Henry, The meeting at Scifoo with the Wave developers that I mentioned is already discussed out on the blogosphere so I believe it is fine to quote it:
http://network.nature.com/people/mfenner/blog/2009/07/18/using-google-wa ve-for-a-week-its-still-great I'm interested to see the Nature article you discuss below. Best wishes. Antony Williams, VP Strategic Development ChemSpider, Royal Society of Chemistry US Office: 904 Tamaras Circle, Wake Forest, NC-27587 Phone: +1 (919) 201-1516 Fax: +1 (919) 300-5321 > -----Original Message----- > From: Rzepa, Henry [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 8:28 AM > To: Antony Williams; Rzepa, Henry S; blueobelisk- > [email protected] > Cc: Cameron Neylon > Subject: RE: [Blueobelisk-discuss] http://wave.google.com/ > > At 13:11 +0100 14/8/09, Antony Williams wrote: > >Cameron Neylon, Peter Murray-Rust and myself were at the Google Wave > >discussion at SciFoo. Cameron has an intention to use Google Wave to > >write an article and this may match with your intentions. I have cc'ed > >Cameron for his comments. > > > >Antony Williams, VP Strategic Development > >ChemSpider, Royal Society of Chemistry > > Tony, > > I presume since you are posting this information to the list, the > knowledge of the above meeting is open and can be quoted as such? > > If anyone is interested, this particular thread was catalysed at my end by > a request from Nature Chemistry for myself (and independently a > colleague) to write a News&View article for the journal. This takes as > its starting point, a recently published, and possibly even controversial, > regular article, and appends a view of it by one or more others. That view > is of course static, and cannot be added to by anyone else (it is also > limited to 1000 words, and odd limitation in this day and age?). In this > it is, it could be argued, a rather pale imitation of a blog entry. My > article charted its own course (I do not think I was in charge at all), > and I ended up with what might be described as an "exploratorium", this > being of the chemistry and in particular of the molecules concerned. But > again, it is very much a write once/read many conventional construct. The > subsequent discussions with the editor of Nature Chemistry had (and > continue to have) a most interesting flavour. The outcome, whatever it > becomes, is expected in October, or possibly November. > > I have mulled over whether my "commentary" (it evolved into this from an > News&Views, and now allows 2000 words!) could indeed be cast as a Google > wave, thus inviting others into the exploratorium. It also begs the > question of whether a self-consistent analysis of some aspect of chemistry > should continue to mutate with time, or whether after a period of rapid > mutation, it then becomes cast in stone. Much of the social dynamics of a > university department very much continues to depend on the later (tenure, > promotion, prizes, etc). > -- > > Professor Henry S Rzepa. > +44 (020) 7594 5774 (Voice); http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/rzepa/ & /rzepa/blog > Dept. Chemistry, Imperial College London, SW7 2AZ, UK. > > (Voracious anti-spam filter in operation for received email. > If expected reply not received, please phone/fax). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Blueobelisk-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/blueobelisk-discuss
