=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EDline Vol. 3, no. 2 (11 January 1998) Editorial mailing list Published by the Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Contents: Q & A---Previous queries [2ca] Word v. WordPerfect [2cc] Spelling in German FYI [3bk] Copyright expiry Business matters---New posting [4af] Job opportunity: conference paper [5] Bookmarks [6] Just for fun [8] Administration =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ---[2] Q & A --------------------------------------------------------- ** [2ca] Word v. WordPerfect Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 From: T. Bruce Tober, octobersdad@reporters.net Dan Wilson wrote: > That capacity [to view documents without opening them] is > there, of course, in all versions of WP for windows. It's > called "preview" now, and it's available in the Open dialog. > Its speed and power make the old 5.1 access look very feeble. Well, you learn something new everyday about this great tool. I knew about the preview in WP8 but had no idea of it's versatility. Thank you. It is pretty much what I'd have hoped for. Hilary Powers wrote: > You'll probably get forty-nine bazillion notes about this, but > just in case -- doesn't the "view" option do exactly this? It's > on the open screen, and certainly seems to work just like WP5.1, > with the added wrinkle that you can copy from the viewed file > to the Clipboard. Thank you too. I didn't know that, I've only had a few minutes to play around with it, but that's actually not a new wrinkle, you could cut and paste from the wp5.1 version, IF you operated under WPOffice Shell. I wrote: > I need the old DOS view of the document in which I could > search for words and phrases to see if it's the document I > need etc. Ah well, such is "progress". And now thanks to the above two messages I see I can. Thanks people. --------------------- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 From: Hannah Hyam, hhyam@globalnet.co.uk Bruce Tober wrote (about the Reveal Formatting feature in Word): > Does it allow you to manipulate the codes in order to alter > the formatting. Or is it just another pretty window that billie > allows you to look through and admire the wonder of his program > without being able to alter it to your own personal world view? Well, you can't manipulate any codes directly from the Reveal Formatting box, as what it does is give you a list of all the formatting that has been applied, under two main headings - paragraph formatting and font formatting - and further subdivides these into underlying styles and any styles you have applied directly (e.g. italics). But it does, I think, give you all the information you need to spot hidden formatting that is causing problems, and you can then change it in the normal way. --------------------- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 From: Naomi Laredo, naomi@smallprt.demon.co.uk In EDline 2.50 Jane Kerr wrote: > one thing I really like about WP is its ability to arrange two > open documents side by side, instead of horizontally - it > makes comparison of two documents so much easier. It doesn't > seem to be possible to do this in Word. I'm not entering the Word v. WordPerfect debate, but you *can* view two documents side by side in Word if you size each window manually -- it takes a few seconds, but it is possible and, as Jane says, convenient. It has the effect of converting your landscape TV screen into two portrait pages -- a topic raised recently in Grapevine 75. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2cc] Spelling in German Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 From: Eddie Kent, eddie.kent@mcr1.poptel.org.uk Many years ago I worked on a journal that consisted mostly of papers translated from German. There were two basic instructions that had to be followed to the death, or beyond. One was that 'ue' had to become u- umlaut throughout, and the other was that all references were to be cited in the German style, as J. appl. Math for instance, to distinguish the Journal of Applied Mathematics from the Journal for the Applications of Mathematics, J. Appl. Math. Fortunately I am now senior enough in my profession to have my views taken seriousy, and it is my opininion that while the second of these is just about justifiable on the grounds of saving ink, the convention of surrounding random letter with silly marks that even native speakers can't always manage with their normal equipment is doomed. Certainly the advent of simple email has put paid to much of this foolishness, and although I do not expect to see the total end of it in my lifetime, nevertheless even the most diehard supernationalists must begin to see that context will normally decide meaning, without resorting to mumbo-jumbo. After all the English have been managing a fairly complicated language without such aids for a goodly time now. Just for an experiment, try typing out a sentence or so of one of these bedecked (I was going to say 'horrid', but the word has quite lost its meaning) languages without all the unattached spikes, and see how difficult it then becomes to read. After a while you might even begin to like it. ---[3] FYI ----------------------------------------------------------- ** [3bk] Copyright expiry Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 From: Iain Brown, i_brown@compuserve.com [The following is a compilation of material that originally appeared in the Humanist Discussion Group] How old does a text have to be before it can be posted to the WWW? In other words, at what point does copyright no longer apply? It looks as if texts from the ninteenth century and before are exempt (at least from the number of them posted), but are texts from the early years of this century also now exempt? Depending on which country you are in, it differs. (But then again, the people accessing your text may be living under a different legal system ...) Under EU law (Council Directive 93/98/EEC of 29 October 1993 harmonizing the term protection of copyright and certain related rights, Official Journal of the European Communities L290/9 (24/11/93)), the basic term of copyright is author's life + 70 years. If there are multiple authors, then term is last surviving author + 70 years. See also Intellectual Property by W.R. Cornish (London: Sweet & Maxwell 1996) for explanation of copyright. The Council Directive is fairly straightforward. However, there is one point that I would like clarified and which is not discussed in any of the legal textbooks I've seen. This is to do with Article 5 dealing with Critical and Scientific publications. The term for these is 30 years after the publication has been published. I can find nowhere a definition of a critical publication. In discussions of author's life + 70 years, edited works are discussed so I guess they come under that particular term. As for database copyright, there is also an EU Directive (Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, Official Journal of the European Communities L77/20 (27/3/96). This came into effect on 1/1/98. ---[4] Business matters ------------------------------------------------ ** [4af] Job opportunity: conference paper Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 From: Jan Melissen, jm33@leicester.ac.uk I am preparing a paper for an academic conference which is to take place in mid-February. The paper will be about the influence of the media on diplomatic practice. I am a native Dutch speaker and I usually show my work to an editor for final corrections. My writing style is clear and not very theoretical. The final length of the piece I am preparing is unlikely to exceed 6,000 words. If anyone is willing and able to do this job on a short notice, please let me know. I would appreciate more information about your qualifications, working methods and, of course, your going rate. Dr Jan Melissen Executive Director Centre for the Study of Diplomacy & Co-ordinator Diplomatic Studies Programme Attenborough Building Leicester University Leicester LE1 7RH UK tel. 00-44-116-252.2797 fax. 00-44-116-252.5082 http://www.le.ac.uk/csd/dsp/ ---[5] Bookmarks ----------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 From: Jane Kerr, bywater@zetnet.co.uk With my usually efficiency, I took time out from revelry and debauchery at Hogmanay[*] to update the Electric Editors Site of the Month -- and then forgot to tell the rest of you about it. Therefore, somewhat later than usual, check out the new link to the Society of Authors: < http://www.writers.org.uk/society/ > This is billed as "the leading association for writers of fiction and non-fiction in the United Kingdom", and their links page is well worth looking at - many useful reference resources are listed there. ---- [*] For those of you who don't know, that's what Scots call New Year's Eve. ---[6] Just for fun -------------------------------------------------- "Lines from the slushpile", no. 16 "Well," she said suavely, "viola for now." +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ "Everyone needs an editor". no. 8 "An editor should tell the author his writing is better than it is. Not a lot better, a little better". -- TS ELIOT +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Einstein's Co-author: A Cautionary Tale for Science Editors Among the many notable achievements during the celebrations of Einstein's 100th birthday, the discovery of his coworker in Berlin, S.B. Preuss, was one of those receiving rather little publicity. A review article about cosmology stated: "The discovery ... of Hubble's law ... led Einstein to ... reject the notorious cosmological term (Einstein and Preuss, 1931)". The curious reader who has followed Einstein's life story and knows of his collaborations with M. Grossman, J. Grommer and W. Mayer (to name a few), but who has never heard of Preuss, eagerly turns to the references given. It is: A. Einstein and Preuss, S.B. (1931), _Akad. Wiss._, 235. Surely the _Akad. Wiss._ must be the Berlin Academy? Happily enough for those without access to the originals, Einstein's reports to the Berlin Academy were reproduced on the occasion of the 1979 celebrations. A glance at the appropriate page of the 1931 volume of the _Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften_ (Reports of the meetings of the Prussian Academy of Science) reveals the workings of a creative mind. Let us look at the following sequence of references: Einstein, A. (1931). _Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss._ ... A. Einstein, 1931, _Sitzgsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss._ ... A. Einstein, _Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss._ ... (1931) A. Einstein (1931) _Sber. preuss. Akad. Wiss._ ... Einstein, A., 1931, S.B. Preuss. _Akad. Wiss._ ... A. Einstein, S.B. Preuss, _Akad. Wiss._, 1931 ... A. Einstein, S.B. Preuss, _Akad. Wiss._ (1931) ... A. Einstein and Preuss, S.B. (1931) _Akad. Wiss._ ... Thus, it turns out that the birth and death of S.B. Preuss occurred within such a very short time span that any scientific endeavors attempted could come to nothing. One hopes that this will be noticed by the people producing the citation index. Otherwise, I fear, lest, in a generation or two, a young historian of science might apply for a grant to uncover more details from the brief, but not entirely joyless, life of S.B. Preuss. [Source: _Droll Science_, an anthology compiled by Robert L. Weber] ---[8] Administration ------------------------------------------------ EDline provides the opportunity for a weekly online discussion of matters editorial and editorial business. * POSTING MESSAGES TO THE LIST All messages to be posted to the list should be sent to Jane Kerr, at: bywater@zetnet.co.uk Include as the subject line, "EDline [topic]", where [topic] is the subject under discussion. Topics might include areas such as Grammar, Spelling, American English or Punctuation. Messages should be pertinent to the basic premise of the list; they may be withheld, or redirected if more pertinent to one of the other mailing lists. The spelling and grammar of messages will *not* be corrected, but some editing of length may be undertaken. Quoting from previous messages: quote as much as you need to make the context of your reply clear, but no more. * Administration All messages of a subscription or administrative nature should be directed to Jane Kerr, at: bywater@zetnet.co.uk with "EDline ADMIN" in the subject line. * To subscribe to Grapevine To subscribe to Grapevine, the discussion list concerned with matters computing, please e-mail Electric Editors at: ElectricEds@bigfoot.com with [Subscribe Grapevine] in the subject line. * To subscribe to LANGline To subscribe to LANGline, which discusses modern languages, translation and editing in non-English languages, please e-mail Electric Editors at: ElectricEds@bigfoot.com with [Subscribe LANGline] in the subject line. *Homepage and back issues: Visit the Electric Editors at: < http://www.ikingston.demon.co.uk/ee/home.htm > Back issues of all three mailing lists are available on the Mailing Lists archive page. --------- ** The views expressed in this mailing list are strictly those of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the moderators or of the Electric Editors. ** Articles (c) 1998, by individual contributors Design (c) 1996, 1997 Iain Brown =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= END OF EDline 3.2 Next issue: 18 January 1998 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=