Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 10:11:35 -0400
From: "Michael Walsh" <mjw at press.jhu.edu>
To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Nebula winners
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

> "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com> 5/17/2010 11:05 PM >>>
>Tamar Lindsay wrote:
>>  Keith F. Lynch <kfl at KeithLynch.net>
>>
>>> "Michael Walsh" <mjw at press.jhu.edu> wrote:
>>>> http://www.locusmag.com/News/2010/05/nebula-awards-winners/
>>> Is it just some browser incompatibility, or does that page list all
>>> the nominees with no indication as to which one won?
>>
>> In Firefox, the first name on each list is in red, which I assume
>> means they are listed in order of votes gained, winner first.

You assume incorrectly.  The official SFWA site lists only winners.  =
Locusmag.com lists the winners followed by the non-winners in alphabetical =
by author sequence.

>Yeah, I figured the red ones were the winners, but why some are in =
bold
>and some aren't isn't obvious. Neither is the reason for some being in
>italics while others aren't, or why the ones that are bold also have =
no
>quote marks.

To me it's fairly obvious.

For the 4 fiction categories:

Bold indicates it is a book.

Material in quotation marks indicate it's a story published in a magazine, =
a book, or
online.

The italics material are films.

> There's no "key" either.  Poor form for a magazine.  Might
>expect it from J. Random Blogger or other untrained ape, but a magazine =

>should have people who are good at communicating in the written word
>form, and who follow consistent and well-known standards.

www.thehugoawards.org follows a somewhat similar format.

mjw