MIRI’s LaTeX document template uses the /href command to hyperlink text and styles links (both internal and external) using the pdfboarderstyle specification from Abode. We aren’t doing anything unusual.
Links are working (and styled) for me in OS X Preview and Adobe Reader 10.1.6, on OS 10.8.3. They even work in Chrome’s pdf viewer which currently doesn’t support pdfboarderstyle, i.e., the text is linked even though there is no underline or box to indicate that it is.
I suspect something fishy is going on with your Reader install . . .
Also, to clarify Luke’s comments, we have a dedicated technical editor (who I have been very impressed with so far), and the papers are reviewed by a couple other people (once they have been typeset) before they are published. I’d be interested to hear about (possibly more appropriate through PM or email) other things in this document that made you think we didn’t have a technical editor.
EDIT: I should clarify that the editing and proofreading I’m talking about is done once the content has been finalized. See a definition of technical editing here.
EDIT: I’m no longer sure that sending all of that over a PM (which I unwisely forgot to retain) was such a great idea. Your edit makes it sound like my objections weren’t really under the aegis of “technical editing”, but I don’t recall objecting to anything that doesn’t fall under that objection. Anyone who doubts my sincerity, please feel free to PM me.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that at all. I just reread my message an it occurred to me that it might not be clear to everyone what technical editing was.
MIRI’s LaTeX document template uses the /href command to hyperlink text and styles links (both internal and external) using the pdfboarderstyle specification from Abode. We aren’t doing anything unusual.
Links are working (and styled) for me in OS X Preview and Adobe Reader 10.1.6, on OS 10.8.3. They even work in Chrome’s pdf viewer which currently doesn’t support pdfboarderstyle, i.e., the text is linked even though there is no underline or box to indicate that it is.
I suspect something fishy is going on with your Reader install . . .
Also, to clarify Luke’s comments, we have a dedicated technical editor (who I have been very impressed with so far), and the papers are reviewed by a couple other people (once they have been typeset) before they are published. I’d be interested to hear about (possibly more appropriate through PM or email) other things in this document that made you think we didn’t have a technical editor.
EDIT: I should clarify that the editing and proofreading I’m talking about is done once the content has been finalized. See a definition of technical editing here.
PM sent.
EDIT: I’m no longer sure that sending all of that over a PM (which I unwisely forgot to retain) was such a great idea. Your edit makes it sound like my objections weren’t really under the aegis of “technical editing”, but I don’t recall objecting to anything that doesn’t fall under that objection. Anyone who doubts my sincerity, please feel free to PM me.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that at all. I just reread my message an it occurred to me that it might not be clear to everyone what technical editing was.
Your PM was indeed about technical edits.
BTW you can see all PMs you sent by visiting, http://lesswrong.com/message/sent/
Ohh! Thanks. I hadn’t noticed that feature.