Digital Proofing Guide
Proofing is the final step before final publication of an RC volume/edition. Because the proofing stage occurs after all documents have been TEI encoded, transformed into HTML, and imported to the production site, RC tech staff cannot (and should not) accommodate substantive changes to a text at this stage. However, it is common that typos, transformation errors, artifacts, or other errors pop up during the coding, transformation, and import process. Proofs are distributed to the volume editor(s), who will then provide a link to all contributors for review. Also CC the general editors and the section editor(s) on all proofs correspondence so they have the opportunity to review the volume as well. In general, we ask for a quick turnaround here, usually between one and two weeks, and ask the volume editor to collect and return all errata in a single document.
Proofing Praxis / Pedagogies volumes
For Praxis volumes, which generally contain the work of between 6 and 8 individual authors, it’s easiest simply to provide a link to each individual essay in your email to the volume editor(s). (Recall that the TOC isn’t published, so it cannot be accessed by any site visitor who isn’t logged into Drupal’s admin UI.)
In your email to the volume editor(s), graciously thank them again for the privilege to work with them and their contributors. Then set the parameters of the proofing process:
- Remind them to remind their contributors that NO substantive or content changes are possible at this stage. These proofs are the equivalent of book galleys; it’s not possible to re-set the text at the proofs stage.
- Contributors should look for any and all errata that might have slipped through the copyedit and/or been produced by the coding/transformation/import process. Occasionally artifacts will appear in the HTML and need to be manually removed.
- Contributors should test ALL hyperlinks in their essay(s), including both links that point to outside sites and links internal to their content or the volume. Any incorrect or broken links should be noted.
- Contributors should also ensure that all media/images are displaying as intended on the site. If not, they should describe the issue in detail.
- At this stage, if you don’t have an abstract for every essay, a description (abstract) of the volume as a whole, metadata tags for each essay and the whole volume, and a bio for each individual contributor, make a point to ask for these items with some urgency.
- As noted above, you should ask the volume editor(s) to turn all of this around in 2-3 weeks, ideally, and to return all errata to you in a single (Word) document, as an attachment.
After these errata are corrected and the tech editors receive a go-ahead from the general editors, the volume/edition can be published.
Proofing Editions
Editions can be a lot more involved than Praxis volumes. This often means the TOC and volume navigation are of equal importance to the content itself. For this reason, in the case of a large, convoluted Edition, it’s best to create a Drupal user login for each editor of the Edition. (To create a new user, go to People / +Add User; also see the Drupal nav guide.) Assign them the “Content Editor” role, which will allow them to view unpublished pages.
Simply follow the parameters outlined above in communicating with the Edition editor(s); in the case of a large edition, however, more turnaround time for proofing may be required. Use your best judgment and, if appropriate, simply communicate with the editors of the edition to feel out their preferences.