In defense of PNAS

[Marc Roussel]

In article <93005.085026FORSDYKE at QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <FORSDYKE at QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
writes:
>Lassaro says:
>>Is PNAS any different from an edited book?
>
>Yes it is different, because journals are not edited books
>and we are discussing journals.

     The "edited book" argument strikes me as being a little weak (PNAS is
clearly not a book, as Forsdyke points out), but isn't the title of this
particular periodical (PROCEEDINGS of the NAS) a warning that this is not
a regular journal?  When a scholarly society operates a real journal, it
usually labels it clearly as such (for instance, Journal of the American
Chemical Society) but when the publication in question is labeled
"Proceedings" or "Transactions", I usually assume the sort of clubbish
publication rules which apply to PNAS.  (I realize that there are
exceptions.)  Doesn't everyone?

				Marc R. Roussel
                                mroussel at alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca