[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Re: bibtex support in Mathematica 8

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg114955] Re: bibtex support in Mathematica 8
• From: Armand Tamzarian <mike.honeychurch at gmail.com>
• Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 04:11:21 -0500 (EST)
• References: <iepdi9$g2h$1@smc.vnet.net> <201012220736.CAA10472@smc.vnet.net> <iev2go$4j5$1@smc.vnet.net>

On Dec 23, 7:50 pm, Andrzej Kozlowski <a... at mimuw.edu.pl> wrote:
> On 22 Dec 2010, at 08:36, Armand Tamzarian wrote:
>
> > There was a thread recently about the standard of documentation. We
> > appreciate the enormity of the task of documenting functions but in
> > this case Wolfram clearly dropped the ball by including documentation
> > of functionality that doesn't exist.
>
> Well, given the choice between useful but undocumented features and
> fully documented but non-existent features, I have no doubt about my
> preference.
>
> Andrzej Kozlowski


Why frame it as a question of choice? Shouldn't you be aiming to
eliminate both? Both instances tend to waste users time. ...as we
already saw above from a post by Eric Brown.

Mike

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: bibtex support in Mathematica 8
    • From: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz@mimuw.edu.pl>

• References:
  • Re: bibtex support in Mathematica 8
    • From: Armand Tamzarian <mike.honeychurch@gmail.com>