On 2/10/2023 3:27 PM, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>> You can try a single column with an overly wide outer margin.
>
> We are very short of space on most issues, so every millimetre of width
> is needed.
That was the overall impression. Is this a consequence of trying to
manage postage costs? Are you "entitled" to subsidized postage rates
as a "charity"?
>> FM lets you layer frames on/in other frames. So, I can create a
>> frame for a photo. Then, create a frame ON that for a caption
>> or callout. And, other graphic objects (circles, squares, rounded
>> rectangles, arrows, etc.
>
> Claris Works does that easily but PageMaker is much more restricted and
> less intuitive. Actually the whole magazine would be far easier to lay
> out in Claris Works but for the fact that it doesn't allow cropping of
> photographs. That's the only thing preventing me from using it.
I've never used CW so can't comment on it. Are you *really*
cropping the photos? Or, just "exposing them through an adjustable
window" in the document?
E.g., the inset example I described has two full copies of the
underlying photo in the document but "exposed" at different scales
and offsets.
[This is something to be wary of as some tools will actually include
the masked-off portions of the object in the document! If you
don't want those portions to be *accessible*, you have to explicitly
crop them off before importing!]
>> (And, how does an EXTRAORDINARY meeting differ from an ORDINARY one?)
>
> The ordinary one (A.G.M.) is annually at about the same date and is a
> legal obligation for a Registered Charity. The extraordinary one has
> become necessary to thrash out a number of issues that have arisen
> recently and must be sorted in order to present the next A.G.M. with a
> considered plan to vote on. An E.G.M. is usually a sign that a society
> is in chaos.
If *not* in chaos, you'd have no reason to meet? (or, are there still
other types of "meetings")
>> - indent first line of paragraph *or* precede with blank line, not both
>> (note typesetting of Martin's p6 article vs. Chairman's Notes) First
>> paragraph of a section (article?) shouldn't be indented.
>> - indent bulleted list items like the numbered list items (see p.5)
>> I prefer no whitespace between items (like the numbered list) as
>> I rely on whitespace to terminate the paragraph in which the list
>> appears.
>
> Good points, I'll try them out and see if I like the look of them.
I have a whole set of (paragraph) tags just for bulleted lists:
- indented vs. flush left
- numbered vs. bulleted
- tight leading vs. open
as combinations of each of the above.
>> - I like a line across the bottom of the page to separate the
>> "bottom material" (page number, publication title) from the
>> body of the document. Similarly across the top -- for documents
>> that have "top material" (yours doesn't).
>
> I do that if there are any references or footnotes, but not for the page
> numbers.
>
> The other place I use a line under an article is when it is written by
> the Editor (me). Normally I indicate the end of an article with the
> author's name in block capitals and right-justified, but tradition says
> the Editor does not sign his or her own articles, so the underline is
> the way of indicating the end.
Ah! I keep my name out of newsletters entirely. Not so for technical
articles (but also omitted for manuals).
>> - The "FOUNDATIONS..." caption on p11 sits right *on* the text beneath it.
>> Contrast with the spacing between other captions and body text.
>
> That was a slip-up that went un-noticed.
FM requires a "frame" to be created for a photo, text insert, etc.
When creating such a frame, I allocate extra space for a "text frame"
contained within. The text frame holds the caption -- usually with
a line separating the text from the "content".
Frames carry offsets that they impose on the preceding and following
content (text). So, this discipline maintains spacing.
>> - The last page (?) is set in a sans serif typeface (?). Why?
>
> That is an inheritance from the days when this was a photocopied
> paste-up. There didn't seem to be any reason to change it (a lot of our
> members are very conservative), so it has stayed in the old format.
<frown> OK (I guess)
>> - If your membership form is suitably terse, perhaps include it instead
>> of a reference to where readers can *find* it (I assume people are
>> lazy and would respond more favorably to something in their hands)
>
> Unfortunately it has to include a lot of legal information about Gift
> Aid (a U.K. tax avoidance scheme for charities) and more recently a
> legally-required consent section for us to store the names and addresses
> of our members. It crams in even more information than an average page
> of the magazine.
Oh. There are tax consequences for donations to *registered*
charities, here. But, most folks know of them and/or are not
concerned with the magnitude of their donation/dues.
Publishing names has some consequences, here (and its just
good manners not to publish someone's name/donation without
their consent). But, I don't think there are any legal
requirements to disclose those requirements.
"Your contact information is never sold, rented or disclosed in any way!"
>> I'm assuming this is a collaborative effort -- that each author sorted
>> out what to present topically and in practical terms?
>
> It varies a lot. Some authors are very good, but others send in a list
> of bullet points and say "Write that up into something people will want
> to read". One article in this issue was completely 'ghost written',
> based on a casual conversation, and then sent to the author with a note
> saying "Is that what you would have written if you had written it?".
"So, you want me to do MY job *and* YOURS?"
I had a woman who was going to do this, that and the other thing.
None of it was ever forthcoming. So, I had to do it for her -- and
let her discover this *after* publication ("Yeah, these articles
were supposed to be written by you. You don't recall writing them,
do you? Yet, here they are...")
> In one really bad case a while ago, an author sent in some accompanying
> photographs that were vital to the article but were lopsided and so
> lacking in contrast that it was impossible to see the important details
> even with heavy Photoshopping. I had to work out where they had been
> taken and which way the camera was pointing (straight into the sun),
> then drive to the location at a time when I had worked out the light
> would be right and re-photograph them. The author never spotted what I
> had done.
More work than I'd care to take on. I'd let others, instead, notice
"What happened to Bob's article?" -- and direct them to ask Bob!
>> Is this released
>> monthly (as "January 2023" suggests)? How cooperative are your
>> contributors (I note the Chairman's tardiness) in delivering material
>> for YOUR deadlines? (I got tired of waiting for people to meet their
>> commitments -- yeah, I've got "shit happening" too, yet *I* manage
>> to meet mine...)
>
> It is supposed to be quarterly, but we rarely publish more than three in
> any year. I would rather wait for good material than send out poor
> quality 'fillers'. If I stamped my foot and insisted on deadlines, I
> would get nothing at all. As it is, I finish up writing some of it
> myself and re-writing many of the submissions.
Sounds familiar. I withdrew my efforts because of this sort of thing.
I don't mind giving *my* time. But, for things that *I* am willing
to do and for an amount of time that I can estimate and control.
"Let's write a 5 part series on..."
"Great -- let me see it WHEN IT IS DONE!"
>> Are the maps pasted "as is" or did they require augmentation?
>
> I usually draw a lot of the maps in Claris Works but the historic one on
> p.19 was taken from a property ownership map. This meant it was covered
> in handwritten notes about land ownership and inheritance relating to
> familes who still live in the area. This sensitive information all had
> to be Photoshopped out before I could use the map. The 'cloning' tool
> in PhotoshopLE was very useful for reinstating the features that had
> been covered by the writing.
Yeah, PS is delightful for doctoring images. I was creating icons
for my workstations, last night. I name each network device after a
cartoon character, grouping similar devices into the same series
(e.g., workstations after The Flintstones, NASs after The Jetsons,
etc.). So, I have to locate artwork (online) with the character(s)
of interest, in suitable poses, and then elide all the extra cruft
from the image so I am left with *just* that character.
It's tedious (trying to cut to the nearest pixel with your masking
tool) but a sort of refreshingly brain-dead activity; if you screw
up, you just hit UNDO and try again!
> The superb map on the back page was drawn by one of our founding members
> who was a professional draughtsman; sadly he has just died and the next
> edition will contain an extensive obituary.
This is all too common with volunteer/nonprofit organizations.
Young people are "too busy" (in their minds) to get involved.
So, much falls on "older folks".
By far, most of the "dead people that I know" were from these
sorts of organizations. Here, many folks have alternate
homes "elsewhere". So, you expect them to be gone for half
of the year. When they don't return, you wonder if they
"lost interest" or "stopped breathing".