[rkward-devel] JSS FINAL

[Stefan Rödiger]

On Sunday 26 December 2010 21:06:34 Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I'll take another look tomorrow or the day after that. Some comments:
> 
> On Sunday 26 December 2010, Stefan Rödiger wrote:
> > 0) Check for any missing authors guideline. From what I can see we are
> > conform the the requirements.
> > 1) I would like to ask everybody which final paragraph of the
> > background.tex and which of section "Help system" you prefer (look for
> > the %)?
> > you prefer.
> 
> I like the style of the non-commented version, but it's not accurate: The
> example session come after the GUI elements, not after the technical
> details. And of course it's the technical details, which will be compared,
> where appropriate.

Okay, I changed/corrected that and took the non-commented version (regarding 
the background.tex).

I need a vote for the section "Help system" too.
> 
> > 2) Please give me feedback which figure are not good readable for you.

Can I take no comment for the moment being as accepted? 

> > 3) Check that we use consistent term etc. (for example it's always
> > "section" not
> > "Section", "Figure" not "Fig." or "figure"). Other  examples are "help
> > page" vs. "help-page" or "``Submit button''" vs.  "Submit button".
> 
> I'm fairly certain that it should be "Section x.y", not "section x.y" (but
> lowercase when writing "section" without a number: "in this section / in
> the next section"). See the examples in http://www.jstatsoft.org/style.
> It's also what the APA-styleguide says (for whatever that is worth in this
> context).

Okay, I took care of this.

> 
> > 4) If I get it right \proglang{} is only for languages (XML, HTML, R,
> > C++, Qt, ECMAScript, ...) not for programs like Red-R or RKWard (see
> > 5)).
> 
> Yes, but it does not appear to be clear-cut. Citing from jss.dtx:
> % This should be used for typesetting the names of programming
> % languages, e.g., |\proglang{Java}|, |\proglang{C++}| or |\proglang{R}|.
> % This applies also to programmable environments which also have a GUI
> % like |\proglang{SAS}|, |\proglang{Stata}| or |\proglang{S-PLUS}|.
> 
> Programmable environments could certainly be stretched to include KDE, but
> also Red-R, and RKWard. Still I guess it's best to restrict it as you
> suggest.
> 
Okay, we keep it without anything. We keep \proglang{KDE} but stick with Red-R 
and RKWard. 

> > 5) Do you wish to emphasise words  like RKWard, TDI?
> 
> We certainly shouldn't emphasise all technical terms like TDI. We might
> emphasise RKWard (see above), but I'd leave it as is, for now. If the
> editors want that, it will be easy to revise.
> 

Same opinion here. I just had the impression that some co-authors prefer it 
emphasised.

> > 6) Does anybody see a need to add something to Conclusion and Outlook? If
> > so when do you plan to finish it?
> 
> I don't plan to add anything.

Okay. Same for me.
> 
> > Generally:
> > * 31.12 is the official deadline. I would like to sent it earlier (29. or
> > 30. in case the editors need something else).
> 
> Yes. I propose to target the 29th, meaning the 28th will be the last day to
> make any changes. Of course if there is a good reason to add another day,
> we can still do that.
> 

Okay. Let's stick with it. Official target is the 28th with the 29th as 
buffer.


> Regards
> Thomas

Regards
Stefan

Side note:  The weather is quite unpredictable and I have to use a surf stick 
currently ... . In case you don't see a "I submitted" message from me on the 
list (latest 30th evening) somebody else shouldn't hesitate to submit. Who 
wants to be the "backup"? To make it clear I intend to submit the paper as we 
discussed before (unless there is a unforeseeable reason). I would just like 
to be on the safe side.