effective publishing

[Mary Barkworth]

I would add to Pieter's comment that it would be helpful if journals would
specify the date when an issue was actually made available.  I had written
actually printed, but I recently became aware of a journal that was
printed one year after the date that appears on the front cover and, from
what I was told, not sent out for another 6 months.  I do not have hard
information about the latter situation. The distribution aspect could have
been a problem with a country's mail service or the receiving institution,
but there are a distressingly large number of journals that are printed
after the date on their cover.  Whether the problem lies with the journal
editors or printer is immaterial, it creates a messy situation. There is
probably little that can be done about it, but it would be nice if
societies that like to publish taxonomic papers would consider voluntarily
adopting a policy of stating the actual date of printing on the cover.

Mary Barkworth
_______________________________________________________________

I would like to modify Brian's point (c) as the need for the publisher to
specify unambiguously the edition or version used to produce a batch of
books, as well as the need for subsequent authors to unambiguously cite
the specific edition or version. Perhaps a unique identifier per print run
such as a batch number may even have to be specified. This implies that
any subsequent, even minor corrections will probably strictly have to be
identified as, and cited as, a next edition of the publication.

I am sure publishers do realise, and cater for these sorts of
implications, but it may be wise for taxonomists to liase closer with them
on such points.


--------------------------------
Pieter J.D. Winter
Herbarium Curator
University of the North
Private Bag  X 1106
0727 SOVENGA
South Africa
pieterw at unin.unorth.ac.za