August Socialist Standard
- This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I have to read the Standard online and I don't usually go to the PDF but this month i was curious to why there was only one item in Rear View so opened up the PDF to see if omething else shared the back page since the cartoon strip was elsewhere inside the magazine
i'm puzzled.
both Pages 37 and 39 seem to be a re-production of the same August front cover of a 1966 issue of the Socialist Standard
Any explanation?
Hi Alan, I've just uploaded the pdf for August, and can confirm that 'Rear View' only has one item this month – the rest of the printed page is a photo.
alanjjohnstone wrote:both Pages 37 and 39 seem to be a re-production of the same August front cover of a 1966 issue of the Socialist StandardThere are only 24 pages in the Standard. Incidentally, the typo on p 22 of "Rebel's" in stead of "Rebels" has been corrected in the print version.
It must be to do with the fact that we are using a PDF version prepared by the printer and not by the editorial committee as usually. It could also be to do with people's browser. I don't have a problem with mine. Still looking into it. Will have to ask the printer perhaps.
I've heard from two members that some of the PDF material, including most photographs and other images, is not being reproduced correctly. Either black, very dark or as negatives… Other editions of the Standard are fine. Any clues as to why that might be?
ALB wrote:It must be to do with the fact that we are using a PDF version prepared by the printer and not by the editorial committee as usually. It could also be to do with people's browser. I don't have a problem with mine. Still looking into it. Will have to ask the printer perhaps.I don't have a problem with one my browsers but I do with another and so do two other members I've heard from. Yet that second browser of mine has no problem with any other edition of the Standard, so it must be something to with this particular PDF. According to Rob W., and as you say above, the PDF application supplied to the printer by the SSPC was not in order in some way and so the PDF Rob received, which had been prepared by the printer, was much larger than usual – in fact, the website wouldn't let it upload. Rob then had to use an online PDF compressor to bring the size down to normal before it could be uploaded. Quod erat demonstrandum?
Just to update on the new issue and Alan's comment above regarding the 'Rear View' column – please note that although there is only one item in the printed and pdf version of this month's Standard, there were actually three items submitted and approved, and the missing two have now been added to the website – http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2016/no-1344-august-2016/rear-view
ALB wrote:It's all because Comrade Shannon's PDF converter broke down.It seems the problem has been resolved as Rob W. has now been able to upload the original large file PDF from the printers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.