repositories
/
rsss1516.git
/ commitdiff
commit
grep
author
committer
pickaxe
?
search:
re
summary
|
shortlog
|
log
|
commit
| commitdiff |
tree
raw
|
patch
|
inline
| side by side (parent:
57abd9a
)
tasks
author
Mart Lubbers
<mart@martlubbers.net>
Tue, 7 Jun 2016 18:22:38 +0000
(20:22 +0200)
committer
Mart Lubbers
<mart@martlubbers.net>
Tue, 7 Jun 2016 18:22:38 +0000
(20:22 +0200)
shorts2/tasks.tex
patch
|
blob
|
history
diff --git
a/shorts2/tasks.tex
b/shorts2/tasks.tex
index
b6c46fc
..
33d78b8
100644
(file)
--- a/
shorts2/tasks.tex
+++ b/
shorts2/tasks.tex
@@
-34,22
+34,34
@@
implementation of the interaction.
\subsubsection*{Strengths \& Weaknesses}
%Strength (what positive basis is there for publishing/reading it?)
\subsubsection*{Strengths \& Weaknesses}
%Strength (what positive basis is there for publishing/reading it?)
-
+The strength of the paper is the elaboration. The writing is very verbose and
+it would almost be possible to recreate the entire application from the paper.
+There is a lot of elaboration
%Weaknesses
%Weaknesses
+A weakness is the big heaps of implementation and the size of the images. The
+introducton on iTasks is a tad short and the introduction to SVG is a bit too
+long.
\subsubsection*{Evaluation}
%Evaluation (if you were running the conference/journal where it was published,
%would you recommend acceptance?)
\subsubsection*{Evaluation}
%Evaluation (if you were running the conference/journal where it was published,
%would you recommend acceptance?)
+I would advise to accept the paper on the condition that the implementation is
+shortened and especially shorten section 4. More elaboration on iTasks would be
+more benificial since it is lesser known.
%Comments on quality of writing
The text is very readable and really guides the reader through the process of
%Comments on quality of writing
The text is very readable and really guides the reader through the process of
-development. There is a lot of implementation
+development. There is a lot of implementation that can help the reader to
+understand the problem, however the sheer lines of code presented is very big.
+There are also a big number of images.
\subsubsection*{Discussion}
%Queries for discussion
\begin{itemize}
\subsubsection*{Discussion}
%Queries for discussion
\begin{itemize}
- \item
+ \item The number of implementations decrease drastically.
+ \item The current application is way to slow to function properly as the
+ author mentions, it should be improved before publishing it.
\end{itemize}
\end{document}
\end{itemize}
\end{document}