On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 13:28:25 -0500 Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In response to Rich Shepard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Bill Moran wrote: > > > > > Anyone know of a template for "standard manuscript format" ... as > > > described here, for example: > > > http://www.shunn.net/format/story.html > > > > I don't know where he gets his ideas, but if you want to emulate > > that, use the article class with a monospaced typeface as the > > default. I submit typeset articles in pdf to journal editors, and > > only the most retrogressive ask that I put them into M$ Word format. > > I'm not interested in M$ Word. Most of the markets that are worth > submitting to want submissions sent by mail anyway, so the electronic > format is unimportant. > > What _is_ important is that I can focus on my story while I'm writing > it, and not worry about whether my headers are correct, or whether OOo > decided to change the fonts or the line spacing on me for some reason. > > At this time, I do most of my writing in OOo, purely so I have an > active spell-checker, and I save the files as ASCII text. Once the > story is complete, I then go to all the trouble to fight with OOo to > get the story formatted as I want it. > > While your comments about the relative benefits and disadvantages of > that format are "interesting", they're completely unimportant to me > until you can convince paying editors of their merits. If you want to > take up that torch, feel free ... I'm simply trying to find a way to > adhere to the current market requirements. > > > His comment about making the content more important than the > > visual appearance is belied by the rest of his suggestions. Typeset > > material is so much easier to read that the content stands by > > itself. His blog entry was visibly irritating for me to read. > > Well, if I'm submitting a story to you for publication, I'll remember > that and format it as you'd like. However, until you're paying $.10 a > word or better for fiction, I'll follow the guidelines of the people > who _are_ paying. And that page is the best description of those > guidelines I've found so far. > <SNIP> It does seem to me that the manuscript format recommended by the web page is somewhat outdated. Even the author notes that an earlier version was "reprinted" in 1998 and he cites a "VERY HELPFUL" work from 1990. I write fiction and legal textbooks, and I have never had a publisher call for a manuscript in the form that Shunn recommends. However, as Rich said, LaTeX is so versatile that you can force it to make ugly manuscripts. Alan > > -- > Bill Moran > http://www.potentialtech.com >
