I'm regularly writing papers for different conferences and they all expect you to conform to a different cls, which I find to be a huge loss of time, since for every conference you have to relearn a new style.

I would like to know if there exists a package that unifies it in a way that you write the header once and for all with this package and then it automatically defines the right fields for the editor class. This would give something like this :

\unifyingauthor[1]{Name 1}
\unifyingauthor[2]{Name 2}
\unifyingauthorinst[1]{Inst 1}

and then to make it work with lipics I would just have to change the documentclass and nothing else. Does anyone know of such a package my google quests didn't bring up anything.

  • 5
    Even if someone wrote such a package (I never heard of it): it is quite improbable that it would unify the same set of cls you are interested in. – Ulrike Fischer Feb 10 '15 at 10:23
  • @UlrikeFischer i think it's even worse than that: these class files aren't static, so even if the proposed unifying class dealt with all current classes, any one of them could change and invalidate the unifier’s claim, at any time. – wasteofspace Feb 10 '15 at 10:46
  • @wasteofspace: I don't think that this would be a real problem. Most classes don't change much - at least the user interfaces. After all the authors of such cls don't want to break existing documents without need. – Ulrike Fischer Feb 10 '15 at 10:51
  • To some extent, this is a product of the classes not being very well-designed so that they require you to use class-specific markup when they should use standard LaTeX markup. To some extent, this is inevitable given that the classes need markup which doesn't have a standard implementation, and that would likely remain the case even in the best (realistically imaginable) scenario. I'm surprised, I guess, that this is a huge waste of time as opposed to a relatively minor irritation. But that is probably because I work in a field where the requirements are .doc or .docx! – cfr Feb 10 '15 at 12:35
  • 2
    @cfr -- the basic article and proc classes aren't very well designed with respect to the topmatter -- they don't provide distinctive and unique methods for identifying (for example) individual authors and related information that can be "spun off" easily to provide to aggregators and indexing services. that is why the ams classes have redefined the top matter structure so that it can be spun off, reformatted, or massaged in many different ways without changing the user interface. i'm afraid we're stuck with the history. – barbara beeton Feb 10 '15 at 16:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.