[Geysers] GOSA Transactions 12 submission guidelines

[Bill Johnson]

I've had stuff published in various sections of the IEEE Transactions, and I
agree with Scott: their style guide is not necessarily ideal for GOSA
Transactions.  Still, bringing a little more professionalism to the
publication is a fine idea, and you gotta start somewhere.  Would it be out
of line to go with the existing guidelines for this issue, and then do some
fine tuning for the next one?  I'd be more than happy to help with that fine
tuning if desired, having a bit of experience in that kind of thing.

-- Bill (AKA M. W. Johnson, Ph.D., nuclear physicist and published
arms-control geek for a living).

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 8:03 AM, <TSBryan at aol.com> wrote:

>  The curmudgeon here... though this will be a lot shorter than what I
> initially drafted. However...
>
> Upon reading the new "Submission Guidelines" for Transactions 12, I do have
> a couple of comments. Note, by the way, that the start of the "Citations"
> section of the guidelines it says Transactions 11, rather than 12. I also
> ask: will this be "12" or "XII"?
>
> 1. My most pointed comment is: Why adopt the citation style of the
> Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)? I believe this to
> be a serious mistake, as the Transactions is not a publication of the IEEE
> sort. Rather, it is geological in nature, and therefore ought to abide by
> the style used by geological publications. I have a pretty fair library, and
> I can note the styles (plural, but with little variation among them) used by
> the U. S. Geological Survey, Geological Society of America, various state
> geological surveys, numerous commercial publishers (such as Cambridge,
> California, Colorado, and Arizona university presses), and a bunch more (I
> actually wrote out a list of 18 sources). None uses anything remotely akin
> to the IEEE style.
>      I think the editors need to seriously rethink this decision.
>
> 2. Perhaps the intention is to publish maps at full-page size. But if not,
> then maps should be submitted at the anticipated publication size, for it is
> at that size where it needs to be legible.
>
> 3. While of course it is the desire for the Transactions volumes to be as
> professional in appearance as possible, I feel the detailed submission
> requirements will turn off a number of potential contributors. Remember that
> I do have some experience in this matter. Even with the comparatively lax
> requirements during my tenure, some contributions were lost because those
> people simply did not wish to expend the effort or expense necessary to
> comply with the request.
>
> OK, I'm not the editor, so......
>
> Scott Bryan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geysers mailing list
> Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu
> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </geyser-list/attachments/20110107/79426b82/attachment.html>