>
> I know of cases where journals demanded .doc format, only to convert back
> to latex to actually typset the article.  But authors are often powerless to
> "fight city hall".]


I told that to some Elsevier journal's editor, who asked me for a DOC
version instead of LaTeX, and he couldn't believe it.
-------------------------------------------------
Julio Rojas
jcredbe...@gmail.com



On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:57 PM, David A Case <c...@biomaps.rutgers.edu>
wrote:
> On 09/16/2011 11:27 AM, Kalisch Dominik P.H. wrote:
>> >
>> >I need to export my
>> >document, with a heavy use of formulasm tables and images, to word.
>
> I also need to do this, primarily for scientific journals that accept only
> ".doc" files (i.e. the older Word format).  At least in my field
(chemistry
> and biology), there are a lot of journals like this.
>
> I've tried exporting to html (by several methods), then importing the html
> into Microsoft Word.  This can work pretty well for text and tables,
> moderately well for bibliographic citations (depends a lot on what bib
style
> files you use) and for figure captions (the figures themselves are
expected
> by the journals I use to be in separate files anyway).  Simple equations
can
> be OK, but complex equations are sure to fail.  You can use either elyxer
> (with the --html flag) or the export to html (not xhtml) native to Lyx
2.0.
> Note that any limitations are *not* the fault of html converters (which
work
> remarkably well for their intended purpose), but are the result of
limitations
> in Word's ability to take html as an input format.
>
> For equations, the only thing I've found that "almost" works is tex2word
> (just Google it).  This is a commercial program that only runs on Windows,
> but fills a real need for me, so much so that I have a virtual Windows
> machine that I use pretty much just for that purpose.  The program is
> limited (it doesn't recognize all latex packages, and you often have to
> manually tweak the latex file you give it), but the support staff is
> quite helpful and nothing else [that I have tried] comes close if you
> have lots of equations.  (You do also need to have MathType, which means
> yet more money.) One thing missing from tex2word, but promised "soon", is
> natbib support.  Also, tables are far from perfect -- I've gone to the
> trouble of converting tables via html, and the rest of a manuscript via
> tex2word....sigh.
>
> [The "pain" is that, almost inevitably, the equations are going to
manually
> re-typeset by the publisher anyway, so a difficult (and error-prone)
> conversion to .doc is just a waste of everyone's time.  I know of cases
where
> journals demanded .doc format, only to convert back to latex to actually
> typset the article.  But authors are often powerless to "fight city
hall".]
>
> ...just my conclusions based in limited experience, but maybe it will
help.
>
> ...dave case
>
>

Reply via email to