|
I hope you like the new photo. This "disaster area" really is my workspace; the previous photo was just the product of our design staff's imagination. In this case, is truth better? You can be the judge of that. Here at JSS, though, we felt that this electronic issue presented a good opportunity to relay some honest information about what goes on behind the scenes, creating an online guide that readers and submitters can easily refer back to. What is being the Technical Editor really like? Here's the exposé, as after nearly 10 years, it may be time for someone else to consider whether he or she might be interested in giving it a try.
Actually, most of the difficult work is handled by the publications crew — Publisher Ann Waterman, Copy Editor Dara Chadwick, Layout Editor and Illustrator Dave Davis, and Electronic Layout and Web Professional Norman Bell, plus our occasional photographer David Rosenberg, who took both the old and new office photos. My own job centers around pre-screening lead article and paper submissions, as well as coordinating the peer-review cycle among our associate editors, sending out advertiser bills and collecting bi-monthly submissions from our regular columnists and contributors. I also perform the technical review on each journal. After all, the most beautifully assembled issue isn't worth much if the content doesn't hold up under scrutiny. (Pardon the editorial comment, if Dara or Ann doesn't "X" it out. I trust them implicitly.) In brief, although my position may be the most visible, the "pubs crew" (as we call them) are the ones who put in the long hours to make JSS happen — and I couldn't ask for a finer group to do it. Thanks, all!
There are a few things that can help or hinder the process, and I hope that offering some insights here might help us avoid costly pitfalls. Authors, when your paper or article is accepted for publication, Dara and Ann spend a lot of time with it — correcting grammar and spelling, refining style, checking facts and terminology, smoothing out rough spots and making sure it's top-notch, long before it's sent for layout. You'll get a proof copy before it goes to press so that you can make any necessary corrections. However, please don't make changes by re-editing your original file. That would mean making our team do all that work over again, and frankly, our budget (and our time) just doesn't allow for that. A similar process happens with illustrations, which are redrawn to be consistent in size, style and format with the JSS standard and the rest of the journal. Please don't resubmit your own, or the crew will yell at me. After all these years, they're very good at it.
If you do submit illustrations (such as photographs) that are to be published essentially unchanged — note that I say "essentially," as even photographs are altered to remove glare, un-shine noses and foreheads, improve contrast and clarity, etc. — please remember that for the print edition, we need minimum resolution of 300 dpi at final size (nearly always a file of 1.5 MB or larger), and that these images should not be embedded in another program such as Word® or PowerPoint®. When you embed an image file, you remove some of its quality. A 72 dpi resolution is acceptable for the electronic edition, but this will limit our artist's ability to retouch the photograph, so the higher resolution is best for all.
Well, I hope these insights have proven helpful, as well as intrigued some potential future Technical Editors. Here at JSS, we're proud of the tradition of excellence that continues to garner praise from its worldwide readership. Now, with that in mind, I'd like to turn this column over to Pat Clemens for the following mini-editorial:
Not so long ago, as I was making a classroom presentation to a group of about 25 engineers who practice system safety in mixed government and private sector venues, I asked a question of the students: "Given your choice, how many of you would choose a personal physician who belongs to the American Medical Association and studies the technical papers in their journal over one who does not?" There was no contest. Everyone raised a hand. A few looked disdainful, as though I'd asked a really foolish question. I needn't have been surprised; I'd done this several times before with other groups, always getting the same results.
I followed with a second question: "How many of you belong to the System Safety Society and study its journal?" Two hands went up. Again, about the same result as with other groups.
I've no way of knowing whether the 23 or so who didn't raise their hands felt any sense of chagrin. I would have. We can all agree that staying abreast of the state of the art in the discipline we practice is a sure mark of professionalism.
Technological stagnation is to be feared in any dynamic arena of technology. It has been said that an engineering education now has a half-life of about five to seven years. Perpetual robust maintenance extends that half-life indefinitely.
Make the System Safety Society your professional association, and make Journal of System Safety your maintenance handbook. Spread the word.
— Pat Clemens
APT Research, Inc.
Thanks, Pat! We'll continue to do our part.
— Niles Welch
|
