diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_2/key.tex')
-rw-r--r-- | usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_2/key.tex | 196 |
1 files changed, 196 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_2/key.tex b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_2/key.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..73dcc6400b --- /dev/null +++ b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_2/key.tex @@ -0,0 +1,196 @@ +\title{Theory into Practice: working +with SGML, PDF and \LaTeX\ at Elsevier Science} +\author[Martin Key]{Martin Key\\ +Elsevier Science Ltd\\ +\texttt{m.key@elsevier.co.uk}} +\begin{Article} +\section{The Company} +While I do not want to make +this article a plug for Elsevier, +it is first necessary to put our activities +into context. Therefore, for those who do not know us, Elsevier Science +is part of the Reed Elsevier Group and, in terms of number of journals, +is by far the largest publisher of scientific journals in the world. +The original Elsevier Company was Dutch based, but now, through +acquisition and merger, is an international company with offices +in the Netherlands, UK, USA, Switzerland, Eire and the Far East. +We publish well over 1,000 scientific, technical and medical journals +covering all sections of academe and business. + +\section{The move into electronic publishing} +Elsevier's major customers +are academic and research institutes throughout the world. Traditionally, +academic publishing has relied on authors submitting papers via external +academic editors who arrange for the necessary peer reviews. Once +accepted, papers are sent to Elsevier for copy-editing, typesetting +and compilation into issues. As a result we have in the past received +paper manuscripts of varying levels of presentation from around the +world. Over the last 10 years it has become apparent that most authors +use some form of word processing or computer generated text to prepare +their papers. To have these papers typeset means rekeying the manuscript +and, what is worse, ending up with electronic files produced by many +types of typesetting equipment and software with minimal chance to +reuse this material at a later date. For some years the Elsevier +Group have been looking at ways to avoid rekeying manuscripts whilst +at the same time automating the production process, produce proofs +more quickly and create electronic files for multiple use in the +foreseeable future. + +After many surveys, +experiments and discussion groups it was clear that Elsevier should +work to accepted international generic standards in order to achieve +these goals. The major standards agreed on were Standard Generalised +Mark-up Language (SGML) for text, Tagged Image File Format (TIFF), +Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) and Encapsulated PostScript +(EPS) for graphics and PostScript, and the Portable Document Format, +(PDF), also known as Acrobat, for pages. Unlike typesetting codes, +SGML does not drive any particular application but can be readily +converted to numerous formats for typesetting on paper, database +applications, CD Rom and so on. It is therefore an ideal archive +medium. TIFF, JPEG and EPS are well documented graphic file formats +and are widely supported in terms of external applications. PDF is, +perhaps, a risk in that it is the property of a commercial developer +(Adobe) but its great flexibility and rapid acceptance by professionals +and the academic community, together with the track record of PostScript +itself --- now a de facto standard --- makes its long-term future seem +relatively safe. The decision by Adobe to make the Acrobat reader +available free-of-charge is another positive sign. + +\section{The concept of Computer Aided Publishing (CAP)} + +Once the standards +were agreed the process known internally as CAP (Computer Aided Publishing) +took clearer shape. There are a number of activities which form part +of CAP. These include the following: the converting of manuscripts +and artwork into electronic files; structuring of text with SGML; +editing on screen; automatic proofing; moving and maintaining files +on a network; creating SGML (text) and graphic files; receiving PDF +files from our typesetters. In addition, a number of journals receive, +and use, papers in \LaTeX\ format which will be discussed later. + +\section{Practicalities: How we do it} + +CAP started in Elsevier +in January 1994, in both Amsterdam and Oxford, with a limited set +of journals. The number of journals has been increasing rapidly and +in 1995, as software and hardware stabilises, the number of journals +is being increased dramatically. + +The first action when +receiving a paper, either on paper or disk, is to log the information +on to our production tracking system. All the important details are +recorded --- title, authors, number and type of graphics, whether it +is available on disk etc. This record follows the manuscript throughout +its production process and is updated at each stage of its progress +through the system. Elsevier encourage authors to submit on disk, +and the numbers are rising. If it is on disk it is initially converted +to our standard CAP format which allows it to be used by our SGML +tagging and editing tool --- Pandora --- which was developed by staff +working in Amsterdam. If it is only available on paper it is either +OCR (Optical Character Recognition) scanned and then converted into +the CAP format or, if the paper is too complex for scanning, it is +keyed by off-shore keying agencies. Whatever the route, it arrives +at our Pre-Edit Department in the generic CAP format. Simultaneously +graphics are scanned --- TIFF for line art and JPEG for half-tones +--- or redrawn and saved as EPS in some instances. + +The text is then tagged +using Pandora. The Document Type Definition (DTD) used is the Elsevier +DTD (which Elsevier has made publicly available subject to certain +conditions) which is fairly complex covering not only text but also +tables and mathematics. + +After coding and parsing, +the text is loaded onto the network server, together with the graphics, +using an in-house developed Document Management System which monitors, +names and controls the files. As one article can produce more than +20 files, with an average issue of a journal containing 10 articles, +the number of files can quickly mount making such management essential. +Once the files are on the server, they can be retrieved by the Production +Editor who will then edit the article for style, spelling, grammar, +etc. and add any additional tags necessary. Graphic files are also +checked at this stage to ensure that the correct graphics are linked +to the relevant caption. The file is then parsed again to check its +validity. Author proofs can then be produced and, once they are received +back from the authors and corrections made, the final SGML and graphic +files are exported to the typesetter for making up the final pages. + +We expect typesetters +to retain the validity of the SGML files when producing the pages, +and this is strictly monitored. Due to the complexity of the DTD +and the relevant inexperience of most typesetters in using precoded +SGML files, we have to work with our typesetters quite closely, answering +specific queries and offering advice where necessary. However, we +do not expect to develop the systems for the typesetters --- that is +their responsibility. The final, additional requirement we demand +from our typesetters is that they supply each individual article, +and other elements of the issue, in PDF format. This means that they +must have a PostScript setter in order to create these files. + +\section{\TeX\ and \LaTeX} + +In some disciplines +\TeX\ and \LaTeX\ are used extensively by authors and, not unnaturally, +they would like to submit their articles in this format. Experience +has shown that this can be hard work for the Publisher. In some cases, +hacking in to such a file to find out how the author's carefully +developed macros have been used can be very time-consuming and, in +some cases, can take considerably longer than having the paper professionally +typeset. However, whenever possible, we will try and use submitted +\LaTeX\ files and, to a lesser extent, plain \TeX\ files. However, Elsevier +encourage authors to use the Elsevier style file which produce a +pre-print type output. This style is then replaced with the journal-specific +style file which makes the Publisher's task considerably easier. +The Elsevier style files, together with the instruction manual, +are available from the three CTAN sites or direct from Elsevier. + +\LaTeX\ has a number +of advantages. Pages in camera ready format can be produced readily +in-house without recourse to a typesetter, and PDF files can also +be generated from the dvi files. Recently, +the Production Methods Group at Elsevier Science Ltd +has further developed the `dvihps' converter and \LaTeX\ macros from +the Hyper\TeX\ project, +to fully retain the hypertext links available in the \LaTeX\ file, as +well as generating automatic `bookmarks' or contents list, directly +into the PDF file. In order to meet the full CAP requirements previously +mentioned, there is one final part of the equation to be completed +--- a \LaTeX\ to SGML conversion. Due to the complexity of the Elsevier +DTD this is not a simple task but work is currently taking place +to see how far down this road it is possible to go. + + \section{Practical Problems} + +As with most technical +developments there are always problems to be addressed. In the case +of CAP they have been surprisingly few. The major problem experienced +at an early stage was the lack of SGML editors which could cope with +the Elsevier DTD, particularly in the area of tables and mathematics. + This problem has been largely resolved by the development of Pandora, +a tool which has far exceeded its initial specification as a package +which would enable compuscripts to be handled by typesetters. The +second problem was one of logistics --- how do you train Production +Editors to work with SGML on screen editing whilst simultaneously +producing journal issues? As previously mentioned, there is also +the increased demand we place on typesetters, many of whom have had +limited experience of handling complete journals in SGML. Finally, +as Production Editors began to use the DTD in earnest, additional +requirements are discovered which means that the DTD must be further +developed. As a result, the DTD has become a moving target with more +complex requirements being asked for almost daily. + +\section{The Future} +Some +people may ask why we are putting ourselves through so much pain. + Is it worth it? The market is demanding electronic products in addition +to, and sometimes instead of, the traditional paper ones. For those +publishers who have tried to use typesetters' tapes for such products, +the answer is clear. The availability of generic coded data which +can be manipulated in multifarious ways is clealy the route to take. + In addition to meeting the demands of our market, we are also satisfying +the demands of our producers --- the authors --- who create `electronic' +versions of their articles and who naturally expect that we, the +Publishers, should be able to use them. Finally, the Production process +itself is being streamlined allowing for more efficient and faster +production times. +\end{Article}
\ No newline at end of file |