search

euroscipy / euroscipy_proceedings

Tools used to generate the SciPy conference proceedings
Other
13 stars 51 forks source link

High-Content Digital Microscopy with Python #15

Closed FabriceSalvaire closed 10 years ago

FabriceSalvaire commented 10 years ago

I changed the title of my contribution to something more meaningful. I will continue to review the paper these next days.

FabriceSalvaire commented 10 years ago

I added the latex source code of the figures and the Makefile to generate the PDF.

khinsen commented 10 years ago

After reading this paper, I am confused about an essential point: is this a proposition for a system that remains to be developed, or the description of existing software? I wonder because many of the formulations suggest the former ("We will discuss in this paper how the Python ecosystem could provide efficiently a software platform for the digital microscopy." etc.), whereas there are real images shown (Fig. 10) and the last page mentions practical experience.

FabriceSalvaire commented 10 years ago

I don't take care to these formulations and the usage of "could". I effectively implemented a software based on what it is discussed on this paper, but this paper covers a larger topic than this implementation which is optimised for a particular field of application. My aim is not to talk about a particular implementation but how we can build a framework to do that. So it is why I written "could" instead of "can", but "can" should be the right formulation.

khinsen commented 10 years ago

For the reader it makes a big difference. When I started to read the paper, I thought "wow, a huge design that was never implemented, this can't possibly work". I continued reading only because I had seen the figure at the end. It's important to make clear what actually works and what is just a proposal for the future.

FabriceSalvaire commented 10 years ago

I rechecked my paper and I found a lot of "could" occurrences are mistakes and must be replaced by "can". For example this sentence "A texture - could - have from one to four colour components" doesn't make sense.

I will fix that Friday evening.

FabriceSalvaire commented 10 years ago

I reviewed my paper and corrected the huge "could" noise. Thus now the confusion should be gone. Moreover I improved a little bit the text. I don't see anybody in my neighbourhood that will read seriously my draft, thus I rely on the reviewers to report mistakes, confusions and so on. Because writing is like to drive in a tunnel.

NelleV commented 10 years ago

Overall, I think the content is interesting and good, but there are some problems in term of formulation and grammatical mistakes. I'll do my best to suggest a few changes.

FabriceSalvaire commented 10 years ago

I merged your pull request. Many thanks for these corrections. I expected some formulation and grammatical mistakes. How good is the english now?