Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.9EFBBAFC@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:44:29 +0100 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.9EFBBAFC" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: {1} Conference proceeedings Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1992 21:50:57 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: Sender: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" To: "Multiple recipients of" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 610 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.9EFBBAFC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dominik mentioned the question of conference-proceedings (on 25th Feb): > This could be made much easier if there were a variant of the "book" > style called, say, "proceedings" which could deal sensibly with the > \author, \title, and \date macros of the article style. There seem to be two types of conference-proceedings: 1. Where the papers are assembled to make "the proceeedings" in much = the same way that papers submitted to a journal are assembled to form = an issue of the journal (and it may have been a "research = conference"). Thus the structure is much the same as that of "articles in = journal" (even if, for example, each paper is given a "chapter number" and "chapter heading"). In particular, each paper has its own list of references. The structure is "like a journal issue". Assembling = the proceedings is like assembling "a journal issue" with the same need = to copy titles/authors etc. to a table-of-contents. There may be appendices within papers. (One can just about drag Malcolm's = Exeter proceedings into this class by saying that a proceedings having an index is only like a journal publishing an index at the end of a volume.) 2. Where the proceedings editor has done the work needed to combine = the individual papers into something more like a "multi-author book" = (and it may have been an "expository conference"). The main thing such = an editor would have to do is to combine all the references into a = single list which goes at the end of the published proceedings and change = the in-text citations accordingly (or use software that does). The = editor might go as far as standardizing notation, providing a common = glossary and a common index. The structure may then be closer to that of "a book" than to that of "an issue of a journal": if the editor has = done a thorough job, it may differ from "an ordinary book" only because = of the need to put author/affiliation at the start of each chapter. This supposition seems supported by the recently published ANSI/NISO standard Z39.59-1988 for "Electronic Manuscript Preparation and Markup" which lists "conference proceedings" under both BK-1 (book-like things) = and SER-1 (serials, i.e., things which include "articles embedded without = any modification"). It may be necessary to be clear about whether a particular proceedings = is to have the structure envisaged in item 1, or the structure envisaged in item 2, so that it gets appropriate treatment. It might be easier to = treat the former's STRUCTURE as a variant of "a journal-issue made up of articles", but the latter's STRUCTURE as a variant of "a book-like = thing". I'd agree that a book-like DESIGN would be appropriate in both cases. David Rhead d.rhead@uk.ac.nottingham.ccc.vme ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.9EFBBAFC Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable {1} Conference proceeedings

Dominik mentioned the question of = conference-proceedings (on 25th Feb):
>  This could be made much easier if there = were a variant of the "book"
>  style called, say, "proceedings" = which could deal sensibly with the
>  \author, \title, and \date macros of the = article style.

There seem to be two types of = conference-proceedings:
1.   Where the papers are assembled to make = "the proceeedings" in much the
     same way that papers = submitted to a journal are assembled to form an
     issue of the journal (and it = may have been a "research conference").
     Thus the structure is much = the same as that of "articles in journal"
     (even if, for example, each = paper is given a "chapter number" and
     "chapter = heading").  In particular, each paper has its own list = of
     references.  The = structure is "like a journal issue".  Assembling = the
     proceedings is like = assembling "a journal issue" with the same need to
     copy titles/authors = etc.  to a table-of-contents.  There may be
     appendices within = papers.  (One can just about drag Malcolm's Exeter
     proceedings into this class = by saying that a proceedings having an
     index is only like a journal = publishing an index at the end of a
     volume.)
2.   Where the proceedings editor has done = the work needed to combine the
     individual papers into = something more like a "multi-author book" (and
     it may have been an = "expository conference").  The main thing such an
     editor would have to do is = to combine all the references into a single
     list which goes at the end = of the published proceedings and change the
     in-text citations = accordingly (or use software that does).  The editor
     might go as far as = standardizing notation, providing a common glossary
     and a common index.  = The structure may then be closer to that of "a
     book" than to that of = "an issue of a journal": if the editor has done
     a thorough job, it may = differ from "an ordinary book" only because of
     the need to put = author/affiliation at the start of each chapter.
This supposition seems supported by the recently = published ANSI/NISO
standard Z39.59-1988 for "Electronic Manuscript = Preparation and Markup"
which lists "conference proceedings" under = both BK-1 (book-like things) and
SER-1 (serials, i.e., things which include = "articles embedded without any
modification").

It may be necessary to be clear about whether a = particular proceedings is
to have the structure envisaged in item 1, or the = structure envisaged in
item 2, so that it gets appropriate treatment.  = It might be easier to treat
the former's STRUCTURE as a variant of "a = journal-issue made up of
articles", but the latter's STRUCTURE as a = variant of "a book-like thing".
I'd agree that a book-like DESIGN would be = appropriate in both cases.


David Rhead
d.rhead@uk.ac.nottingham.ccc.vme

------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.9EFBBAFC--