Reading Leo Stolov’s annotated Bibliography, it is very similar to my own. We both chose issues, that while not dangerous, represent inefficiencies/failures. These quality of life improvements represent our efforts for quality as engineers and developers.
Leo’s problem statement did a very good job of breaking down the problem. After reading his first paragraph, I immediately understood the individual components of the package delivery issue in Boston. He explains it in a way that any one (especially outside of a technical profession) would say “Obviously the way we do it is not ideal”. I also like that he summarized a potential solution right in the problem statement, something my annotated bibliography sincerely lacked.
The first thing I noticed about Leo’s sources is that he has a good mix of news stories and papers. I attempted to bring the same mix of our sources to my bibliography, and I believe it creates a valuable diversity.
Looking at his XML source, his code is very clean. The lines are broken at very precise intervals and he also spaced out any multiple authors into a new line. It makes his code clear to read by highlighting the sub-elements, and overall shows a carefulness and professional approach to his code. I noticed that he broke down some of his relevance and summary paragraphs into different types. Meaning that he would have two different summary’s or approaches with different types to the same article. This allowed him to really highlight the way he breaks down his thoughts. I found myself struggling to match myself to certain definitions, but Leo just incorporated both. I had not thought of doing so, but now will to help better define my own thoughts in XML.
