I think it does - these are the sorts of situations & requirements that really underscore the need for a general mechanism that can underlie all sorts of printed variations... On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Feldkamp, Anthony (LNG-DAY) <> wrote:
> I did review and agree with Chet. I did have one question about handling
> modifications, such as the new CO repoters. CO add an 'M1' to the opinion
> number, but I thought that was covered under : > >>> 6) It should address a range of citation types and variations to > >>> address a variety of needs and practical domains. For example, it > >>> should be capable of traversing or making pinpoint references across > >>> different instances, compilations or presentations of the same > >>> material; of disambiguating the correct target when a citation points > >>> to a location with multiple resources; of supporting automated > >>> production and automated consumption of the information. > > > >
