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>
- Re: bibtex support in Mathematica 8