I hate to mention it, Eberhard, but I am not sure how many places would want to keep most of them in print format. I am not even sure whether most universities ought
Based on use data, print use of many titles -- including many or most APS ones--in almost all science fields is very low for years that are also avail in electronic format. Numbers forthcoming for the libraries here. but not for a few months. A good case, though, can be made for keeping such titles as PR in print in a major university for what I call Iconic reasons--to demonstrate to the students physically what the science consists of. Some librarians and faculty here and elsewhere feel quite strongly about this, and, though I am not the one who will decide, I am pretty sure our university will decide to keep PR and most or all APS titles in print as long as they are so published. How many titles this reasoning should apply to is an interesting question to think about. David Goodman, Princeton University Biology Library dgood...@princeton.edu 609-258-3235 On Sat, 15 Dec 2001, Eberhard R. Hilf wrote: > deat Arthur, > what would be a very rough estimate if APS would let their journals free > online but print costly and therefore raise the membership fee of APS by > what amount. > [Numbers such as: DPG has 40.000 members, fee raising by 10 % would amount > to 200.000 $ or 200 articles..] > Ebs >