mb@sparrms.ists.ca (Mike Bell) (05/13/91)
While the debate rages on about CACM - I *much* preferred the old format which had the benefit of readability and *not* feeling like a here-today-trash-tomorrow trade magazine - am I alone in feeling that ACM Computing Surveys actually could do with a face lift? Given the small format, two columns of six-and-one-hypehenated-half words per column seems ridiculous. The fonts used also seem cramped and hard to read. A single column page set in (say) Times Roman would be much easier to read. The content (and easy-to-find contents list) are good though. (I thought the recent article on "What Every Computer Scientist Should Know About Floating Point" particularly good.) The only other improvement I would make is to put a few keywords on the spine to make it easy to find articles or issues on a particular subject.
lamaster@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) (05/14/91)
In article <1991May13.133955.29618@sparrms.ists.ca>, mb@sparrms.ists.ca (Mike Bell) writes: |> ... am I alone in feeling that |> ACM Computing Surveys actually could do with a face lift? |> I am no expert in typography, but I really like the format of Computing Surveys. It is the best ACM publication that I regularly read. I like the format and the contents, and find it much more readable than CACM. I am sure that it could be improved, but, given what happened to CACM, I am afraid of any change right now. |> The content (and easy-to-find contents list) are good though. (I thought |> the recent article on "What Every Computer Scientist Should Know About |> Floating Point" particularly good.) Yes. This was an excellent article. Good work! -- Hugh LaMaster, M/S 233-9, UUCP: ames!lamaster NASA Ames Research Center Internet: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov Moffett Field, CA 94035 With Good Mailer: lamaster@george.arc.nasa.gov Phone: 415/604-1056 #include <std.disclaimer>
ed@titipu.meta.com (Edward Reid) (05/18/91)
In article <1991May13.133955.29618@sparrms.ists.ca>, mb@sparrms.ists.ca (Mike Bell) writes: > > While the debate rages on about CACM - I *much* preferred the old format > I preferred the old format, too. The old black-and-blue cover. It's looked trashy ever since they started putting those stupid color graphics on the cover about ten years ago. Most of the covers now have that obnoxious look and feel of computer-generated graphics. Edward Reid (8-}> eel: ed@titipu.meta.com snail: PO Box 378/Greensboro FL 32330