Why Desktop Publishing Is Right for Some Scientists, Wrong for Others

For anyone who has spent hours with pen in hand, poring over a word-processed scientific manuscript and filling in a multitude of blanks with equations and complicated graphs, the latest generation of desktop publishing software may sound like a dream come true. After all, some of these programs combine an array of capabilities that can make the operator the equivalent of a typesetter and layout artist. They allow the fluent integration of different functions— spreadsheets, word processor

Diana Gabaldon
Jun 12, 1988
For anyone who has spent hours with pen in hand, poring over a word-processed scientific manuscript and filling in a multitude of blanks with equations and complicated graphs, the latest generation of desktop publishing software may sound like a dream come true. After all, some of these programs combine an array of capabilities that can make the operator the equivalent of a typesetter and layout artist. They allow the fluent integration of different functions— spreadsheets, word processors, graphics, for example; and the operator able is to adjust with relative ease the size and appearance of most visual elements blocks of text, graphic devices, figures, photographs, charts, tables, graphs, and so forth. Multiple typefaces and point sizes give documents a professional appearance and allow the insertion of complex equations.

But don’t throw out your Rapidograph pen just yet Desktop publishing is a great computer application, but it requires a substantial investment...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?