Responding to Mark Jordan: > but I don't think that audience should be the people you > describe above (who a colleague of mine calls "analogue > librarians"). If there are any accidental techs (or potential > accidental techs) who aren't already hanging out on venues > like what code4lib already is (i.e., oss4lib, /usr/lib/info, > and a host of email lists, IRC channels, and tech blogs, > inside and outside of library land) then they'll probably > remain happy with thumbing through the existing diluted > journals that librarianship is plagued with, and also remain > happy with the delusion (pardon me for saying so) that they > are keeping up on what's happening out in the world by reading them. There are (a whole lotta?) folks out here who don't peruse *anything* we pay attention to, but who still produce code in libraries. There are various reasons why they don't watch: no time, stuff of interest is too scattered, 1.0-level coder, etc. When I commented that those of us lurking here funnel stuff back into our (and maybe other) institutions, I was thinking specifically of funneling to those who do not watch. (Not watching is not new. Decades ago, I mentioned an article on experimental "bubble" memory to a senior and respected programmer; the response was basically "Huh?". For those of you born after bubble memory peaked: http://www.xs4all.nl/~fjkraan/comp/pc5000/bubble.html ) This might be the value of the formal aspect of a code4lib magazine or journal. Those who do not watch blogs, websites, etc. might spend more time on something more formal when a citation is plunked under their noses. And, they may find a peer group. Din. Donna Dinberg Systems Librarian/Analyst Reference and Genealogy Division Library and Archives Canada [log in to unmask] ** My own thoughts, of course, not those of my employer. **