Even if a CITATION file is included, there is an issue of what to put
in it.
Authorship of a book or paper is not always the simple matter that might
appear. With an R package, it can be a far from simple matter. We are
trying to adapt a tool, surely, that was designed for different
purposes.
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:01:44 +1100,
> John Maindonald (JM) wrote:
[...]
> Where there is a published paper or a book (such as MASS), or a
> manual for which a url can be given, my decision was to include
> that in the main list of references, but not to include references
> ther
On 5 Feb 2006, at 2:27 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:06:52 +1100 (EST),
>> John Maindonald (JM) wrote:
>
>> The bibtex citations provided by citation() do not
>> work all that well in cases where there is no printed
>> document to reference:
>
> That's why there is
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:06:52 +1100 (EST),
> John Maindonald (JM) wrote:
> The bibtex citations provided by citation() do not
> work all that well in cases where there is no printed
> document to reference:
That's why there is a warning at the end that they will need manual
editing
The bibtex citations provided by citation() do not
work all that well in cases where there is no printed
document to reference:
(1) A version field is needed, as the note field is
required for other purposes, currently trying to
sort out nuances that cannot be sorted out in the
author list (author,
