How about having a "glossary" box at the end of the article for words related to that article where you suspect folks will want info? Then you don’t need to highlight it inline – people will get used to looking for a word they don’t recognize in that box.

The point of the glossary is to talk about things that are important without slowing the flow? But you can’t highlight too much without making it distracting. What about having an "online companion glossary code" that is printed at the end of the article (which would be entered at the top of this homepage), that leads to a glossary with _all_ the terms applicable to that article? That could be including repeats from prior issues. How about adding the glossary content to wikipedia or wiktionary?

Another thing, maybe related: Hyperlinks in print. I think it looks kind of odd to make something printed look like a web page. I can’t click on it in the magazine, so why make it look like a link?

Another thing, probably not related: I was wondering why the author’s name is printed at the end, not the beginning? To me, that’s actually become a fun sport. I read the article without looking ahead and try to guess who is the author.

I am in favor of moving the glossary to the front, although placement following the articles is traditional. No matter where the glossary is placed, I would like to see a reference back to the article. This would allow the reader a context for the term as it relates to a woodworking project. There are many times when I read a relatively abstract definition and wish a real-world example were available to illustrate it’s appropriate use or enhance my understanding or visualization.

Keep the glossary and put it near the back – inside back cover? Anyway in the last page or so, however that can be done without interrupting the article flow. I believe that is in fact the traditional location, anyway.

My 2¢ worth. Keep up the good work!

Are you suggesting :

1) Flag all words (terms) in the glossary with a font change or footnote?
2) Instead of flagging – define the word in the text with no glossary at the back?
3) Just have a glossary for the terms specific to the issue, no flagging?

Is using a footnote "oldschool"?

I like the idea of keeping it to a small number of terms and not let it get out of hand. As many of the articles are very educational for me (non-professional) I would suggest the glossary be more of an outline of the magazine and some people have suggested it be in the front.
If I may make a bold suggestion (to my favorite mag) … Introduce each article "briefly" with terms used in the article and definitions and possibly history of the word e.g. "Lap Joints" were first used in 2000B.C. blah blah blah and we are featuring in this issue the techniques used vs. a tennon.
I think a modified glossary will help focus the article around a tool or technique and you can leave stuff out like "nails – a small metal spike used to etc. "

I make this suggestion as I won’t rip out the glossary and use it as a reference pile. So after I have read the issue it’s no longer useful outside of the issue.

For what’s left of my mental capacity … If I know WHY I’m reading about a technique/tool, and how it was applied I better able to remember the article/issue vs. a definition of a word used in an article at the back of the issue.

But that’s just my 1cent. (The government took my other penny)

The concern voiced by some that this resembles the irritating misuse of links on the Internet is misplaced. As described, this would be a proper use of the concept w/o ads etc. so, no problem there.

We are now used to getting a lot of information presented to us and are very capable of filtering quickly so, I don’t see how this small, innocuous type face change in the middle of the paragraph would be that difficult to my understanding of the information presented. I don’t agree with the hitting a knot with a hand plane metaphor.

Finally, let’s be realistic. With all due respect to authors and editors (it’s a great publication), these are magazine articles presenting factual and how-to information. Not Shakespearean poetry. Form needs to follow function. The proposed concept is to present the reader with added information which is the very purpose of publication.

What about just moving the glossary to the front? Then the natural order of perusal would be to see the glossary first, then see it reinforced when I read the article. Heck, I might even actually learn the vocabulary term.

Letters could move to the end or stop wasting valuable magazine space and move letters to the web. If you can’t use the web, then you are probably not going to say anything I care about anyway. I’m willing to take that chance.

Woodworking for dummies? Seems very much like spoon-feeding. What other publication has felt the necessity or succumbed to the suggestion to somehow highlight every term that some reader somewhere might not know or understand right away?

I have always been of the practice that if I see a term in anything I’m reading, I will either make the effort to find out what it means or decide I don’t care enough to make that effort. Today, with so many dictionaries, handbooks and, uh, this here little thing called the Internet – and of course, the Glossary at the back of every issue, it’s not like it’s much of a chore to find out what a "haunched mortise" is.