|I, for one, do not welcome our new llncs.sty overlords
(29 Mar 2005 at 14:22)
|Oh man, when I redesign academia some day I am going to definitely lay waste to this "page limit" business. I've spent the last week turning a 25 page paper into a 16 page one, and the process has been painful, damaging to the paper's contents, and wholly unscientific. Instead, why don't we let a paper's length simply be evaluated as part of the peer review process? So many smart people would spend so much less time fooling around with LaTeX, and we could get a whole lot more interesting things done instead.
One more page to go...
|That's a good idea! Papers that aren't too great (like the ones I write) could have fewer pages, and ones that are better could be alotted another page.
Can you buy a page? I've heard you can do that with some conferences.
|Yeah, I have done that before, and I think it's a decent solution to the problem. But there's no information about that in the call for papers, so I guess I have to wait for press time, if I'm lucky enough to have it accepted this time. ;)
|They'll probably let you get away with it if you put nifty illustrations in. What you're fighting is people's eyes glazing over and deciding not to expend the (large cognitive) cost to process your complex technical information. If you were to have the comics section of the conference/journal in <em>your</em> paper, they'd probably be more forgiving.
Well, either that, or you could fully explain <a href="http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=805852&dl=ACM&coll=GUIDE">all modern programming language features</a> in twenty pages.