Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
open_sauces_errata [2010-04-27 15:54] – nik | open_sauces_errata [2010-09-06 06:12] – 203.26.122.12 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
* < | * < | ||
* i like the idea of the formatting of the ingredients sections, but somehow the combination of ingredients with and without preceding quantities looks confusing to me… especially where one ingredient listing spills over into multiple lines. -- please add details/ | * i like the idea of the formatting of the ingredients sections, but somehow the combination of ingredients with and without preceding quantities looks confusing to me… especially where one ingredient listing spills over into multiple lines. -- please add details/ | ||
+ | |||
+ | === draft #31 === | ||
+ | * document-wide. < | ||
+ | * pp 4-7 < | ||
+ | * p 7. < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * heading "Note to the readers on how to get involved" | ||
+ | * p 18. < | ||
+ | * p 25. consider reflowing to avoid the two-line widow in paragraph 3? | ||
+ | * p 28. < | ||
+ | * p 41. < | ||
+ | * pp 42-43. spacing here still seems off to me | ||
+ | * p 47. < | ||
+ | * p 49. < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * p 56. < | ||
+ | * p 61. < | ||
+ | * p 74. < | ||
+ | |||
+ | * i just noticed… the coloured tabs at page corners have no bleed. i don't know if this is intentional or not, but nor do i know why you // | ||
+ | |||
+ | * also don't forget to make the text more legible in the " | ||
+ | |||
+ | === draft #37 (aka the big final reference shindig) === | ||
+ | some quotes still don't have full reference data attached, but in these few cases i think we can get away with it (and in any case no data was supplied by the authors). | ||
+ | |||
+ | the references not corrected below can be left as they are. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * p 18. < | ||
+ | * p 23. < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * p 42. < | ||
+ | * p 56. [can maja supply the citation data] i've used: F. Adria, J. Soler, A. Adria, _El Bulli 2003-2004_ (Ecco, 2006) | ||
+ | * p 61. < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | * < | ||
+ | |||
+ | === draft #41 === | ||
+ | * p 10. **Q.** is it ok for an ellipsis (for quotation elision) to follow a fullstop? i.e. "human sex hormones. … From the Middle Ages" | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Author' | ||
+ | * p 34. replace period with comma after "The Big Fat Duck Cookbook" | ||
+ | * p 53. bulleted list is wonky | ||
+ | * p 87. references: replace hyphens with colons for consistency | ||
+ | |||
+ | * are you going to keep the blue highlighting for the urls? it looks kind of full-on to me. also, urls listed as references/ | ||
+ | * by the way, why don't you bite the bullet and just give the sourcing sections ragged margins??? just look at the paragraphs on p. 11 (also 37, etc.) :-/ | ||
=== still waiting... === | === still waiting... === | ||
* check all logos | * check all logos | ||
- | * check E numbers | + | * check E numbers |
* check chemical notation | * check chemical notation | ||
+ | * only one or two of these have ended up in the publication, | ||
* check footnotes | * check footnotes | ||
* check IPA for ' | * check IPA for ' | ||
Line 46: | Line 101: | ||
* check urls for accurcy & consistency | * check urls for accurcy & consistency | ||
* check footnote consistency | * check footnote consistency | ||
- | | + | * the few footnotes there are now look fine. maybe consider using a numeral in sneha' |
+ | | ||
+ | * quote references. eg. " | ||