=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EDline Vol. 3, no. 49 (6 December 1998) Editorial mailing list Published by the Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Contents: [1] Editorial Q & A---previous query [2fy] 555 Q & A---new queries [2ga] Dummy telephone numbers [Offshoot of [2fy] 555] [2gb] Resources for Editors FYI [3dm] Announcement: Mac-using editors' list Business matters---previous posting [4bt] Rates of pay [5] Bookmarks [6] Just for fun [8] Administration =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ---[1] Editorial ---------------------------------------------- Next week's issue of EDline will be the last for 1998, and with the New Year comes the annual change of duties at EDline HQ. Jane Kerr will be taking over as Moderator of the list from 1st January, and I will be looking after the despatch of issues. Therefore, an advance notice to remind you to send any EDline contributions to Jane at bywater@zetnet.co.uk and any EDline administration matters to me. Many thanks, Iain Brown Moderator ---[2] Q & A -------------------------------------------------- ** [2fy] 555 Date: Tues, 24 Nov 1998 From: Ian Kingston, ian@ikingston.demon.co.uk Thanks to Ruth T-C and Deborah Shaw for confirming my suspicions about the 555 exchange in US telephone numbers. Not long after I posted, I saw another example in a children's book (555 1234 - obviously intended to be a fake), so I was pretty sure that I was on the right track. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2ga] Dummy telephone numbers [Offshoot of [2fy] 555] Date: Tues, 1 Dec 1998 From: John Woodruff, jwoodruf@globalnet.co.uk I have just come across this problem in a book I'm editing. All the replies in EDline 3.48 concerned US numbers and the use of 555. Since there is a 555 exchange in the London area, if not in other large UK cities, I contacted BT's customer services. Their answer: there is no equivalent dummy exchange number in the UK. The only solution for the UK would therefore seem to be to use a number-string that obviously isn't a telephone number -- but that's not going to be satisfactory in many contexts. Any thoughts on this? +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2gb] Resources for Editors Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 From: Rachel Spungin, uczciab@ucl.ac.uk Are there any resources on-line or paper that give guidance for editors on (highly interesting) subjects such as capitalisation and punctuation. This is related to the work I'm doing for a multi-media company at the moment. They don't seem to have any idea what the formal protocols are for text editing. ---[3] FYI ----------------------------------------------------- ** [3dm] Announcement: Mac-using editors' list Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 From: Chuck Brandstater, acreatyv1@earthlink.net Mac-using editors interested in a list for the like-minded can direct subscription requests to: mcedit-owner@onelist.com ---[4] Business matters --------------------------------------- ** [4bt] Rates of pay Date: Tues, 1 Dec 1998 From: Hilary Powers, HPowers1@compuserve.com Eldo Barkhuizen writes: > I ... received my first on-screen project ... When attempting > to negotiate rates I was shocked when the client insisted on > paying me their normal copy-editing rate (GBP10 per hour). > When I pointed out that they were making a substantial saving > through on-screen editing they said that all they were saving > was 50p per page. I also mentioned that I had to bear the cost > of expensive computer equipment, software and electricity, but > they were adamant about the GBP10-per-hour rate. > > Is this situation common? That alleged 50p/page saving sounds like pure exploitative bushwah. An on-screen edit knocks one whole job out of the production process and cuts into another -- it has to save the publisher more than that! Tells you something about the tone of the company right there. It might be worth doing a job or two for them just to cut your teeth on electronic editing -- it can take a while to get up to speed -- but it doesn't sound like a good sort of long-term client to me. Meanwhile, many U.S. publishers do have hourly rates that they want to pay. The kind of publisher seems to make the most difference in the hourly rate, with university presses at the bottom and computer how-to houses at the top. The latter are pretty much all working on screen these days, so there's a correlation between rate and medium -- but probably not a causal relationship. The computer publishers are (relatively speaking) rolling in money, and working on a much tighter time frame than the scholarly or trade folks. I haven't heard of a differential rate for paper versus on-screen jobs from companies that still do both... but then, I don't work on paper at all, so I wouldn't know. I don't work by the hour, either, even for publishers that prefer that sort of working arrangement. It turns out that many companies will negotiate a flat project rate based on their budget -- either frankly as an agreed-upon sum or somewhat slyly as an agreed-upon number of hours you're expected to bill. If you can set up that sort of deal, you can then make a great deal more than the proposed hourly rate by handing off the grunt work to your computer. It takes some skill and thought to do this while keeping the quality high enough to get return business... but then, it's worth putting in the effort to raise your hourly income, which it wouldn't be if all you were doing was finishing a job in fewer hours and then having to scratch around for another one at the same old rate.... ---[5] Bookmarks ----------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 From: Iain Brown, i_brown@compuserve.com Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox: Tips on writing for the Internet. Well worth a look (and also subscribing to his alertbox list). < http://www.useit.com/alertbox/980906.html > ---[6] Just for fun ------------------------------------------- "Beguiling ideas about science", no. 34 A hurricane is a breeze of a bigly size. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ "It CAN be done", no. 18 The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon. --- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon- Extraordinary to Queen Victoria, 1873. ---[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 Iain Brown, at: i_brown@compuserve.com 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. The sections of EDline are as follows: [2] Q & A -- questions and answers [3] FYI -- items of general interest [4] Business matters -- items of a business nature [5] Bookmarks -- useful Web pages [6] Just for fun -- time for letting hair down! [7] Miscellaneous -- odds and sods * 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/ > 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 Compilation (c) 1998, The Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= END OF EDline 3.49 Next issue: 13 December 1998 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=