(posted on behalf of Chris Gilmore)
As you know, the IUCr is keen to proceed with a new volume of International Tables Volume H devoted to all aspects of powder diffraction. The original plan was to appoint 2-3 Editors in chief who would commission contributions from experts in each area and produce a volume of some 600 A4 sized pages. This is proving difficult partly because of the size of the task, and also the fact that everyone is so busy at present.
However, the IUCr is still keen to proceed, and an alternative plan comprises a new structure (which has not been tried before for International Tables): a team would be put together comprising 2-3 Editors-in-chief and about 11 section editors who would commission contributions, collate them and have them refereed. This is a much more manageable task, and could work well especially given the level of support that the IUCr office could provide. A possible format is as follows:
PART A: Instrumentation and Methods (2 section editors)
Overview and Principles Instrumentation
Specimen preparation
Sample Environment
Data Processing
PART B: Crystal Structure Analysis (2 section editors)
Qualitative analysis
Standards and Instrument Performance
Quantitative phase analysis
Solving Crystal Structures
Structure Refinement
PART C: Defects, Texture, Microstructure and Fibres (3 section editors)
Amorphous materials
Nanocrystalline materials
Grain size and grain size distribution
Stress and strain
Domains and domain walls (incl elecrton microscopy)
Texture
Defects
Thin films
Multilayers
Fibres
Incommensurate phases (with HREM)
PART D: Applications (4 section editors)
Macromolecules
Zeolites
Minerals and Mining
Inorganic structures
Glass ceramics
Ceramic materials (incl medicals)
Metals and alloys
Cement
Polymers and Fibres
Pharmaceuticals
Forensic science
Materials for energy storage and conversion
Magnetic materials
Catalysis
Petroleum and Petrochemicals
Superconductivity
Composites
Paint and Pigments
Piezzo ceramics
Aeronautics and Space
Art and archaeology
Combined methods with Raman and DSC
Software
TOTAL 2/3 Editors-in-chief + 11 section editors)
Proposed editorial structure
-
Brian McMahon
- Site Admin
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 12:34 pm
Re: Proposed editorial structure
The following email responses have already been received and are collated here for reference.
Peter Stevens:
Chris, it seems like a very good idea, perhaps the only feasible idea to accomplish such a large task without a previous IT volume to build upon. I would be happy to serve in whatever capacity you would invite.
Best,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rosanna Rizzi:
Dear Chris,
thank you very much for the invitation and to get me involved in this interesting work.
I accept with pleasure.
About the plan, it seems to me it covers all the fundamental aspects of the powder's world.
Only two suggestions:
1) the Volume would start with the Part. A, Instrumentation and Methods, while I think should be better to start with an overview and principles of powders, something of introductory and general, before entering into the specific.
2) in the Part. B, in addition to 'solving crystal structures', which will cover the methods of structure solution strictly, I should also add the combination of X-ray powder diffraction with other techniques like: electron diffraction, spectroscopy, thermodynamic etc.
Please, keep me informed.
wishes for a happy 2011
Regards Rosanna
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alastair Florence:
Hi Chris,
thanks. I'll digest and get comments to you when I get back to the office.
best,
Alastair
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Toby:
Hi Chris,
The outline looks good and I think dividing up the work makes the task more manageable. It probably transfers more work to the editors, since they will need to nag the section editors to do their job.
I think this is worth doing and I am glad to have a role. I am probably happier to edit than write at this point, but I am worried about keeping up with all the various deadlines in front of me.
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Synder
Chris,
When did you get old while I wasn't watching? Emeritus status already! Maybe I will have to think about retiring one of these days but no time soon. I think I would enjoy participating in your proposed project. A section editor for part B would be the best fit but I also have spent a fair bit of time hanging around Part C.
The project looks interesting and while I still have a pretty busy day job, I think I would enjoy dealing with this. Thanks for keeping me in mind. And a healthy and prosperous new year to you.
Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lubo Smrock & Radovan Cerny
Dear Chris,
I have made use of the last Sunday and have gone through the text. Although it obviously is a zeroth iteration, it is a good start.
If you think we are up to such a role we can, together with Radovan Cerny, work as Sections Editors of the Part B, provided we can make some changes in the proposal.
Yours,
Lubo
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ian Madsen
Dear Chris,
As requested, some comments re: the plan for Volume H :-
Part A
(1) I think that an additional section is needed here - that of Data Collection Strategies. This is an aspect often overlooked with many practitioners opting for 'what is normally done in that laboratory' rather than investigating what is actually needed for the analysis question. There is much past work on this question by Madsen & Hill plus some contributions by David & Shankland.
Part B
(1) There is some considerable diversity in this Part. The demands of qualitative & quantitative analysis are often very different from the requirements for crystal structure analysis. The two editors should be carefully selected to represent these diverse needs.
(2) I would be happy to contribute the quantitative phase analysis section (if no other willing soul has been found - or an unwilling one press-ganged into service) and will endeavour to find a co-author who meets the criteria specified earlier (i.e. not from my group, some different viewpoints on the topic etc.. )
Part D
(1) I should be able to put together a few people to contribute the Minerals and Mining section
Cheers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Altomare
Dear Chris,
thank you very much for your e-mail.
Let me take this opportunity to wish you a happy new year.
Concerning the IT Volume H plan,
I agree with the alternative plan (2/3 Editors-in-chief + 11 section editors).
It may work better (no matter that it has not been tried before for IT).
Concerning the sections PART A-D, they sound well.
I am available in being part of the Section Editor team.
Please, keep me informed about the evolution of the plan.
Best wishes
Angela
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pam Whitfield
Dear Chris and Ian
Hope everyone had a relaxing and uneventful holiday. I count myself lucky not to have got caught in the mess at Heathrow, but it's the 3rd year running where Christmas in deepest Yorkshire was colder than Ottawa.
Anyway for some comments of my own. I like the idea of breaking it down into more manageable pieces - not as intimidating!
I couldn't agree with Ian more about the need for a section on data collection strategies in Part A. It's something about which I repeatedly finding myself banging my head against a brick wall - for instance we now have a fast PSD but everyone insists on doing the same scans as when we used a scintillation detector!
Part B gives me a little pause given the diversity of what is covered. Two editors should be able to do it. I think it also emphasizes the need for part A to be comprehensive given that the optimal instrumentation, sample prep and data collection are different for each of the applications. There needs to be significant linkage - most people are using multi-purpose instruments but they should know what should be tweaked when possible for the best results for different techniques.
A small change to the title may be required as 'Crystal Structure Analysis' clangs a bit when most of the time the structures aren't refined in quant analysis by Rietveld (and might not have them at all using the classical methods)
It wouldn't surprise me if you need to add another section editor for part C for the electron microscopy aspect. The fields are pretty diverse and some of them are very specialized. I'm sure that the electron crystallography commission would have some suggestions.
In terms of actual contributions I suffer a bit from being a 'jack of all trades' so I'm not a real specialist at any of them (tenacious dabbler, tinkerer or just plain stubborn!?)
Maybe that's the recipe for a section editor, who knows? What's the current thinking with regards to timescale on this?
Best regards
Pam
Peter Stevens:
Chris, it seems like a very good idea, perhaps the only feasible idea to accomplish such a large task without a previous IT volume to build upon. I would be happy to serve in whatever capacity you would invite.
Best,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rosanna Rizzi:
Dear Chris,
thank you very much for the invitation and to get me involved in this interesting work.
I accept with pleasure.
About the plan, it seems to me it covers all the fundamental aspects of the powder's world.
Only two suggestions:
1) the Volume would start with the Part. A, Instrumentation and Methods, while I think should be better to start with an overview and principles of powders, something of introductory and general, before entering into the specific.
2) in the Part. B, in addition to 'solving crystal structures', which will cover the methods of structure solution strictly, I should also add the combination of X-ray powder diffraction with other techniques like: electron diffraction, spectroscopy, thermodynamic etc.
Please, keep me informed.
wishes for a happy 2011
Regards Rosanna
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alastair Florence:
Hi Chris,
thanks. I'll digest and get comments to you when I get back to the office.
best,
Alastair
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Toby:
Hi Chris,
The outline looks good and I think dividing up the work makes the task more manageable. It probably transfers more work to the editors, since they will need to nag the section editors to do their job.
I think this is worth doing and I am glad to have a role. I am probably happier to edit than write at this point, but I am worried about keeping up with all the various deadlines in front of me.
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Synder
Chris,
When did you get old while I wasn't watching? Emeritus status already! Maybe I will have to think about retiring one of these days but no time soon. I think I would enjoy participating in your proposed project. A section editor for part B would be the best fit but I also have spent a fair bit of time hanging around Part C.
The project looks interesting and while I still have a pretty busy day job, I think I would enjoy dealing with this. Thanks for keeping me in mind. And a healthy and prosperous new year to you.
Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lubo Smrock & Radovan Cerny
Dear Chris,
I have made use of the last Sunday and have gone through the text. Although it obviously is a zeroth iteration, it is a good start.
If you think we are up to such a role we can, together with Radovan Cerny, work as Sections Editors of the Part B, provided we can make some changes in the proposal.
Yours,
Lubo
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ian Madsen
Dear Chris,
As requested, some comments re: the plan for Volume H :-
Part A
(1) I think that an additional section is needed here - that of Data Collection Strategies. This is an aspect often overlooked with many practitioners opting for 'what is normally done in that laboratory' rather than investigating what is actually needed for the analysis question. There is much past work on this question by Madsen & Hill plus some contributions by David & Shankland.
Part B
(1) There is some considerable diversity in this Part. The demands of qualitative & quantitative analysis are often very different from the requirements for crystal structure analysis. The two editors should be carefully selected to represent these diverse needs.
(2) I would be happy to contribute the quantitative phase analysis section (if no other willing soul has been found - or an unwilling one press-ganged into service) and will endeavour to find a co-author who meets the criteria specified earlier (i.e. not from my group, some different viewpoints on the topic etc.. )
Part D
(1) I should be able to put together a few people to contribute the Minerals and Mining section
Cheers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Altomare
Dear Chris,
thank you very much for your e-mail.
Let me take this opportunity to wish you a happy new year.
Concerning the IT Volume H plan,
I agree with the alternative plan (2/3 Editors-in-chief + 11 section editors).
It may work better (no matter that it has not been tried before for IT).
Concerning the sections PART A-D, they sound well.
I am available in being part of the Section Editor team.
Please, keep me informed about the evolution of the plan.
Best wishes
Angela
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pam Whitfield
Dear Chris and Ian
Hope everyone had a relaxing and uneventful holiday. I count myself lucky not to have got caught in the mess at Heathrow, but it's the 3rd year running where Christmas in deepest Yorkshire was colder than Ottawa.
Anyway for some comments of my own. I like the idea of breaking it down into more manageable pieces - not as intimidating!
I couldn't agree with Ian more about the need for a section on data collection strategies in Part A. It's something about which I repeatedly finding myself banging my head against a brick wall - for instance we now have a fast PSD but everyone insists on doing the same scans as when we used a scintillation detector!
Part B gives me a little pause given the diversity of what is covered. Two editors should be able to do it. I think it also emphasizes the need for part A to be comprehensive given that the optimal instrumentation, sample prep and data collection are different for each of the applications. There needs to be significant linkage - most people are using multi-purpose instruments but they should know what should be tweaked when possible for the best results for different techniques.
A small change to the title may be required as 'Crystal Structure Analysis' clangs a bit when most of the time the structures aren't refined in quant analysis by Rietveld (and might not have them at all using the classical methods)
It wouldn't surprise me if you need to add another section editor for part C for the electron microscopy aspect. The fields are pretty diverse and some of them are very specialized. I'm sure that the electron crystallography commission would have some suggestions.
In terms of actual contributions I suffer a bit from being a 'jack of all trades' so I'm not a real specialist at any of them (tenacious dabbler, tinkerer or just plain stubborn!?)
Maybe that's the recipe for a section editor, who knows? What's the current thinking with regards to timescale on this?
Best regards
Pam