| re: I just think digital copyediting is more slipshod... | |
| Posted by: ryhog 05:13 pm EST 02/22/24 | |
| In reply to: re: I just think digital copyediting is more slipshod... - portenopete 04:29 pm EST 02/22/24 | |
|
|
|
| I did not intend an analogy between ATC and "higher" forms of writing. I was simply responding to the prior post regarding the laxity that the introduction of easy (post-hoc) editing engenders. What verdict did the "gay altekokkers" reach on the new show? :-) Regarding copy editors and AI,I do think this is a match made in heaven. Unlike substantive editors, I understand copy editors to be people who know all of the rules and most all facts, but not to be in search of nuance or insight. A machine can do copy editing better. One of the many great things about the theatre is that no machine will ever be able to replicate the impressions of a human sharing oxygen with the performers in the show they are reviewing. While I am writing, I'll address your other post a little. I am happy, in light of your additional clarity, to replace that horse you don't like with a pony. Regarding that quiz that offended you, it is really a bad attempt at a survey, and I am willing to bet a stack of those environmentally pathetic hard copies of the paper that it was not written by any journalist. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: I just think digital copyediting is more slipshod... - portenopete 04:29 pm EST 02/22/24 |
| Next: | re: I just think digital copyediting is more slipshod... - portenopete 06:12 pm EST 02/22/24 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.015492 seconds.