Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the process of providing feedback on proofreading errors found in scientific books, specifically focusing on how and to whom such feedback should be sent for future printings. Participants explore the implications of reporting errors and the potential responses from authors and publishers.
Discussion Character
- Meta-discussion
- Conceptual clarification
Main Points Raised
- One participant inquires about the appropriate channel for reporting small errors in scientific books, questioning whether to contact the author or the publisher.
- Another participant suggests sending error lists directly to the authors if they are still alive, or to a dedicated website for errata.
- Concerns are raised about whether authors would appreciate being contacted about such errors and if publishers take responsibility for correcting them.
- It is mentioned that if a book goes into subsequent printings, edits can be made at that time, but if the author is deceased, changes are less likely to occur.
- One participant notes that they have received acknowledgments in several books for reporting errors, indicating that some authors do appreciate the feedback.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants generally agree that sending error reports to authors is a viable option, but there is uncertainty about the publisher's role and the likelihood of corrections being made, especially if the author is no longer living.
Contextual Notes
There are unresolved questions regarding the process of tracking errors and whether publishers actively update printed versions of books based on feedback.