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

Re: bibtex support in Mathematica 8

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg114999] Re: bibtex support in Mathematica 8
• From: "philipp.giese at googlemail.com" <philipp.giese at googlemail.com>
• Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 06:48:21 -0500 (EST)
• References: <iepdi9$g2h$1@smc.vnet.net> <201012220736.CAA10472@smc.vnet.net>

On 25 Dez., 08:34, Andrzej Kozlowski <a... at mimuw.edu.pl> wrote:
> On 24 Dec 2010, at 10:11, Armand Tamzarian wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > 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
>
> Well, I guess this (sort of) proves that these irritating "emoticons" =
> are sometimes really needed... Sigh.
>
> Andrzej
>
> 

Ok ,that means I will not write my thesis with mathematica - without a
good reference support I can forget it. I cannot tell how disappointed
I am. To tell that there is a new feature and describe this feature in
the documentation is a mere lie if people have to find this signifcant
exclusion in a newsgroup. So please implement that feature presto.

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