All,
I think we should meet on Friday.
Bob
From: ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-editorial-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike LaBonte
Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2019 7:52 AM
To: ibis-editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-editorial] Re: IBIS Version 7.0 Draft 1 Review
I would be in favor of making most or all of Randy's suggested changes. Some
are outright errors that I didn't catch, and some are common editorial
cleanups. Commenting on a few things though:
1. Like me, Randy is troubled by the unnecessary use of full-word
capitalization for emphasis. I had started to flag those, but gave up
because there are SO MANY. Hopefully Randy found them all, but even if we
don't find them all, it makes the document better and is worthwhile to fix
the ones he found. If we feel that emphasis is warranted, changing them to
lowercase italics would suffice. This is an artifact of IBIS's plain text
roots.
2. The suggested changes for more consistent capitalization of concept
terms like Interconnect Model might be more iffy. We do not have a
documented policy to help do this consistently, Randy changed one
"interconnect model" to "Interconnect Model" on page 8. There are over 400
instances of title case, but 6 more lowercase instances remain. We could
change those and at least be consistent about Interconnect Model, if there
is little chance that we will later decide to drop rampant capitalization of
concept terms. I lean toward making the change though.
3. The linespace added at the top of 296 is between two regular
paragraphs, so we need to instead use 4pt space after there.
4. The images on 306 and 307 that Randy suggest expanding are at 100%
already. I think I produced them, and I would have to go back and regenerate
at a larger size to avoid blurring.
5. About figures 49 and 50, the captions explain them fairly well,
which might be why we didn't introduce them in the text. However, it is not
100% obvious that they are associated with previous example syntax, so lines
like "Figure 49 graphically shows the connectivity established by this
example." might be good.
6. In Example 10 on page 321 I think the word "and" can be deleted to
fix the problem.
Should we have an Editorial Task Group meeting Friday?
Mike
On 12/26/2018 6:13 PM, Randy Wolff (Redacted sender rrwolff for DMARC)
wrote:
Sorry to be so late to the game with editorial review of Version 7.0. I
finally found time during the last several days of holiday travel to do a
read through of most of the draft, including older sections of the document.
I tracked changes, so the easiest way to see these is to view only the
markup from "Author". I made some small edits, while most others are shown
as comments (without actual changes). Some of the changes may be easily
acceptable, while a few comments likely need a bit more discussion.
I can attend an Editorial task group meeting after the holidays to go
through the potential edits as a group. Mike posted my edited version at:
.docx <https://ibis.org/editorial_wip/ver7_0_draft1_rrw.docx> (Thanks
Mike!).
Happy New Year all.
Randy
