THE NEEDS OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY

Abstract

Just as the Dainton Report is written in the first person plural so this brief discussion of how the conclusions of the Report might affect scientists is written in the first person singular. But here the similarity ends. The Dainton Report expresses the carefully considered opinions of a group of people, arrived at after listening to the arguments, pleadings, and exhortations of individuals, of institutions, etc., and therefore may be regarded as reflecting—if not a majority view—at least a substantial concensus of opinion throughout the country. This is far from true in my case. I did not consult my colleagues and in the few cases where I was familiar with the evidence submitted to the Dainton Committee I tried to forget what I knew. So, what follows is a very personal statement, based mainly on guesses and hunches rather than on rigorously established facts. My excuse for this slapdash approach is that to do full justice to the task would require a detailed and time‐consuming study of how the scientific community uses its libraries.

Citation

KURTI, N. (1969), "THE NEEDS OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY", Journal of Documentation, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 315-318. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026480