Hi Bruce and Emmanuel,
"Bruce D'Arcus" writes:
> Finally, a question: what's the best way to do complex-ish
> documentation like this collaboratively? Is there an alternative to
> email + patches for the create, comment, revise cycle of refining
> this?
I'm sending you (and Timothy and Nicolas)
Great start!
A few quick comments:
1. I'm not sure we should call them "citation links", since they
aren't really links.
2. "four bibliograhic backends are available": a) note typo (which I
think I saw elsewhere; there are a number of spelling errors
throughout), b) "available" -> "included" (in
As reported by Bastien, I started a documentation for the current state
of the citation engine(s). I intended to complete it, but got "a
little" sidetracked.
Enclosed is a patch of where I was in August.
Bastien made the following remarks, which I mostly intended to follow :
As reported by Bastien, I started a documentation for the current state of the
citation engine(s). I intended to complete it, but got "a little" sidetracked.
Enclosed is a patch of where I was in August.
Bastien made the following remarks, which I mostly intended to follow :
===
