Dear David,
David Winsemius wrote:
A) It is not an error, only a warning. Wouldn't it seem reasonable to
issue such a warning if you have data that violates the distributional
assumptions?
I am not questioning the approach. I am only trying to understand why a
(rather expensive) source of documentation and the behaviour of a
function are not aligned.
B) You did not include any of the data
Data attached as R object.
C) Wouldn't this be more appropriate to the author of the book if this
is "exactly what was suggested" there?
I think it will be definitively appropriate, but only when I am certain
I am not doing anything wrong.
Regards
--
Corrado Topi
PhD Researcher
Global Climate Change and Biodiversity
Area 18,Department of Biology
University of York, York, YO10 5YW, UK
Phone: + 44 (0) 1904 328645, E-mail: ct...@york.ac.uk
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
