A question about two texts tests whether you can use one author's view to judge a situation in the other. Start with the question to check who answers whom, then put each text's main point in a few words. If one text describes a problem, ask how the responding author's ideas apply to it. Use the responding author's own reason to judge the situation, because a useful suggestion may not be what that author would recommend.
Hints
- Hint 1
Text 1's author is doing the responding. Find what that author says researchers should be able to verify about a source.
- Hint 2
Compare Text 2's chart example with Text 1's final sentence. Ask how Text 1's standards apply to this problem.
Step-by-step
Apply one author's standards
Step 1Find Text 1's goal
The question has the author of Text 1 doing the responding, so let's judge Text 2 by that author's view. What should a citation let researchers check? Text 1 says verify precisely which version a researcher consulted, so identifying the version used is the goal.
- Step 2
Find what goes wrong
Text 2's chart example shows a citation later leading to a document with different numbers. Why can't readers work out which numbers were originally there? The files change, and dates and version histories are inconsistently recorded. Readers lose track of the source's earlier contents, even if the link still works.
- Step 3
Judge the proposed fixes
How would Text 1's author judge this case? They'd apply the need for persistent, standardized records to policy reports. Adding the date they were accessed records when someone visited, not what the file contained then; keeping one permanent link while publishers overwrite the file also loses the earlier version. Sending readers to the most current version misses the same goal because the newest version may not be the one cited.
- Step 4
Apply the full method
Text 1's stable, machine-readable links keep sources findable when documents move. How does Text 1 say platforms also tell versions apart? Platforms assign distinct identifiers to preprints, corrections, and new editions. Adopting persistent identifiers and explicit versioning gives policy reports both protections, so readers can identify the version originally cited. Choice A.