Mark, you stick with 20, I'll stick with more. Steve
2008/11/11 Mark Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I think it is >> http://www.amazon.com/Software-Engineering-International-Computer-Science/dp/book-citations/0321210263 >> and I think he does >> >> http://portal.acm.org/author_page.cfm?id=81100335980&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&trk=0&CFID=4466725&CFTOKEN=79928146. >> According to some sources its more cited than the Perry and Wolfe >> paper (340 v 338) > > My bad. I had checked citeseer, but only saw 2 results. Just > checking again now, I see what you report. Perhaps I misspelled his > name. > > As I say, I haven't read the book. If you say there's a model there, > then great. But none of his top several cited papers seem to have > anything to do with a model, so perhaps it wasn't very popular. > Editions of his book prior to the Foundations paper are not highly > cited (~25). This is also in part because the number of conferences and papers has gone up hugely in the last 20 years. Hell even I can get published these days. > > FWIW, Foundations has been cited over 300 times. 338 according to my reckoning (SE is at 340). > > So, that's why I said 20, and I think I've defended that position > sufficiently. As above, its your perception that it started 20 years ago,my perception is that hugely complex programmes were delivered to live by thinking about connections, components and data right the way back into the 60s. Not so much about academic papers as delivered projects. Steve > > Mark. >
