The springing up of MOFs (Metal Organic Frameworks) studies is obvious enough by their continuous double-appearance-per-issue manner in Angew. Chem., JACS, Adv. Mater., etc. Thanks to my weak inorganic/elemental chemistry I desperately comprehend from those square brackets of compound names, that, MOFs can absorb things (CO2), catalyze things (example forgot), and generate things (H2). They transform their shapes stimuli-responsively too! Sorry for no reference but a out-of-date CSR review (Chem. Soc. Rev. 2003, 32, 276-288. DOI: 10.1039/b200393g). (In some sense a repeatedly reviewed field is no longer a new field, because it has been dominated by several established groups.)

BTW Adv. Mater. gradually loses my favor because it has been dominated by dye-sensitized nano patterned light-emitting pi-conjugated solar cell dip-pen high-spin inorganic hard stuffs which, in my perception, implies soft wet polymeric Mater. are no longer Adv..

So I want to celebrate a ‘organic frameworks’ with the attributive ‘polymeric’ on the new hot paper on Chem. Commun. (DOI: 10.1039/b814254h), always my favorite, although to make polymers into frameworks is not a new and difficult issue – just crosslink them. But new terms can always grab reader’s attention and re-establish a field as a new one. So why not call a crosslinked polymer a ‘polymer organic framework (POFs)’?