atw: Re: page numbering - which style to use
- From: Irene Wong <irene.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 13:25:41 +1100
Even with loose leaf publishing there is no need to use roman numbers.
Because you need to add extra pages you leave page gaps as appropriate.
The last page before a gap says " Next page is xxx" to explain the break
in page numbers.
Therefore for preliminary pages you just print on the last page "Next page
is 50" which leaves you plenty of space to add to the preliminary pages.
This is a standard loose leaf practice in legal publishing where you need
to add as well as subtract pages. If you take pages out then you put a
next page is line on the bottom of the last existing page so people know
that there is an intentional gap.
Irene Wong
***
This email message has been processed by MIMEsweeper
***
I prefer A every time, but that may be because I have been
accustomed to sending out additional looseleaf chapters as
software modules have been developed. I have also worked
where looseleaf pages are printed from the change onwards
for chapters, thus potentially changing the page numbers for
sections and subsections within a chapter. Using method A
allows for a TOC to be generated and replaced according to
the modules purchased.
Suzanne
> This may not help your argument and you're probably
> already aware of it, but the AGPS Style manual opts for A:
> "It is conventional to number the preliminary pages of a
> book with lower-case roman numerals. This practice allows
> extra material to be added before printing without having
> to change the page numbering of the main text. For
> aesthetic reasons, the roman page numbers are not printed
> on some of the preliminary pages."
>
> My gut reaction is to be scared of moving away from
> convention, but now that you've made me question it I
> can't see why we shouldn't do B instead. Especially if
> you have control over what you are printing and are
> unlikely to insert extra front matter.
>
> It could be a bold new move in publishing Bob - go where
> no man has gone before!
>
> The only argument I could think of for A was that people
> expect to see it and your materials might be seen as less
> professional if they don't conform to convention? As
> always, it depends on your audience. If they don't read a
> lot of books they may not care one way or another.
>
> _____
>
> From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Bob Trussler Sent: Thursday, 23 November 2006 9:48 AM
> To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: atw: page numbering - which style to use
>
>
> There is a debate raging in my tech writer team about what
> numbering style we should use in our documents. We are
> developing new standards.
>
> We currently have two choices, shown below. Does anyone
> have support for the modern way of using Arabic numbering
> throughout? I reckon that Roman for front matter followed
> by Arabic for the content comes from the olden days of
> hand publishing when the content was assembled THEN the
> Table of Contents was assembled later, so why do we need
> to maintain this style?
>
> (A) Keep the front matter separate from main content:
>
> - Front matter uses lower-case Roman with the Title page
> and Copyright unnumbered
>
> - Rest of the doc in sequential Arabic, starting at 1.
>
> (B) Number the whole doc in sequential Arabic:
>
> - Whole doc including the front matter in sequential
> Arabic. Numbering begins at 1 on the title page
>
> - Title page and Copyright with no number displayed.
>
NOTICE
This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the addressee(s) only and may
be confidential. They may contain legally privileged or copyright material.
You should not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If you
are not the intended recipient please contact the sender as soon as possible by
return e-mail and then please delete both messages. This notice should not be
removed.
Other related posts:
