You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Since an ER is not an official OGC document (such as a standard), is there any reason to have only "normative references" in the References section? Seems to me that any reference for a given ER should be in the References section. Thus, no need to put "informative" references in the Bibliography. This would be a minor change to the template and use of the template.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I support the proposal by @cnreediii because it would bring the template in line with scientific papers, technical reports and other research documents.
Since an ER is not an official OGC document (such as a standard), is there any reason to have only "normative references" in the References section? Seems to me that any reference for a given ER should be in the References section. Thus, no need to put "informative" references in the Bibliography. This would be a minor change to the template and use of the template.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: