View source for Talk:Near infrared imaging

Hi Adam,
Thanks for the review. We like all the changes you and the other reviewers made. We made it D_{PF} to avoid confusion that might arise thinking that D, P, and F are separate variables. Thanks for catching isosbestic. We placed a space in the citation as requested.
Cheers,
David and Mari




No significant comments - I think it basically looks fine.

I've made one minor change in the text - changed "isospectic" to "isosbestic point". I hadn't come across "isospectic" before. The Google Test suggests that it's correct; the Oxford English Dictionary suggests that it's not. 

Two minor stylistic suggestions - your abbreviation for "DPF" has "PF" in subscript which it unusual - is that intentional or a formatting thing? And the citation style appears a little clumsy. It's hard to read without at least a space between the surname and date. Is that imposed by Scholarpedia?

Otherwise, I think it's fine. Nice to have a NIRS article on scholarpedia.

All best wishes 

Adam (I don't think this is supposed to be anonymous is it?)