,
13 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
1/ Thread on law review editing process:Most law reviews will provide authors, as a matter of course, with a red-lined version of the draft. When changes are tracked, it is easy for the author to see what was changed, and make any edits on the red-lined version.
2/ Some law reviews will send you the red-lined version as a PDF so you can't edit it. They will ask you to make changes on a "clean" version. Other law reviews won't send you the red-lined version, unless you ask.
3/ I always request the red-lined version in a DOC format, and make my changes directly on that version. This approach obviates the need for me to quickly compare two separate documents. Also, it eliminates any transposition errors.
4/ Law Review withhold the red-lined version to make their lives easier. Editors need to compare two documents line-by-line to see if the author "accepted" or "rejected" a change.
5/ My recommendation to law reviews: accommodate the authors and let them enter their changes directly onto the red-lined word document. The law reviews, with multiple editors, are better able to absorb the additional burden.
6/ Also, this model eliminates the risk of editors injecting errors during the process.
7/ Law Reviews should never, ever, ask an author to mark up a PDF. That approach invites many transposition errors, and makes the author's life more difficult. Track changes in Word is the only acceptable option.
8/ When I first started publishing in 2009, one journal asked me to mark changes on paper! I had to use different color inks (red, blue, etc.) for different kinds of changes. It was a nightmare.
9/ At some point, an enterprising law review will utilize Office 360 so changes can be monitored in the cloud. (Google Docs would mess up the footnote formatting.
10/ I agree with @brianlfrye. Word allows you to only show formatting changes. I then accept all "shown" changes. then I focus on comments and insertions only
11/ Threaded:
12/ Today, I received an "edited" version that had no changes tracked. At first I thought there were no changes! When I asked for the red-lined version, the editor said it was not their policy to do so, but obliged. That exchange prompted this thread.
13/ I have no prob when a journal asks me to mark up a PDF in the final rounds of reviews. This process resembles the "Galley" markup for briefs. It's expensive to make last-min changes But journals should not send a PDF during the first round of reviews.
