From: Mart Lubbers <mart@martlubbers.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 18:22:38 +0000 (+0200)
Subject: tasks
X-Git-Url: https://git.martlubbers.net/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=0a8733498050e832ce28cae2970f5bcd61d0a3dd;p=rsss1516.git

tasks
---

diff --git a/shorts2/tasks.tex b/shorts2/tasks.tex
index b6c46fc..33d78b8 100644
--- 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?)
-
+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
+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?)
+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
-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}
-	\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}