=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EDline Vol. 8, no. 21 (25 February 2003) Editorial mailing list (digest version) Published by the Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Contents: Q & A [2xq] Footnote usage =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ---[2]-- Q & A -------------------------------------------------- Date: Thurs, 20 Feb 2003 From: Lane Lester, llester@simpub.com I hope I haven't asked this before, but it's an issue between me and an author right now: the use of footnotes. I maintain that, unless a reader knows in advance that the footnotes in a piece will all contain the same type of material in which they are not interested, they will look at all footnotes. This requires, when encountering one, that they: 1. stop reading the text, 2. move their eyes to the bottom of the page, 3. read the footnote, 4. hunt for the place they left off in the text, and 5. continue reading the text. Because of this interruption in the reading flow, it seems to me that footnotes should be used only when it would be clearly worse to include their text in the main body. Thoughts? ---------------------- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 From: Andrew Smith, andy@sciedit.fsnet.co.uk In academic texts, where the reader is generally skimming through looking for something of relevance to their own work, if the text isn't interesting then the footnote won't get a first glance. We read all the words, they don't. In Terry Pratchett some of the best bits are in the footnotes. ---------------------- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 From: Simon Cauchi, simon.cauchi@paradise.net.nz Lane Lester wrote: > Because of this interruption in the reading flow, it seems to > me that footnotes should be used only when it would be clearly > worse to include their text in the main body. Thoughts? It all depends. You don't mention what sort of writing your author is doing. Is it academic non-fiction, legal work, autobiography, or what? Is it to be published as a book or a journal article or elsewhere? Here are some examples of well-known books with extensive and, it seems to me, appropriate footnotes: Martin Amis, _Experience_. Roy Jenkins, _Churchill_. Simon Winchester, _The Map That Changed the World_. But it would be just as easy to cite contrary examples---good books with no footnotes, or even no notes at all, and badly organised books with unnecessary and unhelpful footnotes. I particularly remember a heavily annotated translation of Erasmus's _Praise of Folly_ (published by Penguin, IIRC) in which the footnotes were grossly intrusive and annoying. ----------------------- Date: Tues, 25 Feb 2003 From: Lane Lester, llester@simpub.com Simon Cauchi wrote: > You don't mention what sort of writing your author is doing. Yes, that was a serious omission. These are scientific articles by various authors, but the footnotes are not references. They are explanatory, or even what could be called asides. ----------------------- Date: Tues, 25 Feb 2003 From: Steve Rickaby, srickaby@wordmongers.demon.co.uk Lane Lester wrote: > These are scientific articles by various authors, but the > footnotes are not references. They are explanatory, or even > what could be called asides. There are alternative devices for dealing with this sort of thing, but they are not appropriate for all types of material. I work largely with user guides, and my personal preference is for 'detail' call-outs, what I think of as the 'Scientific American' approach. This uses clear visual cues to separate essential material from accessory detail, including smaller fonts, toned background and physical positioning on the page. This sort of approach leaves the main flow of the text uninterrupted, but allows the curious reader to access additional material as and when they wish. It does require either that you are carrying out page layout as well as editing, or that you have control over the typesetting process. ----------------------- Date: Tues, 25 Feb 2003 From: Caroline Petherick, caroline@the-wordsmith.co.uk IMO, the inclusion of footnotes as against other ways of including supplementary information (such as jolly little coloured boxes), are an unmistakable visual indicator that this text is intended to be a seriously academic one. (Unless written by T Pratchett who is, of course, doing a v special spoof.) If your author wants to include footnotes, I feel he/she is saying 'I want my writing to be seen as serious highbrow academic stuff, not 'popular science - perish the thought!' And may feel nettled if you want to change this and in so doing downbrow it. ----------------------- Date: Tues, 25 Feb 2003 From: Beck Laxton, becklaxton@yahoo.com Is 'downbrow' your own invention, Caroline? I like it! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= END OF EDline 8.21 Admin page: < http://www.electriceditors.net/edline/admin.htm > ** 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) 2002--2003, by individual contributors Design (c) 1996--2003 Iain Brown Compilation (c) 2003 Iain Brown / The Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=