ÿþ
| Do you have any suggestions for other improvements to publCIF? | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | Response Date | Response Text | |||||
| 1 | Mar 15, 2011 2:45 PM | no | |||||
| 2 | Mar 15, 2011 11:35 AM | Direct submission from publCIF sounds very useful. Perhaps it could enforce checks on references and force the author to respond to inconsistencies before the submission is finalised? This could also be the place for a more comprehensive database search. | |||||
| 3 | Mar 15, 2011 8:58 AM | Not really, it is very nice! | |||||
| 4 | Mar 15, 2011 4:46 AM | I don't use it | |||||
| 5 | Mar 15, 2011 3:47 AM | Does publCIF highlight wrongly formatted reference? Haven't experienced it. | |||||
| 6 | Mar 14, 2011 11:32 PM | NO ... those above are excellent additions! | |||||
| 7 | Mar 14, 2011 11:26 PM | I know about it, but must start to use it!!! | |||||
| 8 | Mar 14, 2011 8:12 PM | I like to check the references but often the check of IUCr references doesn't work (this may be because I sit behind a firewall), and other references aren't checked. Since there are often typo's in authors' names or surnames and first names swapped it would be nice to have those references that have a problem flagged for checking, rather than having to check each one individually. | |||||
| 9 | Mar 14, 2011 7:01 PM | no | |||||
| 10 | Mar 14, 2011 6:09 PM | No | |||||
| 11 | Mar 14, 2011 5:12 PM | Sometimes it is still difficult to find a syntax error. The message "it should be obvious..." is not true! | |||||
| 12 | Mar 14, 2011 4:38 PM | The "mercury-like" window available in enCIFer was very useful (for me). Actually, both enCIFer and publCIF are great, and fusion of all functionalities would result in a complete software for edition. | |||||
| 13 | Mar 14, 2011 3:58 PM | There is still often a lag between the "text" window and the "CIF" window. Otherwise, it's a great program! | |||||
| 14 | Mar 14, 2011 3:46 PM | generator of _chemical_name_systematic | |||||
| 15 | Mar 14, 2011 3:01 PM | Automatic line breaks created by publcif tend to look HORRIBLE when looking at the file in a pure text editor. The file being locked up after finding some problems with cited articles is a bit annoying (but that's more important for authors, not editors). Could the layout (e.g. font used for special characters) be changed to resemble more what is seen in a final printcif document? | |||||
| 16 | Mar 14, 2011 2:59 PM | Upload my co-editor revision(s) from publCIF and launch my web browser at the 'paper details' page. This is probably covered by (ii) above. | |||||
| 17 | Mar 14, 2011 2:27 PM | choice to omit tables of coordinates and displacement parameters for theses and reports | |||||
| 18 | Mar 14, 2011 2:25 PM | I have noticed a number of bugs in edition, which makes some time easier to exit PublCif to make changes (viz., cut'n'paste with special characterrs, etc) | |||||
| 19 | Mar 14, 2011 2:07 PM | Generation of reprints with the chemical schemes and figures | |||||
| 20 | Mar 14, 2011 1:59 PM | English dictionnary to check the spelling of words. | |||||
| 21 | Mar 14, 2011 1:53 PM | The above answers are from the perspective of an author rather than an editor. Would spell check insistent on UK spelling? | |||||
| 22 | Mar 14, 2011 1:40 PM | No | |||||
| 23 | Mar 14, 2011 1:40 PM | I should use it more often! | |||||