How much editing is normal between conference paper and post-conference publication?

[onerepublic96]

Hi all. Just wondering how much editing is permissible between a paper as given at conference and subsequent publication in a post-conference volume (NOT talking about proper journal publication here)? 
 

I’ve got a conference paper that’s a bit more conversational and informally structured, which makes for good talking but not so much reading, and since I’ve never had to deal with this kind of “publication” before, I’m just wondering how much editing it would be acceptable for me to do for this second part of the affair. Whether any extra referencing/argumentation would be permissible...

[Glasperlenspieler]

It's probably good to check with the editorial guidelines, but as far as I'm concerned for most conference proceedings it's normal and perhaps expected to take into account the discussion during the Q&A which may very well mean reworking the argument. I would say as long it's recognizably the same idea/argument, then you should make it as good as possible before it goes into print with your name on it. I've dealt with three such volumes either directly or indirectly and while all of them were very different sorts of publications, they all produced papers that were markedly different than the ones presented at the conference (though clearly genealogically related).

[onerepublic96]

On 6/29/2020 at 4:55 PM, Glasperlenspieler said:

It's probably good to check with the editorial guidelines, but as far as I'm concerned for most conference proceedings it's normal and perhaps expected to take into account the discussion during the Q&A which may very well mean reworking the argument. I would say as long it's recognizably the same idea/argument, then you should make it as good as possible before it goes into print with your name on it. I've dealt with three such volumes either directly or indirectly and while all of them were very different sorts of publications, they all produced papers that were markedly different than the ones presented at the conference (though clearly genealogically related).

Ah that’s reasonable. Thanks!