From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Manuel Koell Subject: Re: A book produced using Org Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 04:40:38 +0200 Message-ID: References: <6F8ECF8A-D17C-4A27-878B-D0C98E064C77@agrarianresearch.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3a8972b32474052024b032 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54139) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZdUYT-0002Wy-Tp for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 22:40:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZdUYS-0001pl-Gd for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 22:40:41 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-x233.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::233]:34060) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZdUYS-0001pf-0g for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 22:40:40 -0400 Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so105092263wic.1 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 19:40:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6F8ECF8A-D17C-4A27-878B-D0C98E064C77@agrarianresearch.org> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Vikas Rawal Cc: Pascal Fleury , org-mode mailing list --047d7b3a8972b32474052024b032 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Beautiful! I would love to see the org file! How did emacs perform which such huge file? 2015-09-20 3:06 GMT+02:00 Vikas Rawal : > > > On 20-Sep-2015, at 4:20 am, Pascal Fleury wrote: > > > > Great! Congrats! > > > > I was actually wondering: you are 3 authors. How did you collaborate, in > practice ? There was a thread about using org for collaborative work, but > it seemed to end in discussing other tools... > > Was it plain git/emacs and the tools used usually for code management ? > > > Well, unfortunately, the other two authors are not familiar with emacs, > org-mode, or LaTeX. > > The parts they wrote were sent as MS-Word files. I converted them into > Org-mode. > > For the parts I wrote, I sent them PDFs. The first time, I also sent them > a Word version. I offered them that they could comment in word (with track > changes) and send me, or better still, work on hard copies and send me the > scans. The PDFs were so far superior to those word files, that could not > resist them :). So, their comments came as scans of the commented hard > copies, and I incorporated them in. Once they were comfortable with this, > in subsequent rounds, I had to send them only PDFs. > > We followed the same process with the copy editors. The copy editors > worked on hard copies, and I incorporated the comments. This actually had a > huge advantage since, in the process of incorporating their edits, I went > through every single change they wanted to make. I do not know if they had > done this on their software, how I would have gone through every sentence > to check if and what had been modified. > > The publisher usually works with InDesign, but was willing to let me deal > with production of the print-ready PDF if I could meet her specifications. > Again, this meant additional work for me. But this was also far more > efficient than converting everything into Word, and then letting her set it > up on InDesign. Both these steps would have been far more laborious. For > example, I doubt if InDesign can make an author index automatically from > citations in the way biblatex does. > > So, the barrier in our case was not to find the most appropriate > version-control software. The problem was that the other two authors were > completely unfamiliar with any of these tools. But, even with that, using > Org-mode was so far superior to shifting to Word or anything of that kind. > No question. > > Vikas > > > > --047d7b3a8972b32474052024b032 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Beautiful! I would love to see the org file! How did emacs= perform which such huge file?

2015-09-20 3:06 GMT+02:00 Vikas Rawal <vikaslists@agrarianresearch.org>:

> On 20-Sep-2015, at 4:20 am, Pascal Fleury <fleury@google.com> wrote:
>
> Great! Congrats!
>
> I was actually wondering: you are 3 authors. How did you collaborate, = in practice ? There was a thread about using org for collaborative work, bu= t it seemed to end in discussing other tools...
> Was it plain git/emacs and the tools used usually for code management = ?


Well, unfortunately, the other two authors are not familiar with emacs, org= -mode, or LaTeX.

The parts they wrote were sent as MS-Word files. I converted them into Org-= mode.

For the parts I wrote, I sent them PDFs. The first time, I also sent them a= Word version. I offered them that they could comment in word (with track c= hanges) and send me, or better still, work on hard copies and send me the s= cans. The PDFs were so far superior to those word files, that could not res= ist them :). So, their comments came as scans of the commented hard copies,= and I incorporated them in. Once they were comfortable with this, in subse= quent rounds, I had to send them only PDFs.

We followed the same process with the copy editors. The copy editors worked= on hard copies, and I incorporated the comments. This actually had a huge = advantage since, in the process of incorporating their edits, I went throug= h every single change they wanted to make. I do not know if they had done t= his on their software, how I would have gone through every sentence to chec= k if and what had been modified.

The publisher usually works with InDesign, but was willing to let me deal w= ith production of the print-ready PDF if I could meet her specifications. A= gain, this meant additional work for me. But this was also far more efficie= nt than converting everything into Word, and then letting her set it up on = InDesign. Both these steps would have been far more laborious. For example,= I doubt if InDesign can make an author index automatically from citations = in the way biblatex does.

So, the barrier in our case was not to find the most appropriate version-co= ntrol software. The problem was that the other two authors were completely = unfamiliar with any of these tools. But, even with that, using Org-mode was= so far superior to shifting to Word or anything of that kind. No question.=

=C2=A0Vikas




--047d7b3a8972b32474052024b032--