Have you asked him? Maybe even invite him to join in the discussion, rather than just speculate?
-----Original Message----- From: Shaun Grannis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 9:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: J Am Med Inform Assoc Table of Contents for 1 November 2003; Vol. 10, No. 6 From the Bates response: "For open-source approaches, studies and reports in the peer-reviewed literature are /especially /important." (My emphasis) Are studies evaluating open-source approaches more important ("especially important") than those evaluating closed-source commercial products? Why should one favore studying systems whose source code is fully available, rather than trying to understand the hidden "features" (bugs) in closed-source systems that are found only through trial and error, and thus require additional testing ("studying")? I am probably reading too much into a single line, but thought it worth noting.
