ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
EDITORIAL
August 1 9 5 8 , V o l . 3 0 , N o . 8 APPLIED J O U R N A L S , ACS Director o f Publications, Editorial
Director,
C. B. Larrabee
Walter J . Murphy
Executive Editor, James M . C r o w e Production
Manager,
Joseph H. Kuney
ANALYTICAL
CHEMISTRY
Editor, L a w r e n c e T. Hallett Managing EDITORIAL
Editor, Robert G . Gibbs HEADQUARTERS
W A S H I N G T O N 6 , D. C. 1155 Sixteenth St., N.W. Phone Republic 7 - 3 3 3 7 Teletype W A 2 3 Associate Editors: G . Gladys Gordon, Stella A n d e r s o n , Ruth Cornette, K a t h e r i n e I. Biggs, George B. K r a n t z Assistant Editors: A r t h u r Poulos, Robert J . Riley, Robert J . K e l l e y , Ruth M . H o w o r t h , Eugenia K e l l e r , Sue M . S o l l i d a y Editorial Assistants: M a l v i n a B. Preiss, Ruth R e y n a r d , G l o r i a H . W i l l s , Katherine H. Ginnane Layout and Production: Melvin D. Buckner ( A r t ) ; Hanns L. Sperr, Betty V . Kieffer, Roy F. N a s h , Clarence L. R a k o w BRANCH
EDITORIAL
OFFICES
C H I C A G O 3 , ILL. Room 9 2 6 3 6 South W a b a s h A v e . Phone State 2 - 5 1 4 8
Teletype CG 7 2 5
Associate Editors: H o w a r d J . Sanders, Chester Placek Assistant Editor: Laurence J . White HOUSTON 2 , TEX. 7 1 8 Melrose B l d g . Phone F a i r f a x 3 - 7 1 0 7 Associate Editor: Assistant Editor:
Teletype H O 7 2
Bruce F. Greek Earl V . Anderson
NEW Y O R K 1 6 , Ν . Υ . 2 Park A v e . Phone O r e g o n 9 - 1 6 4 6 Teletype NY 1-4726 Associate Editors: William Q . Hull, Harry Stenerson, D a v i d M . Kiefer, D. G r a y W e a v e r , Walter S. Fedor, M o r t o n Salkind Assistant Editor: Louis A . Agnello S A N FRANCISCO 4 , CALIF. 7 0 3 M e c h a n i c s ' Institute B l d g . 5 7 Post St. Phone Exbrook 2 - 2 8 9 5 Teletype SF 5 4 9 Associate Editor: Assistant Editor:
Richard G . N e w h a l l David E. Gushee
EASTON, P A . 2 0 t h a n d N o r t h a m p t o n Sts. Phone Easton 9 1 1 1 Teletype ESTN Pa 4 8 Associate Editor: Charlotte C. Sayre Editorial Assistants: Joyce A . Richards, Elizabeth R. Rufe, June A . Barron EUROPEAN OFFICE Bush H o u s e , A l d w y c h , London Phone Temple Bar 3 6 0 5 Cable JIECHEM Associate Editor: A l b e r t S. Hester Contributing Editor: R. H. Müller Advisory Board: R. M . A r c h i b a l d , W . H . Beamer, H . G . Cassidy, W . D. C o o k e , R. M . F o w l e r , Louis G o r d o n , J . I. H o f f m a n , M . T. K e l l e y , E. E. Leininger, W . M . M a c N e v i n , V . W . M e l o c h e , J o h n M i t c h e l l , Jr., E. J . R o s e n b a u m , R. G . Russell, A I Steyermark Advertising Management: REINHOLD PUBLISHING CORP. 4 3 0 Park A v e . , N e w Y o r k 2 2 , Ν . Υ . (For Branch Offices see p a g e 9 4 A)
Within Bounds TVTow is the time for readers to cast their votes for the 1960 review» on fundamental developments in analysis. Some have already done so. More are needed if we are to know how best to continue the series as a service for readers. Perennial questions have been raised again. Is there not too much overlap among the reviews? Are the titles descriptive and consistent? Are bibliography titles really helpful? Should the specialist interested in one field be satisfied by one review for highlights in his field, or must he also keep in mind that one or two other reviews bear looking at? If so, which ones? Is it permissible for the author of one review to stray slightly over the border? What of duplications within a single review? In the past the editors have told review authors that they are to re view significant developments in the field, "as you see them." One author who was accused by a reader of straying too far afield says, "1 have tried to plan the review as an aid to analytical chemists interested in the theoretical aspects, those interested in developing methods, and those seeking 'cook book' methods. A review strictly of methods has, in my opinion, no place in the fundamental reviews, but does have a place as part of the reviews." This same author also defends some repetition within his review since he has carefully weighed the question of cost of journal space versus· usefulness to the reader. Many people are interested in only one or two phases or sections. Should they therefore have to read an entire review or several reviews? The fact that reviews are written on a strict time schedule means that they cannot be passed around, even among the authors in the series, to catch overlap after they are prepared. There is some possi bility that authors who take in territory likely to be touched by others could confer in advance and arrange for cross-referencing. How can reviews be kept most useful, giving necessary consideration to space problems? Now is the time for you, the reader, to tell us what you want. We are lining up authors for the 1960 series. If you want the "regulars" to continue, say so. If you think new topics should be added (or old ones dropped), say so. We shall welcome your review views, and try to profit from them. When an author can spend several weeks preparing a critical review, we hope you will not mind taking a few minutes to let us know what you want so we can try to provide it.
V O L . 3 0 , N O . 8 , AUGUST 1 9 5 8
·
1305
