On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Rintze Zelle <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Bruce D'Arcus <[email protected]> wrote: > > That's the point: if we're changing the test suite to respond to > > non-documented behavior, then we better document it. > > I suggest we first hammer out the behavioral details here on the list > (which seems to have better reach than the GitHub issue tracker). Once > there is consensus,
That's fine. But I still think we need to be in the habit of clearly and consistently documenting use cases and requirements in one place, rather than forcing people to dig through different places to reconstruct. Putting forward proposal spec language early, in my view, is more efficient ... > I'll open a GitHub issue to keep track of the > required textual changes to the spec. > > I found some supportive information in > http://www.ntvg.nl/publicatie/huidkanker-van-smeren-tot-snijden/volledig > (an article from a Dutch medical journal that uses Vancouver). > Bibliographic entry 21: > > 21. De Vijlder HC, Sterenborg HJCM, Neumann HAM, Robinson DJ, de Haas > ERM. Light fractionation significantly improves the response of > superficial basal cell carcinoma to aminolaevulinic acid photodynamic > therapy: five-year follow-up of a randomized, prospective trial. Acta > Derm Venereol. 2012;92:641-7 > > Both "De" and "de" are both Dutch non-dropping name particles, and, as > Frank has in one of his tests, only the one starting the bibliographic > entry gets capitalized. > > I don't know if things are different in other languages, though. Right. Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ xbiblio-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
