ralf becker r.h.becker at READING.AC.UK
Fri Jan 13 22:49:32 CST 2006

Hello Julian.
Both K and MO failing, or burning down is highly unlikely.
My point is that "Effective publication" is easy done.
If the E journal is printed on an ordinary printer this will be enough,
according to the code.
Until we can not make absolutely sure that e archives are safe and
sustainable, I thing we must have a paper copy and therefore stick to the
I wonder why nobody had a go at Latin descriptions

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian H [mailto:humphries at mail.utexas.edu]
Sent: 13 January 2006 22:08
To: ralf becker
Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] E.journals

At 03:50 PM 1/13/2006, you wrote:

>I thing, printed copies, should be distributed to different institutions,
>insure that coming generations can access it.
>Databases can run out of money and disappear, unlikely libraries at Kew or

Why would they differ?  Kew and MO both have libraries and databases,
failure or success is likely to affect both.

>On the other hand, we should insure that publications are on the web and
>accessible to anyone and anywhere.
>But there is no need to change the code.
>If one deposits two printed copies in any libraries accessible to the
>general public it is an effective publication.

Except that printing those copies adds enormously to the cost.  I
don't have numbers, but I would guess the first copy of any printer
journal is many thousands of dollars over the cost of electronic
publication. It is close to a fixed sum game with libraries, so every
"extra" paper journal (added to satisfy rules from a different
era)  means one or more fewer electronic journals.

Julian Humphries
Geological Sciences
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78712

More information about the Taxacom mailing list