Template LaTex and Word are not the same about document-formats

[ayman]

Thanks for this. I was looking into it and I'm not sure if there's much to do here. Kerning and leading between the two will never be exact. However, we can and should check and see if the hline needs to be at the copyright block or not. @jofish might have the answer here...assigning to him for now.

[simonrob]

To get the same fonts as the word version, and much closer formatting (at least for me on OS X), I use XeLaTeX to compile the document, and replace the single fontenc import with the following:

\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
    \usepackage{xltxtra}
    \defaultfontfeatures{Scale=MatchLowercase}
    \setmainfont[Mapping=tex-text,Scale=0.8]{Verdana}
    \setsansfont[Mapping=tex-text,Scale=0.9]{Verdana}
    \setmonofont{Monaco}
\else
    \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\fi

Happy to make a pull request if this approach also works for others.

[mendeldesign]

I am on Texpad for Mac, and the above solution does not create the right style unfortunately.

[simonrob]

Weird - make sure you have the Verdana font installed, and that you are definitely using XeLaTeX to compile the document (normal LaTeX will not work)

[mendeldesign]

Texpad also compiles using XeLaTex. It works, after I also removed the line
\usepackage[scaled=.92]{helvet} % for proper fonts

Are there many compilers that would not compile correctly? I ask because there are many authors that need instructions.

And there is still the issue with the line above the copyright strip.

[tcboy88]

I also noticed that the template for word and latex is quite different, not only for extended abstract but for paper/note too.
1 obvious difference is the spacing after figure's caption.
In latex the spacing is so large it looks so absurd.
But in word format the space is very small.
For a paper with several figures, so much spaces are lost!

Source (pre-rendered PDF examples from this github):
https://github.com/sigchi/Document-Formats/blob/master/Examples/LaTeX%20SIGCHI%20Proceedings%20Format.pdf
https://github.com/sigchi/Document-Formats/blob/master/Examples/Word%20SIGCHI%20Proceedings%20Format.pdf

[ayman]

@tcboy88 I think you're overlooking the fact that these are two different typesetting systems...there will be some variance. LaTeX will be a bit more elastic in it's spacing as it tries to flow and balance the page (imho) better than word does. If you believe the padding is just too generous, it can be corrected but that's a separate argument (and should be a new issue).

[tcboy88]

@ayman I understand that there will be some variance.
Let's say that I have many figures, it seems like word template will allow me to fit more content?
Do I need to trial and error with both template and choose the one that fits more content?

[ayman]

@tcboy88 I agree...we can tighten the template. So if we were to roll into this issue it would be: 1) address line in copyright bloc and 2) tighten padding on floats.

[mendeldesign]

I agree with solving the padding, also for items in a (numbered) list.
My concern to start with is that we offer authors both options, but with the ultimate goal to put papers generated by the two different templates together in the proceedings. It feels strange to offer templates that do not generate the same output, because fro me that was the point of providing templates in the first place. Some variance is acceptable, but it should appear to be almost identical. So another option would be to change the word template to better match the LaTex version, but that might start an academic riot.

[ayman]

@mjbroekhuijsen I think its less critical for the EA...we spent more time with the archival format doing the matching.

[mendeldesign]

@ayman Agreed.

[ayman]

I think the padding on the latex still needs addressing...

[joemarshall]

Did anything happen with this - the padding on figures is still massive in the current version unless I'm doing something wrong?

[ayman]

I couldn't find a clean solution. Likely it's a no-fix as this version is in sunset anyhow.