[seqfan] Re: Position of new material

[Benoît Jubin]

I agree with these rules and their order.
Actually, many "comments" sections are long and heterogeneous lists
where it can be hard to locate what you're looking for.  Would it be
possible/desirable to create sections or subsections like "other
values" (for instance for values which come after an unknown value,
and hence cannot appear in the data, and also for bounds on other
values), "alternate definitions", "asymptotic behavior", and others,
to organize a little bit these comments?

Benoit

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 7:31 PM,  <franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:
> Is there, or should there be, a standard rule for where new material is to
> be placed in the comments or formulas section of a sequence? My opinion is
> that the following rules should be applied, in order:
>
> 1) If the new material is closely related to existing material, it should be
> placed next to it.
> 2) More significant material should be placed before items that are more
> peripherally related to the sequence.
> 3) Place new items after existing items.
>
> Basically, I think the sequence entry should try to present some degree of
> narrative rather than simply reflecting the history of the entry.
>
> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>