Abstract
An affordance “refers to the fact that the physical properties of an object make possible different functions for the person perceiving or using that object” (Sellen and Harper in The myth of the paperless office. The MIT Press, Cambridge, 2002). Historically, authors, publishers and editors have preferred to check and mark up hard-copy page proofs because it has been easy and flexible to read, cross-reference and annotate. Ironically, changes to the physical properties of computer hardware, as well as improvements to software such as Adobe Acrobat, are eroding our nostalgic preference for paper mark-up and highlighting paper’s inherent limitations. This article compares the affordances of paper in regard to editorial mark-up with those of digital, and demonstrates how digital affordances have impacted positively on editors’ workflow within educational publishing’s highly pressured production process. Specifically, how authors are supplied with complete electronic copy from previous editions and how editors perform their paperless mark-up.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
I am indebted to Dr Louise Poland, Lecturer, Monash University; Stuart Angus, former IT Team Leader, Merri Community Health; and Eleanor Gregory, Senior Publishing Editor, Cengage Learning Australia, for reviewing this paper.
AJ Sellen and RHR Harper [8], 17.
WW Gaver [4], 1.
The terms “action” and “outcome” in relation to affordances comes from A Dillon [1], 1298.
RM Thomson et al. [11], 77.
Sellen and Harper [8], 17.
Sellen and Harper [8], 17.
Sellen and Harper [8], 53.
D Kalantzis [5], 62.
Sellen and Harper [8], 18.
Sellen and Harper [8], 148.
Sellen and Harper [8], 150.
For information on stripped-back files, I am indebted to Campbell Craig, former Lead Instructional Design Manager at Cengage Learning Australia, and Adam Bextream, former Resource Development Coordinator at Australian Academy of Science—Primary Connections.
For further discussion, see T Lieb [6].
Snooks & Co. [9]
P Duguid [3], 65.
References
Dillon A. Reading from paper versus screens: a critical review of the empirical literature. Ergonomics. 1992;35:1297–326.
Donoughue P. Educational publishing. In: Carter D, Galligan A, editors. Making books: contemporary Australian publishing. St Lucia: University of Queensland Press; 2007. p. 209–20.
Duguid P. Material matters: the past and futurology of the book. In: Nunberg G, editor. The future of the book. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1996. p. 63–102.
Gaver WW. Technology affordances. Proceedings of CHI91: ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 1991. p. 79–84.
Kalantzis D. Digital Design. In: Cope B, Kalantzis D, editors. Print and Electronic text convergence. Altona: Common Ground Publishing; 2001. p. 59–80.
Lieb T. Q. A.: HTML, PDF and TXT: the format wars. J Electron Publ. 1999. doi:10.3998/3336451.0005.108.
Newton TJ, Joyce AP. Human Perspectives, 3A3B, Book 2, 6th ed. South Melbourne: Cengage Learning Australia; 2012. p. 94.
Sellen AJ, Harper RHR. The myth of the paperless office. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 2002. p. 17.
Snooks & Co. Style Manual: for Authors, Editors and Printers, 6th ed. Milton, Qld: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd; 2002. p. 523.
Thompson JB. Books in the digital age: the transformation of academic and high education publishing in Britain and the United States. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2005.
Thomson RM, Morgan N, Gullick M, Hadgraft N. Technology of production of the manuscript book. In: Morgan N, Thomson RM, editors. The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain: Volume II 1100–1400. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008. p. 75–109.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hargrave, J.E. Paperless Mark-Up: Editing Educational Texts in a Digital Environment. Pub Res Q 30, 212–222 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-014-9360-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-014-9360-9