George, I'vwe had a prompt reply from Ewing on the general issue so far none from MR will try again jim Janelidze wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
The discussion on citation indices is interesting and important, but may I protest a bit?:
Of course we all know that it does not make sense to judge mathematicians by numbers of publications and/or citations. But it does not mean that the number (and the list) of citations on your and my papers given in Mathematical Reviews should be
the number (and the list) of citations in non-category-theory journals!
Therefore the task number one here is not to argue about general improvements of various indices, but to convince Mathematical Reviews to include TAC, Cahiers, and APCS in what Mathematical Reviews calls "Reference List Journals". Jim, any success?
If it is as bad as Michael Barr says, well, it least we will know that we made an attempt - and then, who knows, may be Categorical Reviews will be created one day...
Next, if you allow me to propose task number two, it could be to try again (using MR) to include the same journals to various lists including Thompson's list (APCS is already there though) - not because it will help us to judge ourselves and each other, but simply because there are those funny bureaucratic requirements of many universities in many countries.
George Janelidze