions as a partial course outline. That means that starting from the beginning and plowing through, should be a reasonable order of topics for a course. In addition, the better texts usually have a section listing dependencies among chapters and giving alternate course outlines that the text can be used with.
The trickiest issue, I think, is the question of authority. A textbook functions as an authority in a course, second only to the instructor. We're supposed to be able to rely on it. This is the same issue confronted, and basically sidestepped, by Wikipedia, which was successfully able to turn the focus from authoritativeness to the related issue of quality of information. Since Wikipedia clearly shines in the latter, we don't worry so much about the former.
Can we do this same sidestep for texts? I don't think so. Universities, in particular, have accrediting bodies, which will not look favorably on something with standards along the lines of Wikipedia, being presented as authoritative. Thus, your idea of the effort being peer-reviewed. A good idea, but how to implement it?
Lastly:
> Somehow, I don’t see many scientists relying on royalties for a non-trivial portion of their income.
Certainly not. I believe some do, but, if they can't compete with free, then I figure that's their problem. I wouldn't worry about it.
Hmm, I agree with your issue with the lack authority, and honestly, I don't really know what to say. Having something like this peer-reviewed by professionals (determining who is is a different matter, I guess) is perhaps too idealistic. At best, I can imagine students dedicating some of their time to such an endeavor - I don't know if many researchers, for example, who usually know their field quite well, would be willing to volunteer their skills.
They already do, when they referee papers. Journal peer review is unpaid. This text-reviewing idea could find its way into the system as something similar. Especially since the reviewers might have a better incentive. Journal peer review helps fellow researchers. But if I'm planning on using a text, then helping to review it helps me -- and my students.
Oh okay, that's good to know.
> Journal peer review helps fellow researchers. But if I'm planning on using a text, then helping to review it helps me -- and my students.
Hmm, that's a good point, though, of course, it would depend on the researcher and how well established/organized the framework is. Perhaps it's worth looking into the history of arXiv...