#1   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
pammrick pammrick is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default word 2003

In editing do I work in "hard copy?" What is it?
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
Tony Jollans Tony Jollans is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,308
Default word 2003

Hard copy is a physical - rather than an electronic - medium; like a tablet
of stone.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

"pammrick" Oregon Coast wrote in message
...
In editing do I work in "hard copy?" What is it?


  #3   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
grammatim[_2_] grammatim[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,751
Default word 2003

"Hard copy" means the document on paper. Most editing is done on-
screen these days, but since files can get corrupted, or saved without
renaming, it's always a good idea to have an author's hard copy on
hand for reference.

(Apparently pdf's are now easily altered, which kind of defeats the
purpose of pdf's, so they might not be an adequate substitute for a
paper copy of a ms.)

On Mar 21, 3:18*am, "Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot com
wrote:
Hard copy is a physical - rather than an electronic - medium; like a tablet
of stone.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

"pammrick" Oregon Coast wrote in message

...



In editing do I work in "hard copy?" What is it?-

  #5   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
grammatim[_2_] grammatim[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,751
Default word 2003

There are publishers that still let you do that? University of Chicago
Press, Ohio State UP, Walter de Gruyter, and the one where I used to
be an employee (which was responsible for my switch from Mac/
FrameMaker [Word for the easy stuff, or stuff that had to be shared]
to PC/Word) don't!

On Mar 21, 10:40*am, Peter A wrote:
In article 72a578d4-175b-4972-b046-0eeb856bb780
@z38g2000hsc.googlegroups.com, says...

"Hard copy" means the document on paper. Most editing is done on-
screen these days, but since files can get corrupted, or saved without
renaming, it's always a good idea to have an author's hard copy on
hand for reference.


For what it's worth, a lot of professional writers and editors, myself
included, find it difficult to edit on-screen. Working from a printed
copy is a lot more accurate, although certainly less efficient.

--
Peter Aitken
Author, MS Word for Medical and Technical Writerswww.tech-word.com




  #7   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
grammatim[_2_] grammatim[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,751
Default word 2003

Double the opportunity for making mistakes, and considerably
lengthening the time taken! Ah, but if you're billing by the hour ...

On Mar 21, 12:47*pm, Peter A wrote:
In article 91a16064-dbb5-475f-85c6-
,
says...

Newsgroups: microsoft.public.word.docmanagement


There are publishers that still let you do that? University of Chicago
Press, Ohio State UP, Walter de Gruyter, and the one where I used to
be an employee (which was responsible for my switch from Mac/
FrameMaker [Word for the easy stuff, or stuff that had to be shared]
to PC/Word) don't!


Well no, duh! You have to transfer your paper edits to the electronic
file.

  #8   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
Robert M. Franz (RMF) Robert M. Franz (RMF) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,741
Default word 2003

Hello grammatim

grammatim wrote:
Double the opportunity for making mistakes, and considerably
lengthening the time taken! Ah, but if you're billing by the hour ...


how you _edit_ has nothing to do with how you send the document off to
the publisher.

I do most editing on-screen, but certain types of things you're much
more likely to spot on a physical printout compared to a screen, however
large and expensive. This applies to copy-editing, and
pagination/justification control, as well as estimation of a new
"layout" (read: template).

2cents
Robert
--
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | MSFT |
\ / | MVP | Scientific Reports
X Against HTML | for | with Word?
/ \ in e-mail & news | Word | http://www.masteringword.eu/
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
grammatim[_2_] grammatim[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,751
Default word 2003

On Mar 22, 6:03*pm, "Robert M. Franz (RMF)"
wrote:
Hello grammatim

grammatim wrote:
Double the opportunity for making mistakes, and considerably
lengthening the time taken! Ah, but if you're billing by the hour ...


how you _edit_ has nothing to do with how you send the document off to
the publisher.

I do most editing on-screen, but certain types of things you're much
more likely to spot on a physical printout compared to a screen, however
large and expensive. This applies to copy-editing, and
pagination/justification control, as well as estimation of a new
"layout" (read: template).


Those last items aren't part of a copyeditor's job, but a
typesetter's. A proofreader _might_ be asked to comment, but usually
the design department gets highly offended when the editorial
department dares to make a comment. (I've been doing this
professionally for 36 years.)
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.word.docmanagement
Suzanne S. Barnhill Suzanne S. Barnhill is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33,624
Default word 2003

Well, I do all the bits and pieces up to the whole nine yards--typesetting,
copyediting, proofreading, book design and layout, etc., and I agree that,
while copyediting is much easier onscreen, there are some errors that are
much easier to see in hard copy. I used to do all copyediting on hard copy
for that reason, and because I wanted to add comments to the manuscript,
either in the margins or on Post-its, but of late I am mostly given an
electronic copy, so I usually edit with Track Changes enabled (if the client
insists) but in Final view so I'm not distracted by the markup and post my
comments to a separate commentary file.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

"grammatim" wrote in message
...
On Mar 22, 6:03 pm, "Robert M. Franz (RMF)"
wrote:
Hello grammatim

grammatim wrote:
Double the opportunity for making mistakes, and considerably
lengthening the time taken! Ah, but if you're billing by the hour ...


how you _edit_ has nothing to do with how you send the document off to
the publisher.

I do most editing on-screen, but certain types of things you're much
more likely to spot on a physical printout compared to a screen, however
large and expensive. This applies to copy-editing, and
pagination/justification control, as well as estimation of a new
"layout" (read: template).


Those last items aren't part of a copyeditor's job, but a
typesetter's. A proofreader _might_ be asked to comment, but usually
the design department gets highly offended when the editorial
department dares to make a comment. (I've been doing this
professionally for 36 years.)


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Word Viewer 2003 does not display/print properly a Word 2003 doc ChicagoPete Microsoft Word Help 1 September 19th 07 07:54 PM
Outlook 2003 Cant send e-mail from Excel 2003 or word 2003 Andy Microsoft Word Help 7 October 25th 06 04:33 AM
Word 2003 - Problem with page template when opening Word 2003 Gerryw Page Layout 2 August 4th 06 01:04 PM
How to Export Auto Correct File From Word 2003 to Word 2003 Matthew C. Microsoft Word Help 2 November 3rd 05 02:51 AM
Exchange 2003 - Outlook 2003 - Word 2003 mail merge Micheline Mailmerge 1 December 2nd 04 12:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:02 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 Microsoft Office Word Forum - WordBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Microsoft Word"