=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- EDline Vol. 4, no. 3 (24 January 1999) Editorial mailing list Published by the Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Contents: Q & A---previous queries [2gc] Divulging "trade secrets" [Offshoot of [2gb] Resources for editors] [2gd] The KISS principle [Offshoot of [2gb] Resources for editors] [2ge] Checking journal references online [2gf] Who needs a proofreader? [2gh] Job description [2gi] Citing internet documents [2gj] Elliptical brainstorm [2gk] Permissions [2gl] Legal query Q & A---new query [2gm] Quark v. Word [Offshoot of [2gf] Who needs a proofreader?] FYI [3dn] "Horrors of the ugasp" [3dr] The Internet Grammar Business matters---previous postings [4ca] Project management contracts [4cb] First Edition [5] Bookmarks [6] Just for fun [8] Administration =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ---[2] Q & A -------------------------------------------------- ** [2gc] Divulging "trade secrets" [Offshoot of [2gb] Resources for editors] Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 From: Ruth Thaler-Carter, Rthalerc@aol.com Mandy Macdonald wrote: > how far should we be prepared to share our tricks of the trade > if the sharing may result in our not getting work and the > further deprofessionalization of our trade? What does the team > think? Trying to balance mentoring/being a good colleague with fending off "users"/ people who might steal clients is a classic, constant problem. I want to be a good sport, but I can't afford to give away *everything* I know. I've given speeches to writers' groups about how to get started as a freelancer, but I get a little short-tempered with people who call me up and say, "Please tell me all your secrets of success," basically wanting to reach my professional level without paying any professional dues, so to speak - and without even buying me a drink in return! The last time that happened, I (half-)jokingly told the caller I'd be glad to provide a little advice but she had to treat for lunch or dinner, and she got furious ... At any rate, I find Internet lists such as EdLine and Copy Editing List to be invaluable sources of collegiality and enhanced professionalism. I'm also a big believer in joining - and being actively visible in - professional associations. That may be why I'm willing to do speeches as I mentioned; at least, the people there have demonstrated some respect for those with more experience by investing in the cost of the conference and the whole idea of professional interaction. We aren't "giving away trade secrets" if we end up with more professional colleagues. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2gd] The KISS principle [Offshoot of [2gb] Resources for editors] Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 From: Eddie Kent, eddie.kent@mcr1.poptel.org.uk Ruth Thaler-Carter wrote: > I use "Keep It Simple, Sweetheart" when I mention the KISS > principle ... because I found that many people were offended > by the original version (Keep It Simple, Stupid). I guess you wouldn't use 'shithead' in that case. But how do you translate SNAFU? Or berk? Or shower? +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2ge] Checking journal references online Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 From: Michele Clark, Michele.Clarke@btinternet.com Hilary Powers wrote: > Do editors commonly have to dig up such information? [details > for incomplete references] My current clients have me query > for it, but if the author can't provide it, so-sad-too-bad I agree with Hilary Powers in her reply to John Woodruff - by all means, if asked, check the references, but only if it's been negotiated for. I always flag up the mistakes or queries to the author. I do know that one of the SFEP members, many years ago, was very surprised when the majority of us said that we do not check references for accuracy as a matter of course - she apparently checked all of them letter by letter. How onerous - it's something I think that could be done by an alert secretary (preferably the author's!) ---------------------- Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 From: B.J. Sutton, jastext@mnet.fr Regarding John Woodruff's query about checking journal references online, I agree with Hilary Powers---this is not the job of the editor. I have published articles and books in various fields and it was always expected that I, as the author of the piece in question, should provide all references as completely as possible. In the case of many academic journals, I was also required to pre-format my references in accordance with their particular style (eg Chicago). It was always the worst part of the job for me, and I don't blame someone for trying to delegate it, but in my experience this is not common practice. ---------------------- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 From: Jane Kerr, bywater@zetnet.co.uk I'd really like to copy-edit the works of B.J. Sutton! In my experience (of academic and STM publishing), few authors are so consciencious, and even the ones that are frequently make mistakes. I am often asked to deal with author queries, and my practice is to sort out as many reference queries as possible using resources like UnCover, before I approach the author. I find that a common authorial response to a long list of queries such as "please supply the volume number of the Bloggs and Smith 1996 reference" is akin to that commonly attributed to the ostrich, and it's genuinely easier (and quicker) for me to deal with such matters myself. In some cases, it's even possible to sort out all such queries without bothering the author at all (and I fondly imagine that academics have better things to do than troll through their university libraries trying to discover whether von Schecklinghauser's initials are GJ or FJ - please don't disillusion me). +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2gh] Job description Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 From: Hilary Powers, HPowers1@compuserve.com Moira Vekony wrote: > how do you all describe what you do (presumably to make it > sound a little bit more demanding than turning on the 'Speak > and spell')? Yes - the amount of ignorance about what we do is just about unlimited. I often see some glimmer of intelligence in people's eyes if I say something along the lines of "I take the book the publishers got from the author and turn it into the one they wanted. Sometimes it's just a matter of fixing typos; sometimes it's almost a rewrite -- like the one I did on office politics, where the instruction was 'take everything outright illegal and turn it into a warning instead of a recommendation!' The trick is to do whatever the book needs and keep the author happy with the results." That covers the main bases - the variability, the source of the assignment, and the emotional overtones - and mentioning a specific job makes it come to life. There's no point in addressing edit levels in any depth or going into details like style sheets or coding for page makeup unless somebody seems seriously interested in going into the biz. (Something I always encourage, though with a heavy dose of reality in the description of the life and the process of getting into it.) ---------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 From: Kathleen Lyle, Kathleen@klyle.demon.co.uk I try to stress the organizational elements - grading headings, etc. - and checking integrity - i.e. that Fig. 1 exists and shows what it says it does, reference lists are complete and so on. I also point out that many excellent scientists are obliged to publish in English although their grasp of the language may be minimal, and it is an editor's job to help them to present their work as they would wish it to be presented. Checking spelling and inserting commas comes quite far down my list of priorities (which seems to come as a surprise even to many fellow editors) although of course I don't ignore these aspects. ---------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 From: Ian Kingston, ian@ikingston.demon.co.uk I have the same problem as Moira - my office overlooks the street outside, and the neighbours see me at the window most days. I think the computer monitor convinces them that I must be doing something useful. I usually tell people that I'm a freelance editor. Then I add something about working on scientific books and journals, which (since most people are intimidated by science) helps to establish my professional credentials. After that I might go into the details if pressed, but that doesn't happen often - after all, who asks an accountant about how they add up numbers? Look on the bright side - you might be a doctor ('I wonder if you could give me an opinion about this rash'), a teacher ('So what *do* you do in those long holidays?') or a computer programmer ('How do I print labels in Word?'). ---------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 From: Eddie Kent, eddie.kent@mcr1.poptel.org.uk I say 'I edit mathematics books and journals.' The automatic and immediate response is the proud boast: 'Oh, I'm hopeless at maths.' to which I either reply 'That is exactly what all stupid people say', or if I'm feeling a little more benign I point out that if I were to say 'I'm hopeless at gardening', I would be told that anyone can garden. Well, I'm here to tell you that anyone can do maths; they just have to decide to stop being lazy and scared. Mathematics is ultimately the only thing worth doing because it is complete, utterly satisfying, and more exciting than car jumping. (Another response that comes up quite often is 'Explain chaos theory (or fractals, or something else) to me. In words of one syllable.) ---------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 From: Christina Malkowska Zaba, christina@zaba.com I've finally worked out a formula for this, after years of being met with blank incomprehension. There's simply no point talking about grammar, or queries, or house style, or lengths of dashes. Most people wouldn't know what these were even if you showed them. I never mention technical things at all. I begin by saying that I work for big publishers, I can read incredibly quickly and no-one will ever take me on at Scrabble (all true, if irrelevant). Then if they want to know more I explain that each book I work on involves a working relationship with three very different entities: The publisher, who's stressed and budget-conscious and works in a big office (and pays me to do a good job), and who wants the book to match its other books in style; to come in on time and to budget; to be no hassle; and to be perfect and ready to give to the printer. The printer, a down-to-earth individual surrounded by complicated machinery who doesn't care at all what the book actually says, as long as everything's labelled clearly and he doesn't have to think too hard about it. 'So I have to label every page for the printer,' I say slowly, 'so that he doesn't make any mistakes.' The author, who is like a nervous parent bringing a child for the first day at school: s/he needs a warm, professional expert who will take charge, and who s/he knows will make improvements, but who will never take over as 'real parent', will always be very interested indeed and will stay in very close touch about what's going on. So I, the editor, I say, sit at the meeting-point of these three relationships, linked to my vast empire by means of my computer; and by handling each one skilfully I help produce a perfectly polished book. To a very tight deadline, and no, I never remember what's in them, and no, they're usually very boring books, not the kind you would read for fun, but they do have to be right because students will be using them. And yes, I do get my name in them. Sometimes. By the time I've finished I've usually shut everyone up. It works every time. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 From: Michele Clark, Michele.Clarke@btinternet.com In reply to Moira Vekony, I have similar problems in that neighbours always ask how I can index and edit an academic medical book without being a doctor - my reply is that how can doctors write good text when they haven't got an academic background of English grammar. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2gi] Citing Internet documents Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 From: Alice King, alicek@deakin.edu.au Mandy Macdonald wrote: > I'm working on a book whose bibliographical references include > many Internet documents. These are cited in all sorts of ways -- > authors are not always given, titles are sometimes italic, > sometimes roman in quotes, sometimes just roman, capitalization > of titles is aleatoric, other details are highly variable, and > the entry often ends 'Internet document on the World Wide Web' > (isn't this tautological?). Sometimes a URL (an URL??) is given, > but not always. > > Are there any other standard features that should always be cited, > or always cited in a particular way? We are increasingly finding that authors are citing internet sources in study materials and that the information provided in the references varies widely. In order to help our authors, as well as a guide for ourselves, we added sections on citing non-print sources, including online material, to the Deakin University Publishing Manual last year. These styles are based on a variety of sources, as we could find no definitive source on citing internet documents. The Deakin University Publishing Manual is online at: < http://www2.deakin.edu.au/lrs/pub_manual/default.htm > The pages on Harvard and Oxford systems of referencing have sections on non-print sources, with subsections on online material. The examples given are subject to revision as conventions for citing material taken from electronic sources are developed. Also, the International Standards Organisation has published a draft standard for bibliographic references to electronic documents: ISO 690 Part 2, "Information and documentation - Bibliographic references - Electronic documents or parts thereof" ISO/FDIS 690-2. I haven't managed to get hold of this yet, so am not sure how it varies from our styles. ---------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 From: Ian Kingston, ian@ikingston.demon.co.uk I don't think the rules for doing this have really settled down yet, but there are some points that are important to take account of. If it's only available on the Net there has to be a URL, since that's the only way of obtaining the document. If there is also a print publication, then I would treat that as the primary source because URLs are prone to change (academic moves from University A to University B; University A removes academic's Internet account and Web pages; academic might or might not put the pages back on the Web at University B). Worse, Web pages and documents themselves may change while the URL remains the same. It is usually worth checking any URLs and querying any that you can't get through to first time or which leave you wondering where the document or information is. Capitalization can be very important. URLs are frequently case-sensitive. 'Internet documents on the World Wide Web' isn't a tautology: the documents may be available via FTP, for example. If the author writes something like: 'This document can be obtained as "article.ps" by anonymous FTP from ftp.univ.edu', try to obtain more information (the exact URL if possible). Depending on the audience, you might also need to find out what format the document is in. The '.ps' that I used above is quite common and usually means that the file is in PostScript, which will necessitate a PostScript viewer. If you see something like 'article.ps.tar.gz' then you can be pretty sure that your audience will have to be well versed in the ways of Unix to be able to decompress and view the file. As a general principle, make sure that the reference contains all of the information necessary to identify and retrieve the document. That means at least: Author(s), Date, Title, Journal (if applicable), URL. When in doubt, err on the side of too much information. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2gj] Elliptical brainstorm Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 From: Di Waite, diwaite@netspace.net.au Mandy Macdonald asks how many points in an ellipses are acceptable and quotes the example: 'especially on sensitive issues. .... The forest fires in Indonesia [etc.etc]' Well a total of five (full stop plus 4 point ellipses) is surely one too many. Looks so messy typographically. Of her three options: (a) no full point at end of sentence, but four-point ellipsis; (b) no full point at end of sentence, and three-point ellipsis; (c) full point at end of sentence, space,then three-point ellipsis surely (a) can only apply within a sentence and not at the end. The easiest sulution would be (b) or (c) and, keeping the KISS(weetheart) principle in mind, (b) is preferable in general work. Ultimately I guess it depends on which style guide you open first -- here are a few words on ellipses from 'The Cambridge Australian English Style Guide' by Pam Chambers that Mandy may find reassuring. Even so, I use the Chicago Manual when I need detailed explanantions that possibly only we 'mature-age' copyeditors ponder! "Most style manuals recognise the practice of using three dots for an ellipses occurring anywhere within a sentence, and the Australian Government Style Manual endorses it without question. The practice is actively recommended as 'sanity-saving' by the Canadian Freelance Editors Association. The alternative practice of using three dots for an omission within sentences, and four dots (counting in the full stop) for an omission between sentences creates many complexities ... All the authorities agree that it's reasonable to begin with a capital letter after an ellipses (whether or not there was a capital at that point in the original) if the resumed quotation continues a fresh sentence ... One other simplification of older ellipses practice is dispensing with them at the start of a quotation. The opening quote mark themselves show that the words cited are an excerpt." ---------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 From: Eddie Kent, eddie.kent@mcr1.poptel.org.uk The three-dot ellipsis represents missing text and should be treated in exactly the same way as the text it represents. Thus it can have a dot before, or after, or no dots at all. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2gk] Permissions Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 From: Jane Kerr, bywater@zetnet.co.uk Becky Taylor wrote: > The publishing company I work for in Dubai wants to do a book > ... which uses selected 2/3 line quotations from public figures. > ... These would initially be sourced from the local paper/other > published books/magazine articles ... Would it be possible to do > this, or would we have to get permission from each individual > person who we quoted? Would we be okay just to cite the source > reference? Please advise! I'd hoped that someone who knows more this than I do would have a bash. My instinct would be to find out whether the previous published sources claimed copyright for the quotations, and if so it would be sufficient to obtain permission from them (and courteous to list and thank the copyright holders somewhere in your book). +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2gl] Legal query Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 From: Jane Kerr, bywater@zetnet.co.uk Merle Read wrote: > How do lawyers read? Should "a section 5 (6) offence" in > abbreviated form be "an s.5 (6) offence" ... or "a s.5 (6) > offence" (which looks right to the author, a solicitor)? My resident legal expert tells me that lawyers would read "s." as "section", and therefore "a s. 5 offence" is correct. If you wanted to be really smart, you could use that squiggley symbol thing instead of the s. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2gm] Quark v. Word Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 From: Rachel Kress, r.kress@fss.uu.nl Following Jane Kerr's comments on the inappropriateness of Word for typsetting I was wondering if anyone can provide a comparison of the two? Until working here I viewed Word as a wp and Quark and PageMaker as typsetting dtp programs. Here I was assured that major publishing houses no longer bothered with anything more than Word. Although surprised, I have since wrestled in good faith with Word, partly as I did not have to produce CRCs. We now have a contract to provide CRC copy to a publisher, who simply turns CRCs into books, markets and distributes. Even to my eye their books look like what they are: hard back collections edited, copy-edited and typset by whoever on whatever, i.e. variable. So far my feeling is that Word97 just makes things hard, and is unreliable. The uni. has a site licence for Page Maker but no try-outs are available, and the download site for PM was not working. I would appreciate any comparisons, or advice, as it is hard to get more than a sales pitch from anyone. ---------------------- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 From: Jane Kerr, bywater@zetnet.co.uk Rachel, trust your feeling. I once used Word to produce CRC for a book (against my better judgement, I might add - a client insisted), and I can only say Never again! Among other things, keeping the pagination stable in Word is an absolute nightmare, and it simply doesn't have the flexibility of a proper dtp/page layout package when it comes to things like kerning, leading, hyphenation etc. I can't say I would wholeheartedly recommend Quark Xpress either - for a major software package, it is user-unfriendly in the extreme, and breaks all the rules of good interface design (even to the extent of niggly things like not having a list of recently-opened documents on the File menu). Perhaps more seriously, it represents poor value for money in that things that (I'm told) come as standard in other dtp packages have to be purchased separately as (Xpensive) Xtensions in Quark. However, I'm not familiar with Pagemaker et al. so I'm not in a position to make comparisons. ---[3] FYI ----------------------------------------------------- ** [3dn] "Horrors of the ugasp" Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 From: Kathe Roth, kathe@internauts.ca I have come in late on this thread, but I wanted to point out a limit to "political correctness" in the example given by Glenda Browne: Glenda Browne wrote: > I have just received a leaflet from a university researcher who > wants to find out what things are transferred to breastmilk > from the food the breastfeeding mother eats. It is headed > "Nursing Parents". It seems to me that the word "parents" in this title is a little too "politically correct." Only mothers breastfeed; what is the harm in saying so? Also, standing on its own, "Nursing Parents" (or even "Nursing Mothers") is a bit ambiguous; I might read "Nursing" as "Caring for." What is wrong with calling breastfeeding what it is, especially in the context? Although Hilary Royston rightly points out -- > (Why shouldn't a male parent who is closely involved in the > parenting of a nursed child be equally interested in what the > child is consuming? -- it seems to me that the issue in the leaflet is biological, rather than sociological. I might revise the title to "Mothers Who Breastfeed." ---------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 From: Eddie Kent, eddie.kent@mcr1.poptel.org.uk Sue Lightfoot quotes a Mr Melvyn Roffe who was apparent stunned by the nonsense: "A Master wishing to apply for maternity leave shall ... " Well, what's wrong with that? I thought most enlightened regimes nowadays gave maternity leave to any parent, man, woman, or good red herring. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [3dr] The Internet Grammar Date: Thur, 14 Jan 1999 From: Fiona Dix, fiona@hiraeth.com Forwarded from British HCI News: The Survey of English Usage, University College London, is pleased to announce the release of the Internet Grammar of English. The Internet Grammar is an online course in English grammar written primarily for university undergraduates. However, we hope that it will be useful to everyone who is interested in the English language. The approach is broadly traditional, though we have made use, where appropriate, of modern theoretical work. The grammar course consists of the following main sections: Word Classes Introducing Phrases Clauses & Sentences Form & Function Functions in Phrases Within these sections, the course is designed as a series of linked topics. Most topics contain interactive exercises, which provide immediate feedback based on the answers submitted. Some topics are illustrated using JavaScript animations. The Internet Grammar is fully searchable, and it includes a comprehensive Glossary of grammatical terms and an Index. The Internet Grammar is now available at this address: < http://www.ucl.ac.uk/internet-grammar/ > To avoid potentially long download times, the Internet Grammar is also available on CD-ROM. Prices start at 25 Pounds Sterling (GBP) + VAT, where applicable. Institutional and network versions are charged at different rates. For full details, visit the website above, or email the Survey of English Usage at ucleseu@ucl.ac.uk. ---[4] Business matters --------------------------------------- ** [4ca] Project management contracts Date: Thur, 21 Jan 1999 From: Michele Clarke, Michele.Clarke@btinternet.com Lionel Browne asked for help on contracts for project management - I don't know whether the back page of SFEP's Code of Practice might help. I might be worth a look! +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [4cb] First Edition Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 From: Robert Symonds, BOBSYMONDS@compuserve.com Alison Woodhouse wrote: > Does anyone know anything about a company called First Edition > Ltd? ... Any info gratefully received! In reply to Alison Woodhouse, I can assure her that First Edition is a highly reputable publishing and translation company in Cambridge U.K., founded in 1981, and a corporate member of ITI, so she need have no fear in contacting them. ---------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 From: Ruth Burns, ruth_anthony@compuserve.com Alison Woodhouse asked about a company called First Edition Ltd. Assuming this is the same company as First Edition Translations Ltd based in Cambridge - I am doing a job for them right now. I first worked for them in the late 80s/early 90s when Judy Boothroyd and Sarah Walsh set up the company as a translation and editorial agency. I answered their ad for freelancers in the Bookseller. They were very pleasant and efficient to work with/for and, if memory serves me, paid promptly. I did other things for a few years and contacted them last year when I wanted to get back to freelance proofreading and editing. They sent me a comprehensive cv-type questionnaire and I am now doing my first proofreading job for the new regime - Judy and Sarah both having retired. Beatrice Hunt who commissioned me is very pleasant; the work has come well presented with clear style sheets; and they have agreed my requested (higher than 'average') rate. I'm going to ring and ask if they need anymore people on the encyclopaedia! ---------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 From: Naomi Laredo, naomi@smallprt.demon.co.uk If you mean First Edition Ltd in Cambridge, UK, I have known the company for 12+ years, so they are well established. However, I believe the founding partners recently sold their interest in the business to the management team. I have only done a couple of small jobs for them but had no problems. They were open to negotiation on the rate. Do note, though, that this is one of the many companies that pay at the END of the month following invoicing, i.e. a payment delay of anything from 31 to 60 days. ---------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 From: Virginia Catmur, Virginia_Catmur@compuserve.com I did some work for First Edition some years ago: they were professional, well managed, and paid on time. ---------------------- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 From: Sara Hulse, sara@hawthorn2.demon.co.uk I have also been approached by this company. Like Alison, I also hadn't heard of them, so was wary. I checked out their web site, and they seem like a reputable operation. I decided there was no harm in sending them my cv, as they are in my area and I'm keen to increase my local client base. On the other hand, I'm not exactly desperate for work, so I quoted them an hourly rate that was slightly higher than my normal (i.e. slightly more than NUJ minimum rate). So far, I haven't had any response from them! ---[5] Bookmarks ---------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 From: Sue Lightfoot, SLightfoot@compuserve.com I don't remember seeing a reference to the CINDEX indexing program site: < http://www.indexres.com/ > email: info@indexres.com ---------------------- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 From: Iain Brown, i_brown@compuserve.com The index for EDline bookmarks, vols 1--3 is now available. The URL is: < http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/ibrown/vols1-3.htm > It covers all issues in volume 3, not just the first half year's worth. Next update: April 1999. --- The California Digital Library (CDL) has opened its public "digital doors", making available an integrated web gateway to digital collections, services and tools at: < http://www.cdlib.org > ---[6] Just for fun ------------------------------------------- "Beguiling ideas about science", no. 38 It is so hot in some places that the people there have to live in other places. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ "It CAN be done", no. 22 This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us. --- Western Union internal memo, 1876. ---[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. 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 Iain Brown, at: iain.brown@ucl.ac.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) 1999, by individual contributors Design (c) 1996, 1997, Iain Brown Compilation (c) 1999, The Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= END OF EDline 4.3 Next issue: 31 January 1999 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=