-
> `For now, the primary Manubot output is HTML intended to be viewed in a web browser.` → I would insist a bit more on this part because it is a real strength if you consider a future integration with…
-
review comments/requests: see
- [x] Strengthen statement about "no objective system " for authorship #123
- [x] further emphasize strikethrough formatting for errors in extant versions #122
- …
-
> On the Authorship, how do you deal with people being not identified (e.g. only a GitHub pseudo)?
-
The output of `fignos` seems to put the id/anchor to the image in the `` tag itself instead of in the containing `` element. It might seem sensible to put it on the ``, however there may be cases wher…
-
> What is the procedure when you submit an article to a journal? Do you have a set of pandoc templates or do you work directly on the word or latex output to match journal requirements?
-
We could have a folder with R/Python scripts that create the figures and with the necessary data to make them. That way it will be easy to tweak and update the figures.
It seems like other manuscri…
-
> Table 1. → You should add a WYSIWIG feature that is present in a number of platforms and important for a lot of non technical people. Same for inline comments and diff colorization.
-
I assume this happens but want to double check (and am at the far end of a lousy Internet connection right now). So this is really more of an "@ctb todo" item.
-
The statement "there is no objective system" reads like it could be a practical statement as in "we haven't built one yet", while I believe (and think the authors agree with me, based on the paragrap…
-
> The layout of the PDF and the HTML could benefit from a better template (and font stack). This a totally minor point, but it might help to attract new people.