Pulishing in MS Word??

Tree

Given how most of the biological sorts i've encountered have never heard of LaTeX, do publisher accept submissions in (crappy) MS word format or something?

I'm just generally perplexed by the reliance on MS word i've seen in bio-academia.

5uspect

It's crazy but some do.
RTF is probably more portable.

cgc5483

Tree wrote: »

Given how most of the biological sorts i've encountered have never heard of LaTeX, do publisher accept submissions in (crappy) MS word format or something?

I'm just generally perplexed by the reliance on MS word i've seen in bio-academia.

Yeah never heard of it and every single paper i have published has required a MS Word file as some stage of submission/publication.

I know people who still prepare figures using Powerpoint. Will have to have a look at LaTeX. Whats its advantage?

5uspect

cgc5483 wrote: »

Yeah never heard of it and every single paper i have published has required a MS Word file as some stage of submission/publication.

I know people who still prepare figures using Powerpoint. Will have to have a look at LaTeX. Whats its advantage?

LaTeX is a markup language. So unlike Word where it's "what you see is what you get" LaTeX looks like a lot of code just like html. You simply type your content and put it under the required \section or \subsection etc.
There are "what you see is what you mean" editors like Lyx that hide the code from you.

A conference or Journal will often give you the a class file and a template. When you compile it calling the class file in the TeX file preamble an elegant pdf is automatically generated.

It's also exceptional for equations. You an even use it here on boards!

[html][latex]
A_1 = \pi r^2_1
[/latex][/html]

[latex]
A_1 = \pi r^2_1
[/latex]

There are loads of free editors online. I use TeXShop for OSX. I use Bibdesk for managing citations and Jabref is also excellent. To cite a paper you just \cite{key} where you want the reference to go. "Key" is the bibtex name of the article in your database. To generate a bibliography all you have do is include the name of your bibliography file and when compiling it'll be automatically generated.

Figures and tables are added in a similar way to equations but you include a path and file name of your graphics, eps ideally. You then give the figure a label and then you can write away making reference to figure~\ref{my_figure} and LATeX will take care of the figure numbers for you.

It can take a bit of getting used to but once you see what it can do you'll never use word again.

Tree

Gosh, im going to have to find excuses to put latex markup all over boards now!

@cgc5483 In phys/maths/computers everyone's at least heard of it, if not using it. It's not difficult to learn, so I dont know why more people aren't taught it.

Turbulent Bill

Tree wrote: »

@cgc5483 In phys/maths/computers everyone's at least heard of it, if not using it. It's not difficult to learn, so I dont know why more people aren't taught it.

One of the stated reasons it's not more widely used (apart from the learning curve) is the difficulty with markup/corrections. In Word there's all sorts of revision markers, notes etc. for editors and reviews to use. LaTex papers are typically submitted as PDFs, and no reviewer is going to mark up a Tex file. Personally I don't buy this as an excuse, but there you go...

For anything even vaguely scientific, LaTex is a no-brainer.

Gaspode

Yet Word is so easy. I've done my phd & published without ever hearing of or seeing LaTex.
It's like any software I suppose, you'll use whatever you're most familiar with. Why get involved with code if you have a wysiwyg?

5uspect

Gaspode wrote: »

Yet Word is so easy. I've done my phd & published without ever hearing of or seeing LaTex.
It's like any software I suppose, you'll use whatever you're most familiar with. Why get involved with code if you have a wysiwyg?

Word is a pain when it come to managing white space. Formatting leaks all over the place and the built in equation editor is a mess. Putting together a complex document like a PhD thesis is horrible. WIh LaTeX it's simple. You get the required style file for your institution and simply type the raw text without worrying about formatting. You have to code equations and tables and citations but it's no more difficult than the BBcode here.

LaTeX output is beautifully elegant. Have a look at any document produced by it. Equations just look sexy. The symbols don't start to run into each other like in Word.

2Scoops

LaTeX is not necessary for the vast majority of publications in biological science. Physics/maths etc. is a different story. I chuckle when I think of the implausible idea of some of my former colleagues trying to get to grips with LaTeX instead of just typing.

Anyway, most journals do their own typesetting after acceptance, so your lovely document goes to waste anyway.

Gaspode

5uspect wrote: »

Word is a pain when it come to managing white space. Formatting leaks all over the place and the built in equation editor is a mess. Putting together a complex document like a PhD thesis is horrible. WIh LaTeX it's simple. You get the required style file for your institution and simply type the raw text without worrying about formatting. You have to code equations and tables and citations but it's no more difficult than the BBcode here.

LaTeX output is beautifully elegant. Have a look at any document produced by it. Equations just look sexy. The symbols don't start to run into each other like in Word.

Maybe it's me, but I've rarely had any hassle like that with formatting, maybe just when I was starting out.
I use Endnote for citation management, so that area is not an issue either.
True the equation editor is clunky, but thankfully I rarely have much use for it.
I'm no champion of MS word, it has it's many faults but I just wanted to point out that it's not a form of madness for it to be used for publications or theses as the OP seemed to suggest!

Dr Strange

Gaspode wrote: »

Maybe it's me, but I've rarely had any hassle like that with formatting, maybe just when I was starting out.
I use Endnote for citation management, so that area is not an issue either.
True the equation editor is clunky, but thankfully I rarely have much use for it.
I'm no champion of MS word, it has it's many faults but I just wanted to point out that it's not a form of madness for it to be used for publications or theses as the OP seemed to suggest!

Same here. Did my PhD in Word. Never a bother. A year after my graduation I got Windows 7 and just saved the whole thing again as a pdf file and it also works perfectly. Also never had a problem with formulae in Words either. I think just use whatever suits you best and what you're used to.

Turbulent Bill

Part of the problem with Word was poor reliability/crashing, especially with complex docs. This has probably been sorted by now, but I know several (tech-literate) people who lost major docs due to Word failures. Word operates on the .doc directly, so if this is corrupted everything is lost. LaTex just processes the .tex file but doesn't modify it, so even if the worst happens you're always left with the source.

I attended a Word training course about 8 years ago while deciding on Word vs. LaTex for the thesis, and even the instructor couldn't get referencing working properly. That and the rubbish equation support was a deal-breaker for me.

I'd agree that Word isn't a suicidal choice, just that LaTex is well worth considering.

opinion guy

People are still using Latex ?!?!?!?!?:eek:

I used it once about 15 years ago and it was a painful experience.

Every journal these days accepts word as far as I know.

Except maybe a Latex journal

BostonB

The problem is most people don't know how to use MS Word properly, or even anything beyond the basics. Many don't even know the basics. For example most people don't know how to use styles, and word is all about using styles.

Even if Word crashes, you shouldn't lose any work if you follow even a half assed backup routine as you work. Most people I know who lose work simply don't backup their work as they go. The worst one I saw was a writer who worked on a document for a month without saving it ever, or even turning on/off his PC.

If you are going to use Word for major work, then people should spend some time to learn the application, and best to use it.

BostonB

The other advantage Word has is you can automate very complex and time consuming tasking using VBA in word. You can program complex applications far beyond simple macro's all within word. Its effectively VB. In the past, I've done work on chemical and financial systems that create very complex documents, very reliably, for hundreds of users. I've seen the same done for medial and legal systems. But it takes a lot of work/effort to get to that point. Most people won't spend the time (or money) to do it though. Ultimately, if there's a feature that doesn't work ideally, you could probably write your own replacement functionality with VBA.

Gaspode

BostonB wrote: »

The problem is most people don't know how to use MS Word properly

That's it exactly.

Amazing how people can use a piece of software every day and not get beyond anything more complicated than copy & paste, and not have a clue just what exactly it can do for them.

Capt'n Midnight

Turbulent Bill wrote: »

Part of the problem with Word was poor reliability/crashing, especially with complex docs. This has probably been sorted by now, but I know several (tech-literate) people who lost major docs due to Word failures. Word operates on the .doc directly, so if this is corrupted everything is lost.

Word was probably the first mainstream text editor that dispensed with backups :mad:

Turn off Quick save
Turn on Always create backup

Otherwise you have one point of failure in a non-contiguous document.

At every milestone Save As with a new name
Make sure you have multiple copies in multiple physical locations, if you use webmail then email it to yourself / friends / family too.

I like editors that have journal files that record your keystrokes, so that if you loose a document you can load the last save and roll forward. The ability to roll backwards is something I miss a lot, much handier than having to load up previous saves till you find the right one. /2c

Turbulent Bill

BostonB wrote: »

The problem is most people don't know how to use MS Word properly, or even anything beyond the basics. Many don't even know the basics. For example most people don't know how to use styles, and word is all about using styles.

Even if Word crashes, you shouldn't lose any work if you follow even a half assed backup routine as you work. Most people I know who lose work simply don't backup their work as they go. The worst one I saw was a writer who worked on a document for a month without saving it ever, or even turning on/off his PC.

If you are going to use Word for major work, then people should spend some time to learn the application, and best to use it.

I agree on not jumping into Word before doing a major document, but seeing a (presumably qualified) instructor struggle with important features really put me off.

Backups are obviously necessary but are only intended for emergency recovery (power cuts, OS crashing etc.), not to cover Word problems doing day-to-day tasks. Apart from the small loss of work (even with backups) there's the inconvenience of recovering docs.

Ultimately it's horses for courses. If I'm writing a quick letter or a work document I'll use Word. If it's a complex report or something for publication I'll use LaTex.

BostonB

Have to say I just haven't had those problems with it, but it depends on a variety of factors. I would be aware to use styles rather than tables, or optimise my graphics, link the graphics, or master/sub documents, or the ram usage on the machine I'm on. That said I wouldn't consider my self an expert, as Word is too vast an application, and people may be using features., functionality I've never used. I've not used references, or equations for example, other where they were in field codes to be dynamically updated through user forms.

As for backups, its just best practise to get into the habit of doing it. You don't know when you'll need it. Doesn't matter what application you use.

Theres some good user groups on the web for example.

Word_DocDesign@yahoogroups.com
Word_VBA@yahoogroups.com
MSO_2007@yahoogroups.com
http://www.mousetrax.com/Resources.html
www.experts-exchange.com/ (paid)

Capt'n Midnight

Turbulent Bill wrote: »

Backups are obviously necessary but are only intended for emergency recovery (power cuts, OS crashing etc.), not to cover Word problems doing day-to-day tasks. Apart from the small loss of work (even with backups) there's the inconvenience of recovering docs.

Tip If you encounter a corrupt Microsoft Document then use Libre Office to try and open it. Back in the day Excel was a complete pig for crapping out on documents.

Open a word document. Press ctrl, now press A, now take your finger off Ctrl. Your document has been replaced with the letter A. If autosave kicks in and you are on default settings, then you better pray the undo function works.

djpbarry

Tree wrote: »

Given how most of the biological sorts i've encountered have never heard of LaTeX, do publisher accept submissions in (crappy) MS word format or something?

I'm just generally perplexed by the reliance on MS word i've seen in bio-academia.

I’m an engineer working in biology and it is a royal pain in the arse. I’ve yet to produce a publication that is completely equation-free and seeing some clunky word-processor trying to format my work almost makes me cry.

Gaspode wrote: »

Yet Word is so easy. I've done my phd & published without ever hearing of or seeing LaTex...

Take one of your publications and Latex it. You’ll never use Word again.

BostonB wrote: »

... Word is too vast an application...

That’s it in a nutshell – it’s too universal and it simply wasn’t designed to handle complex technical documents. Developing an in-depth knowledge of Word is just far too time-consuming and Latex will still do a better job of producing a technical document than a Word expert will.

And of course, Latex is free.

BostonB

Latex has a far narrower scope. So its not directly comparable.

djpbarry

BostonB wrote: »

Latex has a far narrower scope.

How do you mean? There have been so many packages written for Latex that I doubt there's much that can be done in Word that can't be done in Latex.

BostonB

Can I use the VB/VBA object library in with Latex editors to automate things and for example use the VB object model for something like a complex form, to perform validation. We used such for complex formatting, and also for calculations. Even validation of formulae for a range of industries, or linking Charts and tables back to databases charts, or even online data sources. Then the output from word, to numerous other formats from PDF to HTML etc. With such you can automate the production and validation and ultimately, publishing of complex documents.

I'm not saying Word is better than Latex. Its a different product entirely. Its has narrow scope, more specialised. As such it may be better for your use, or it maybe worse. Depends entirely what you are doing. The only point I'm making is that most people don't even know the basic's of using Word.

The #1 problem I see with people using Word, is that they have no concept of using styles, or how it affects formatting through a document. The second is they have no concept of floating objects like text boxes, picture boxes vs inline objects like tables or text.

Many would argue that most people only ever need 10% of what word does and that a valid argument. However most people don't realise the potential of that 90% either.

djpbarry

BostonB wrote: »

Can I use the VB/VBA object library in with Latex editors to automate things and for example use the VB object model for something like a complex form, to perform validation.
...
I'm not saying Word is better than Latex. Its a different product entirely. Its has narrow scope, more specialised.

But we are talking about one specific application, as per the OP. For the purposes of scientific publishing, Latex beats Word hands down, which it should do considering Latex was designed specifically for this purpose, whereas Word was obviously not.

5uspect

And that's exactly the point. A lot of those arguing for Word seem to be discussing general day to day use for Word, not publishing in journals.

Word is a complex beast. I've had managers that cannot even differentiate the difference between Word and the operating system. As far as they're concerned the thing on their desk is a fancy typewriter. But that's industry for you. In academia LaTeX is king. Word will be used to fill out various bit of paperwork but most will submit TeX for publications.

LaTeX support is even baked into the graphics output of applications like MATLAB. I'll stick up a comparison of the two later. LaTeX is so much more elegant. In line equations for example in Word can screw up the line spacing as it tries to shoe horn in the equation. It's an ugly mess, not to mention the rubbish support for eps files.

BostonB

5uspect wrote: »

And that's exactly the point. A lot of those arguing for Word seem to be discussing general day to day use for Word, not publishing in journals.

I'm not arguing for Word. I'm illustrating why they are different, and that most people don't know how to use word. Hence...

BostonB wrote: »

Latex has a far narrower scope. So its not directly comparable.

5uspect wrote: »

Word is a complex beast. I've had managers that cannot even differentiate the difference between Word and the operating system. As far as they're concerned the thing on their desk is a fancy typewriter. But that's industry for you. In academia LaTeX is king. Word will be used to fill out various bit of paperwork but most will submit TeX for publications.....

Er, wasn't the opposite the whole of the thread?

Tree wrote: »

...I'm just generally perplexed by the reliance on MS word i've seen in bio-academia.

That someone can't tell the difference between the OS and a WP application suggests they've never even had basic IT training. Which always strikes me as a bit weird. Why buy some a tool worth hundreds if not thousands, which they've spend vast amounts of time on, then give them no training on it. Why would the person not be bothered to go educate them selves. Even more so considering the field we're talking about.

BostonB

djpbarry wrote: »

But we are talking about one specific application, as per the OP. For the purposes of scientific publishing, Latex beats Word hands down, which it should do considering Latex was designed specifically for this purpose, whereas Word was obviously not.

Wasn't that my point?

BostonB wrote: »

Latex has a far narrower scope. So its not directly comparable.

Turbulent Bill

5uspect wrote: »

In academia LaTeX is king. Word will be used to fill out various bit of paperwork but most will submit TeX for publications.

LaTeX support is even baked into the graphics output of applications like MATLAB. I'll stick up a comparison of the two later. LaTeX is so much more elegant. In line equations for example in Word can screw up the line spacing as it tries to shoe horn in the equation. It's an ugly mess, not to mention the rubbish support for eps files.

Even in academia I think it boils down to the individual whether Word or LaTeX is used, given that lots of journals support both. In a side-by-side comparison I think most people would choose a LaTeX output over Word, but you'd be surprised how many people don't care how it looks (or don't care enough to use LaTeX). There's generally templates/class files for both provided by the publisher (except in the OP's case).

Personally I think it's critical that whatever I publish is as clear as possible, and LaTeX is as close to professional-quality as I can manage. I've swore many times at the MATLAB EPS->psfrag LaTeX->PDF process but have always been impressed with the result.

BostonB

Has anyone in this thread done an official MS Word course. I bet most haven't. I certainly haven't.

Turbulent Bill

BostonB wrote: »

Has anyone in this thread done an official MS Word course. I bet most haven't. I certainly haven't.

Not a Microsoft-certified course, just one provided by the IT services in college many years ago. I remember almost none of it, other than it just showed the breadth of the program rather than how a document should be created. Presumably an official course would be better.