The Internet (like its precursors from the late 1960s onward) offers scholars a unique opportunity to communicate and publish using a revolutionary new technology. In part, it is unique because research and academe had the first go at networked connections, long before entertainment and infotainment could benefit from it. Via this subsidized service, they have had means and opportunity to distribute inexpensively and widely at a time when traditional print publications were increasingly hard to afford and new journals harder and harder to start up. If you are willing to believe that the practically unconstrained way in which academic authors utilize the new academic publishing capabilities might instruct us about what they want and need, then you can imagine the publications currently on the electronic networks as a large goldfish bowl for our study, contemplation, and enlightenment. I want to spend a few moments sketching what are the serious thing on those networks because I believe librarians must take their cue from network users and not from print-on-paper publishers and librarians.

/pp. 5-6/

We are in the early days of this new, far-reaching, powerful communications mode. It will take time, experiments, false starts, grand successes, and whopping disasters before we know where the path we are on may lead us. While we can try to shape and direct progress, while we can work together to deploy the technology successfully, its evolution will take time. We have little way to know what developments will come next — either incrementally, as with gopher and MOSAIC, or monumentally, as with the perfect OCR scanner, artificial intelligence, entirely portable quality displays, and so on. Surely this state of affairs is no different from the early days of scholarly print publishing: the early scholarly book was, by any current standards, as poor and unsophisticated an artifact as our electronic creations will be determined to have been in 100 or even 10 years. At present, we cannot tell how publishing and libraries will be changed; how our roles will have been re-shaped; and how our institutions will change as a result. I often wish I could come back for a day every 50 years, to see what indeed has transpired.

Let me offer two perspectives on that question, firts an overall view of the Internet world, and second one of a finer granularity, recognizing that anything that is said or printedin an attempt to capture or define this mutable, fleeting world is doomed to be incorrect the second after the evidence is gathered. The large view comes from a very useful OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) document released in February 1993: Assessing Information on the Internet, by Martin Dillon, Erik Jul, Mark Burge, and Carol Hickey of the Office of Research.11

Assessing Information on the Internet; Toward Providing Library Services for Computer-Mediated Communication. Research Report (Dublin, Ohio: OCLC Office of Research, February 1993).

That is, if growth on these sites has continued more or less proportionally, in the absence of any information to the contrary, we can assume that some undetermined percentage (and probably the bulk) of information on the Internet might be in areas that libraries would wish to organize so as to enhance access. Possibly 10% — still not an inconsiderable amount — is currently what we could characterize as an area of interest for both librarians and publishers. At a guess, this 10% would be characterized by electronic book type material, i.e. humanistic texts, corpora of assorted textual files such newspapers, etc., and thus very little of what we would consider current scholarly books. The other chunk would be electronic serials, i.e., publications which are intended, at the time of creation, to continue indefinitely.

Our own experience in the Association of Research Librarians (ARL) is predominantly in the serials subset of /pp. 7-8/ that 10%. (I wish I could say what percentage — we should probably encourage OCLC to take on this challenge as well.) As you might know, since 1991 the Association has published a print reference work called the Directory of Electronic Journals, Newsletters, and Academic Discussion Lists.22

The data in these paragraphs is taken from the Directory of Electronic Journals, Newsletters, and Academic Discussion lists, ed. by Ann Okerson (Washington, DC.: Association of Research Libraries Office of Scientific & Academic Publishing, 1993 edition).

By 1993, the scholarly lists section project team had expanded to 10 Kent State professionals and list inclusion had grown from the original 517 in 1991 to 1152 in 1993 — in part this growth reflects the growth of academic discussion lists on the networks; in part the expanding mandate of the compilers who added UK Mailbase groups in 1993 and will be adding scholarly UseNet lists for the 1994 edition, again projected to expand its size by at least 30%. (Note that the universe of discussion lists is estimated at a current total of between 4,000 - 8,000, and that many of these lists come and go; many are not archived, so snapshots are the best anyone has done; and those have only been made in subsets of the List world.)

As to the electronic journals and newsletters, after locating and identifying 110 titles in 1991, 133 in 1992, and 240 in 1993, Michael Strangelove began a print serial publication called Internet Business Journal and as of summer 1993 became only one member of an expanded and institutionalized E-journal/newsletter /pp. 8-9/ directory project coordinated out of the ARL, which will be responsible for this part of the 4th edition due Spring 1994. Currently, about a half dozen workers are contributing to a project which is being re-shaped and re-defined. Our universe for the Fourth Edition, and it is a universe we are researching meticulously to understand what is "out there," includes: the 700+ e-journals on the CICnet gopher (by the way, these are all far from real serials, for various reasons); the previous editions of our own Directory, the list of Zines maintained by John Labovitz at netcom.com, and the 40+ new e-journal startups that have been documented on our moderated e-site: NewJour-L@e- math.ams.org. Our listing of current electronic journals and newsletters as of Spring 1994 will be an estimated 400+ titles. These numbers will exclude the small or proprietary experiments available to selective clientele. I can imagine the day, of course, when every serial in Ulrich's has an Internet format.

Principally , the rest of the field falls in two areas. First of all, preprints are a comparatively tidy activity. That is, you can find the sites and count them. Through the work of a small Preprints Group (1992) which Dave Rodgers (AMS), Jim O'Donnell (Penn) and I initiated, we attempted to document and report the emerging networked Preprint phenomenon, and hope to include a brief listing of the most prominent preprint services available on the net in our next edition. These are predominantly in the areas of high energy physics, mathematics, and philosophy, with some in computer science, astronomy, and philology.

Second are the awareness, indexing, and abstracting services that are coming on stream. Just how we will incorporate into the Directory such "secondary services" as the tables of contents that Springer and Kluwer distribute over the nets; the astronomy abstracts that the AAS community is making available online; and the alerting service that Institute of Physics Publishing and Elsevier are beginning in 1994 for condensed matter materials, /pp. 9-10/ remains to be determined. Maybe we will simply record them as the beginnings of an important and natural trend.

If content on the networks is to instruct the library community's efforts, what generalizations can one make?

Apparently, there are academics, and reputable ones at that, for whom the cost/benefit of the Mercedes Benz — the smart cover, prestigious logo, beautiful paper, and added-value galore — is less important than the means of quick and effective conveyance, even if it be merely a rusty old heap that runs. Academic aspirations are, in many cases, being modified by the financial realities of the day. I believe this is leading us to a more differentiated array of publications. I imagine the Internet full of curiously painted VW beetles and vans, an engaging mixture of information vehicles. If this speculation becomes reality, and if our academics and their institutions become aware that the current style of single-minded high-value publishing can lead to perishing, then we are headed for some value shifts over time. I recall that in the first year of the Directory project, we approached a couple of prestigious foundations for support, and were turned down on the basis that the networked content was just not good enough to track and describe. That 1991 judgment has not stopped the phenomenal growth of networked content, however awful some think it is, nor, fortunately, has it deterred our librarian navigators on the project.

I shall list only a few significant library community efforts that are coming on stream, advancing networked scholarly resources for locating and describing information . And in so doing, I will shortchange the obviously important work of several of the scientific and humanistic societies who are organizing the Internet resources that their researchers and scholars use (examples include /pp. 11-12/ the American Mathematical Society, the American Astronomical Society, the American Philological Association, and others.

As for librarians, it is in listening to our clientele — readers and authors — that our most effective and long-lived future lies.

/p. 13/