Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 13:05:15 -0600
From: Miles Wimer <milesw@SCISOC.ORG>
Subject: Discussion Questions

Dear SERIALST:

I am a member of NASIG, where I obtained your address. As a publisher, I
have two immediate questions about which I would like input from your
members.

QUESTION I
I am Director of Publications for the American Phytopathological Society
(APS) which publishes a journal, Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions. Since
its inception, the journal has published bimonthly, as January/February,
March/April, May/June, etc. Starting in 1996, it will publish nine issues
per year vs. the current six. Our current cover copy identifies each issue
as follows:

Volume 8, Number 6, November-December 1995, ISSN 0894-0282

The spine reads:

Volume 8, No. 6, Pages (range) - (journal name) - November-December 1995

Being that the nine issues will come out at equal intervals throughout the
year the month designations no longer work. What would be an acceptable way
to identify each issue for cataloging purposes. Would referencing them as
No. 1 of 9, No. 2 of 9, No. 3 of 9, etc. work? Cover example:

Volume 9, Number 1 of 9, 1995, ISSN 0894-0282

Spine:

Volume 9, No. 1 of 9, Pages (range) - (journal name) - 1995

Or is there some better way? Also on this question, with such numbering, how
can we avoid unnecessary (early) claims. With the months as reference,
librarians presumably had a way to determine when a particular issue might
not have reached them, thus invoking a claim. With no months, how soon would
claims likely be initiated? And, if this would be before the approximate
nine week interval between issues, how can this be avoided?

QUESTION II
On another subject, we would like to get some idea of how important it is
that back issues be available and for how long. We order additional copies
of each issue to fill new orders as well as claims. Setting this quantity is
difficult because we want to have enough copies but also want to avoid the
unnecessary expense of producing and inventorying too many.

>From a library's perspective, is it necessary that a publisher have back
issues available of all issues produced? (Some of our journals go back to
1908!) If not, how far back must we guarantee availability? Or, at what
point would libraries accept (reluctantly, I'm sure) not being able to
obtain missing issues whether from nonreceipt but also from theft or other
disappearance within the library itself?

I will really appreciate input to these two questions. We are trying to
avoid potential problems on either of these issues by involving the library
community early.

Sincerely,

Miles Wimer