Hello Steve,
Thanks for your comments.
As Olivier commented, this update is what we hoped for.
A few further comments for you to consider:
SUMMARY SUB-SECTION
Thats a good suggestion.Done!
1. Should the summary state that this function calculates the
“principal value”, which is an accepted term I believe.
If we see Microsoft's description they have used arccosine everywhere
should we also shift to it. I actually continued what already exists but we
can consider. What do you say?
2. Similarly, would it be worth mentioning “arc cosine” as well as
“inverse trigonometric cosine”.
ARGUMENTS SUB-SECTION
Done!
1. Since the Syntax sub-section gives the argument name as Number, I
would suggest that the singular form is used in this subsection too.
2. A very minor point, but is it worth putting a plus sign before
“1”?
3. I would be wary about using the acronym NaN which may not be
familiar to some of our users. Perhaps replace with the more specific
“an invalid numeric value (#NUM!) error”.
Actually I should apologise as I somehow skipped this line and actually it
doesn't make any sense to me as well. Actually I found that this line is
coming from the description section of this
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/acos#:~:text=acos()%20method%20returns%20a,Math%20is%20not%20a%20constructor).
webpage but it makes little sense for our users here to be added hence I
have removed it.
4. Apologies but I do not know what the last sentence really means
(“Because ACOS is a static method of Math, you always use it as Math”).
Thanks
EXAMPLES SUB-SECTION
1. I think the format looks great.
Done
2. In description for third and fourth examples, radian and degree
should both be plural.
3. In description for fourth example, insert “by” before 180/PI().
4. In description for fifth example, again I would not bother with
the NaN acronym. So maybe change “error (NaN)” to “an error”. Also I
suspect you could safely delete “which is between -1 and 1” as it is
already been stated.
About this as I earlier mentioned we don't aim at creating such gifs for
all purposes but it will be fine for some trigonometric and statistical the
distributions ones. Otherwise if you see I have edited ABS function as well
but I didn't care about adding a gif or even an image there. Also Olivier
seem to like this one here.
5. A point for discussion – is the dynamic GIF appropriate for
functions like this or is animation unnecessary for such a simple
function? Would a static GIF convey the necessary information
adequately?
6. Another point for discussion – as the GIF covers the whole of the
function and isn’t really an example, would it be more appropriately
placed in the Additional details sub-section?
It did. Thanks
I hope these thoughts help. And please keep up the good work!
One thing I would like to add is that this was the first one hence I took
reviews to avoid getting in a situation where I am working 4-5 days with
different minds but now since we are on the right track as we discussed in
the meeting I'll send 20-30 function pages for review in the weekend of
your convenience.
Regards,
Ronnie