As a former API indexer, I can reaffirm what Stu and Nancy have said
regarding API indexing policy and searching the basic index for additional
references. If you just search "Oleflex" in APILIT, you will retrieve the
records where it is present in the abstract, title, index term, and
supplemental term fields (basic index in APILIT). Patent indexing should
rarely contain the commercially named processes.
Regards,
Joe Terlizzi
Questel/Orbit
-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart M Kaback <smkabac@erenj.com>
To: 'piug' <piug-l@derwent.tecc.co.uk>
Date: Thursday, October 19, 2000 4:06 PM
Subject: API indexing of named processes
>Just for the record (and with Bob Buntrock's blessing):
>
>API indexers would index a named process such as Oleflex only if it were so
>identified in the document at hand. This is almost exclusively done in
>indexing published literature, but would be exceptionally unusual in patent
>indexing, because API patent indexing is done from Derwent Documentation
>abstracts. While a named process would on occasion be referred to in a
>patent document, it's very rare for such a mention to migrate to the
>Derwent abstract.
>
>Under NO circumstances would an API (or any other professional) indexer
>look at a patent document, decide that some commercial process might be
>involved, and choose to index that process. Such creative abstracting
>would be totally unacceptable. It would certainly be proper for an
>information scientist within an organization to inform his or her clients
>that a named process seemed likely to be involved in a given
>document--that's what information professionals are paid for by their
>employers. But such speculation in a commercially produced abstract or
>index would be totally out of line.
>
>Stu Kaback
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 10 2001 - 15:58:59 EDT