Because Editors Canada’s Guidelines for Ethical Editing of Theses / Dissertations is still in the process of being updated, it is still citing the 2009 version of the Professional Editorial Standards (PES). Some rules in PES (2009), however, have been renumbered in PES (2016), so it is not really possible to understand the Guidelines with just a current copy of the PES.
In order to allow others to understand the Guidelines with just a copy of PES (2016), I did a quick comparison of the two standards. The changes I was able to identify are summarized below:
| PES (2009) | PES (2016) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| - | New rule A11.1 | Reference to “A2–A12” (in Part 1) would include this new rule |
| A11.1 | A11.2 | No impact on the Guidelines |
| A11.2 | A11.3 | No impact on the Guidelines |
| A11.3 | A11.4 | No impact on the Guidelines |
| A11.4 | A11.5 | No impact on the Guidelines |
| - | New rules B3, B4 | No impact on the Guidelines |
| B3 | B5 | |
| B4 | B6 | |
| B5 | B7 | |
| B6 | B8 | |
| B7 | B9 | |
| B8 | B10 | |
| B9 | B11 | |
| B10 | B12 | |
| B11 | B13 | |
| B12 | B14 | |
| - | New rule C1 | Guidelines cites old C1 (i.e., C2 in PES, 2016) |
| C1 | C2 | |
| C2 | C3 | |
| C3 | C4 | |
| C4 | C5 | |
| C5 | C6 | |
| C6 | C7 | |
| C7 | C8 | |
| C8 | Merged into C9 | |
| C9 | ||
| D5 | D8 | |
| D6 | D9 | |
| D7 | D10 | |
| D8 | D11 | |
| D9 | D12 | |
| D10 | D13 | |
| D11 | Split into D5, D6 | Also possible that the new D6 is a new rule |
| D12 | D7 | |
| D13 | D14 | |
| D14 | D15 | |
| D15 | D16 | |
| D16 | D17 | |
| D17 | D18 | |
| D18 | D19 | |
| - | New rules E6, E7 | Guidelines cites old E6, E7 (i.e., E8, E9 in PES, 2016) |
| E6 | E8 | |
| E7 | Merged into E9 | |
| E8 | E10 | |
| E9 | E11 | |
| E10 | E12 | |
| E11 | Merged into E9 | |
| E12 | E13 | |
| E13 | E14 | |
| E14 | E15 | |
| E15 | E16 | |
| E16 | E17 | |
| E17 | E18 | |
| E18 | E19 |
I hope this information is useful, but these findings are unofficial, and I have not thoroughly checked my work.