3 ms·
Surely there's a benefit for the authors of doing so? Compressing information forces one to keep only the most important bits, presumably
by qumpis 3y ago
Surely there's a benefit for the authors of doing so? Compressing information forces one to keep only the most important bits, presumably
- patrick451 3y agoNot in my experience. The information is only so compressible. You're usually better of if the authors have an uncompressed preprint on their website. Those tend to be much clearer.
- jrumbut 3y agoThere is absolutely a benefit. What is painful is when one venue has a length limit of 6 pages and the next has a limit of 5 pages (plus one page for references), but when you port the paper from one Latex template to the other it explodes to 8 pages because of formatting. In all cases, what they want and what you have is "a short paper" but you're going to have to take several hours out of your life and probably make some meaningful changes to the content. What would be best is if publishers could come together and harmonize their requirements to the extent possible.
- PeterisP 3y agoSure, abstracts are a good thing and we do want such compressed information about the article - however, recompressing a 'compressed' abstract from 300 words to 200 words or from 200 words to 300 words (which is usually mandatory if resubmitting elsewhere) is time consuming, lossy, and doesn't add value.