Science Article on Electronic Publishing among Physicists

Una Smith smith-una at yale.edu
Sat Mar 6 09:12:59 EST 1993


This thread really does belong in bionet.journals.note, so I'm posting
it there only.

gilbertd at chipmunk.bio.indiana.edu (Don Gilbert) writes:

>The problem with postscript as a common document format is
>that most biologists with microcomputers do not have any
>software already installed that will display it.

Well, we're talking about an Internet archive here, right?  Any biologist
sophisticated enough to get a document off the Internet is probably more
than capable of also grabbing software with which to read or print it.
Are we going to aim for the lowest common (tolerable) denominator, or are
we going to engage in a little social uplift?  I still remember being told
that WordStar was the way to go, since everyone could understand how it
worked.  

I'm a confirmed TeXaholic, myself.  It is a sheer pleasure to receive from
a journal publisher or editor, by e-mail, the LaTeX style to match the
journal's format.  It's absolutely painless, and switching from one style
to another involves little more than swapping styles.  And then there's
BibTeX!  There's an excellent Usenet newsgroup, comp.text.tex, which has
several useful FAQs on where to find free PC and Mac LaTeX packages, and
also a listserv mailing list (in Usenet as bit.listserv.tex-l), if you
want to find out more about TeX stuff.

-- 

      Una Smith      Biology Department       smith-una at yale.edu
                     Yale University
                     New Haven, CT  06511



More information about the Jrnlnote mailing list