Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 9 Oct 1997 12:17:16 +0100 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> What about just the last names (no initials) in the running head?
in that case i would put just surname as shortform, surely? what else
is shortform for? TOCs?
> Or should there be ONE command for the running head? This might prove
> to inflexible, since some will want all author names, some et al. and so
yes, journal style should determine whether to derive et al
> Add as many as the maximum number required by anyone. What exactly is
> `communicated' (as opposed to `received in original form')?
god knows!
> appropriate here:). The keyword syntax is different from the normal
> LaTeX style; by FORCING the author to include everything, compatibility
> is assured. If optional arguments (either in [] or via omitted
you you allow for {}, so whats the difference? it means we just have
the pain of remembering to say \author{}{Foo Bar}
> keywords) are used then each individual .cls should complain if keywords
> are missing.
which, indeed, is a feature; it provides a good interface for journal
classes to work with
> One must also avoid individual packages adding their own
> keywords etc without coordination with others.
again, one might regard that as a feature...
s
|
|
|