dexing definite chemical compounds by their empirical formulas on which there is agreement rather than by their names on which there is not. Kvery chemist is constantly seeking data. His search may be general or specific; i t s urgency, great or small; its importance, compelling or casual. He faces a mountain of recorded facts in which he must locate those having rele vance and value for his purpose. He must organize a n d correlate them as rapidly and effectively as his facilities and experience permit. H e must not IwBfefeily diverted.
He ought not to have to spend so much time and energy in gathering his tools that he lies exhausted among them. T o live effectively he must not be required to plant the trees, nurture the forest, fell the timber, process the logs, drag out the lum ber, build the house, furnish the rooms. H e should be offered not merely a key. Rather is he entitled to the opened door, the lighted lamp, the well-stocked shelf, the organized household in order that as a chemist he may proceed with facility and dispatch upon the utilization of his materials and experience toward his objec-
tive. The time is ripe for the develop ment of comprehensive compendia and for substantial improvements in the methods of indexing the current chemical literature. The attainment of these objectives should be the principal function of his professional society. Literature Cited (1) Huntress, Ε. Η., Ind. Eng. Chem., 40. 473-6 (1948). (2)
CHEM. ENTO. N E W S , 26, 442
(1948).
(3) Hill, Ε. Α., J. Am. Chem. Soc, 22, 47894 (1900).
Documentation—Government and Private J U L I A N F. S M I T H , Office of N a v a l R e s e a r c h , W a s h i n g t o n 2 5 , D. G.
T h e a u t h o r urges that a relatively small s u m s p e n t in m a k i n g our literature searching e q u i p m e n t useful will e n s u r e a g a i n s t creating a situation where t h e millions of dollars s p e n t o n research will b e wasted b e c a u s e t h e results a r e u n a v a i l a b l e JLfocrMEXTATiON's two primary pur poses are t o facilitate prompt dissemina tion of live facts among interested persons, and to systematize dead storage for ready resurrection of any wanted fact. Variously rated as a high-ranking sci ence and a s a lowly art, documentation in science literature has as its best practi tioners such a curious mixture of artisan and scientist as rarely exists in a single individual- The effective work is gener ally performed by teams, not merely be cause the work load is too large for one, but because ordinarily immiscible qualifica tions are required. This duality of per sonnel types does not imply superiority on either skie, and is not related to the duality of ohjecives. The Current
Problem
Scientific literature poses before the wurld a problem huge in bulk, intricate in complexity, and dual in character. Its two aspects are production and utilization. Production is mainly the concern of writ ers, editors, and publishers; but producers of science literature are also users. Docu mentation, therefore, can not ignore the production aspect. A s an example of ways in which sound production practice can aid the documen tation worker, authors can write papers in such form that the subject indexer can readily transmit their findings to posterity in places "where posterity can find them. In the papers theniSelves, and in the authors' abstracts required by many
80
periodicals, thought for indexing can con tribute materially t o efficiency in subse quent documentation. On the utilization side, the great prob lem is to systematize subject searching. One of the foremost difficulties faced by the shelf-list type of classification systems is that they attempt to compartmentalize knowledge, which can not be compart mentalized. The intertwining relation ships among the observed facts in science and technology are so numerous and com plex that any subject matter classification is necessarily a compromise. For pur poses of subject searching, the shelf-list type of classification compromises too much. , The present trend is to seek an arrangement which can be coded in punched-card systems for manual or mechanical sorting. There is no substitute for intelligent, well-directed thought in searching the literature of science and technology. Machines can not enable the searcher to sleep on the job, but they can facilitate his operations. Makers and users of punched-card systems have already dis played some tendency to underestimate the searcher's necessary effort and to over estimate the contribution of the machine. Nevertheless, there appears to be a good prospect that mechanized subject search ing, backed by the necessary team of a well-devised classification and a well-de signed mechanical system will enormously improve and facilitate the bibliographic control of scientific and technical liter ature.
CHEMICAL
Background
of the
Problem
Modern scientific literature dates back about three centuries. The first scientific periodical was the Proceedings of the Royal Society, beginning in 1665. An earlier academy of science was the Accademia dei Lincei, founded in Rome in 1602. Publications prior to 1665, by this and a few other groups interested in sci ence, were sporadic; they were the embryo preceding the birth of modern science literature as the Royal Society's "Proceedings." T h e Lincei did not begin regular publication of proceedings until 1847. In chemistry it was not until interest was aroused by some of the more spectac ular experiments of Lavoisier that a peri odical was established. This was Crell's Chemisches Journal—1778 to 1803. A more enduring effort was Annales de chimie, beginning in 1789; in 1816 it be came Annales de Chimie et de Physique but separated again in 1915 and now appears under its original title. Even the first of these periodicals, the Chemisches Journal, carried a few ab stracts or reviews from other sources, thus recognizing the need for abstracts (1). In pharmacy, Elwert's Magazin fur Apolheker began to publish abstracts in 1785. A more systematic effort in chem istry was originated by Berzelius in 1821 in his annual review entitled Jahresbericht liber die Fortschritte der physischen Wissenschaften. It carried long abstracts or critical reviews of scientific papers from the preceding year. One of the outstanding abstract journals started in 1830 under the title Pharmaceutisches Centralblatt, now k n o w n as Chemisches Zentralblatt. As scientific studies expanded and specialized, the number of periodicals multiplied rapidly
AND
ENGINEERING
NEWS
and was followed by abstract periodicals in specific fields (1), for example: Dingier1 s Polytechnisches Journal, 1820 Metallurgy: Journal of the Iron & Steel Institute, 1869 Agriculture: Biedermann's Zentralblatt, 1872 Experiment Station Record, 1889 Physics: Annulen der Physik, Beiblatter, 1877 Science Abstracts, 1898 Public H e a l t h : Ηι/gienische Rundschau, 1891 Medicine: Centralblatt der Experimentelle Medizin, 1900.
Technology :
In the Science Museum Library's list of 1934 there were 326 periodicals wholly or partly devoted to abstracts of current literature. Chemical literature was among the first to feel the need for a sys tematic arrangement which would facili tate bibliographic control. A pioneer enterprise was Friedrich Beilstein's Handbuch der organischen Chemie. I t grew from a modest beginning in 1881 t o such a huge handbook that even before World War II its literature coverage was 10 to 20 years behind the publication date. The present revision plans to cover all litera ture through 1929 b y 1952. Another effort, similar but different in method, was Richter's Lexikon der organischen Verbindugen which first appeared in 1884. It serves as a dictionary but the basis is the empirical formula of the compound and not its name. In the course of their parallel development, the Richter Lexikon came to be used as the formula index to Beilstein. Bibliographies A comprehensive early effort in chem ical bibliography was Bolton's Select Bibliography of Chemistry (1893-1904), beginning with the year 1492 (1). In general science and technology the catalog of the British Museum is an old and much used compilation. Another very ambi tious list is the Catalog of Scientific Paper's sponsored by the Royal Society of London. This huge project became the Inter national Catalog of Scientific Literature in 1901 under a central bureau but still with aid from t h e Royal Society. I t s com pilations were used to good effect by E. Wyndham Hulme, former Librarian of the British Patent Office, in his Statistical Bibliography in Relation to the Growth of Modern Civilization (1923). A much older but less comprehensive compilation was the Repertorium der Technischen Journaien-Literatur, which was a private enterprise until the German patent office took it over in 1877. I n the medical sciences a corresponding list is the Index Catalog of the Library of the Surgeon General's office (now the Army Medical Library) with coverage from 1880. I t is paralleled by t h e Index Medicus beginning in 1879 and now con tinued as the Quarterly Cumulative Index Medicus.
VOLUME
2 7,
NO.
In 1898 H. W. Wilson undertook a com mercial bibliographic enterprise which evidently met a serious need since it has grown into Industrial Arts Index, Agri cultural Index, and other widely used compilations. Some years later, Lefax made a quite different contribution in its system for standardized size and format of data sheets. Classified
tions
T h e movement toward systematic elassificil^ion of knowledge was approximately contemporaneous with the growth of bibliographic compilations. The U. S. Patent Office, with its strictly functional classification of patents, and the Library of Congress, with its subject matter classification of knowledge, were among those who led the way. Under private initiative, Mel vil Dewey, with his decimal classification, and C. A. Cutter, with his expansive system, were pioneers in classi fications for libraries. Dewey's decimal classification (11,000 entries in Ed. 12 of 1927) has grown into the Universal Decimal Classification more familiarly known as t h e Brussels System (over 100,000 entries in Ed. 2 of 1927-33). In 1936 the Brussels system was said to have about 100,000 users in 4 2 nations (£). There have been many less widely used private classifications developed for spe cific fields of interest. Extension of these classification systems beyond their original purpose of facilitating shelf arrangement for ready finding has not always been successful. Probably the most widely adopted extension is the use of the Brussels System by more than 100 European peri odicals as identifying symbols at the head of each article. The purpose is t o facili tate card indexing. The Kaiser system (2) is a shining ex ample among systems planned in advance for analytic indexing of subject matter not for shelf arrangement. Even more sig nificantly it is an early and workable ex ample of the dual (or multiple) concept of classification for subject searching. Documentation
Problems
Production Side. T h e output of scien tific and technical literature has increased enormously in recent decades. Prior to World War I I the world output of techni cal books was about 14,000 titles annually; the patent offices were granting about 200,000 patents annually; and about 14,000 periodicals were printing about 750,000 articles annually (β). Growth may be briefly illustrated b y two exam ples: (1) Chemical Abstracts, seeking world-wide coverage of chemical papers, covered 1,246 current periodicals in 1926 (1); 4,318 in 1946 (S). (2) Dissertations, written for doctorates in the sciences in America, numbered nearly 1,400 in 1916 47, as against about 750 in 1926-27. A slight trend in the opposite direction may b e noted in the fact that the catalog
2 » » JANUARY
10,
1949
Periodica U.S.S.R. of the middle 1930's carried over 900 titles, was cut back by about two thirds in the later 30's, a n d in 1947 listed only 202 titles. This does not mean that only 202 periodicals were being published in Russia in 1947 ; it means that only 202 were being offered for circulation outside the Iron Curtain. A comparatively new type of scientific and technical literature is found in reports arising from research or development projects and having such a character or such sheer weight of bulk or number a s to preclude publication in t h e scientific or technical press. Tlfiis observation does not apply to reports which are under military security classification or confiden tial by reason of industrial secrecy; many thousands of reports annually are under no security classification or protection as trade secrets. Sometimes the obstacle to publication in a periodical is merely mag nitude; some reports run to hundreds of pages of numerical data or to great num bers of expensive charts and illustrations. Another obstacle is that many periodicals lack the funds, materials, personnel, or equipment needed to increase their output. T h e summation is that a huge structure of scientific and technical literature has been erected without sufficient benefit of the bibliographic architects w h o could have designed it for prompt and efficient utilization of any portion. T h e result is that the structure is not merely in danger ; it is already collapsing. Utilization Side. The earliest prepara tions to meet the situation now existing came mainly from private and not from governmental sources. Abstract periodi cals in chemistry and related sciences were the pioneers, followed by handbooks and compilations such as those of Beilstein and Richter. T h e next step was subject matter classification, now expressed chiefly in the Library of Congress, Dewey Deci mal, Universal Decimal, and V. S. Patent Office classifications. In 1892 Paul Otlet and Henri La Fon taine founded the Office International de Bibliographie in Brussels. In 1895 they added the Institut International de Bibli ographie. T h e present Federation Inter national de Documentation i s an out growth of Otlet's effort. The federation actually enjoys international participa tion, mainly from Europe but with some participation from the United States and Canada. Latin American participation is not y e t large but will probably increase. Industry came into the documentation picture chiefly through its research libraries but in a few cases through the trade asso ciations. A leader in the latter type of participation is the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry (TAPPI), in compiling and publishing bibliographies of pulp and paper technology. The Special Libraries Association h a s a large membership from industrial firms or trade associations and many of the librar ies have participated actively in documen-
81
tatîon efforts. One of the S.L.A. projects was a cumulative numerical index of patents abstracted in Chemical Abstracts. T h e documentation work of public and endowed libraries has included use and extension of the various classification systems, as well as a great many undertakings in the application of bibliographic control techniques. The John Crerar Library in Chicago, t h e Library of the Carnegie I n stitute of Technology in Pittsburgh, and the technology divisions of public libraries in N e w York, Cleveland, Detroit, and other cities have made important contributions in these directions. T h e American Documentation Institute, which is not affiliated with the Federation International de Documentation, has been handicapped by lack of funds, space, and personnel. Its principal contribution to the art and science of documentation has been its centralized cooperative system for filing and recording manuscripts of papers and reports not published in the scientific or technical press. B y making microfilm copies publicly available at moderate cost, this institute is performing a service which deserves wider recognition and more substantial support than it is now receiving. T h e principal societies interested in documentation are the American Library Association, the Special Libraries Association, and (in Great Britain) ASLIB (Association of Special Libraries and Information Bureaus). Societies which participate, although their primary interest is not documentation, include the American Society of Mechanical Engineers in N e w York City with its Engineering Index and the American Medical -Association with its Quarterly Cumulative Index Medicus. Societies, through their cooperative undertakings, publication of union lists, and bibliographic control of literature within their fields of interest, have done much to alleviate the situation but have not effected a cure. Library
of Congress
Largest
Center
In Government, the Library of Congress is the largest center of documentation effort. I t s major contributions are the Library of Congress classification (now widely used b y other libraries, public and private), its card service, and its union lists. The U. S. Patent Office was a pioneer in subject-matter classification, with an approach unique to itself in that the classification is functional and not based on materials, structures, or substances. The LT. S. Department of Agriculture has one of the most comprehensive of the government departmental libraries and its library staff has made important contributions t o documentation by compiling bibliographies, by the Experiment Station Record and by organized photocopying service. The Office of Naval Research and t h e Office of Technical Services are late comers in the documentation field, since they did
82
not exist until the postwar period. T h e y are none the less a c t i v e o n this account and their documentation enterprises are among the foremost government efforts in that direction a t present. Recognition of the need for documentation is spreading a m o n g t h e government agencies, as is evidenced by the increasing number of abstracting and bibliographic services operated by government agencies or their contractors t o meet special needs or cover special interests. Some of these services are under security classification; others are unclassified. The Office of Technical Services, which covers declassified documents of domestic origin and unclassified or declassified captured documents, employs techniques and performs services which have been described previously t o t h e Chemical Literature Group. The documentation studies of the Office of Naval Research a r e centered in the Science and Technology project under contract with the Library of Congress. T h e staff of the project is about equally divided (numerically) between professional and administrative or clerical staff. The two major objectives of the project are to provide current information service concerning reports emanating from the research and development activities of the National Military Establishment and to place such reports under bibliographic control. The current information service is provided for scientists and technologists of military agencies a n d their contractors. Abstracts of current reports are issued on letter-size sheets and o n 3 X 5 index cards. Release to the public is not made directly from the Office of X a v a i Research, but through government agencies having facilities for reproducing copies. The larger task of placing all pertinent reports under bibliographic control calls for a coded subject classification as a first prerequisite. Initial efforts toward the
Quotoons ( R E G . U. S . P A T E N T
OFFICE)
One way to find out if a man is living up to his reputation is to praise him to the sky among his friends
Research is like looking for a golf ball, frequently when you get in the rough, you find a better one than you started out to look for.
There are two kinds of leaders in the world—some are interested in the fleece, others in the flock. —O. (ALU RIGHT'S
A. BATTISTA
RESERVED)
CHEMICAL
development of such a classification have been based on a dual concept which draws a Une between pure science a n d applied science (technology). A short interim classification o n this basis is already in use for 21 major subjects (9 in science, 12 in applications) with a.first breakdown into more than 8 0 0 subclasses. A detailed classification for efficient subject searching remains t o be developed. Coding for a punched-card system is a principal part of the ultimate purpose for this dual classification. Conclusion At present the machines are ahead in the race between mentalization a n d mechanization on the documentation track. Available mechanical aids for efficient subject searching are numerous, versatile, and within t h e financial reach of most organizations or institutions. Actual utilization of these devices falls far short of their potential utility. Hence, the foremost need of documentation today is not so much a greater exercise of mechanical ingenuity a s a meeting of the minds. First, symbiotic teamwork is needed between the scientists or technologists (who are not generally skilled in bibliographic techniques) a n d the bibliographers (who are not generally schooled and skilled in science). The result should be intensive and productive effort. Second, a meeting of t h e minds is needed between these teams and the people who provide the funds. Those executives in industry or government who hold the purse strings are generally not schooled either in science or in the bibliographic arts. T h e need for arousing them t o full appreciation and recognition of the requirement for efficient documentation points u p an essential step o n the path of progress. Given the necessary funds and personnel, t h e huge bulk of scientific and technical literature could be placed under effective bibliographic control at a cost far less than t h e benefits to efficiency and productivity in research and development. Lack of funds is no excuse. Industry and Government are spending dollars by hundreds of millions to build a huge, complex research structure; they can n o t afford the expensive blunder of letting the structure tumble down around their ears for lack of a few millions to make it strong and usable. Literature Cited (1) Crane, E . J., and Patterson, A. JVI ., Literature of Chemistry, p p . 29 and 9 1 101. John Wiley & Sons, New York City, 1927. (2) Holmstrom, J . E., Records and Research in Engineering and Industrial Science, p p . 2, 200, 202, 241, 250, Ed. 2, Chapman & Hall, London, 1947. (3) Annual Report of Chemical Abstracts, C H E M . E N G . N E W S , 26, 552 (1948).
THE two papers published herewith were presented before the Division of Chemical Education, Symposium on Trends in Indexing, Classifying, and Coding Chemical Information at the 113th Meeting of the AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY in Chicago, April 1948.
AND ENGINEERING
NEWS
