Dan made some odd comments days ago and I interpreted this as
"The Griffin white paper is good, then bad". Dan's new message
claims it's good again.**********
Dan said;
"I've read Dr. Griffin's paper, and while it is generally good, it does overlook much of the near-field issues that a good strong reference (Steven's recommendation of Fundamentals of Acoustics by Kinsler et al is excellent) cover."
Then he said;
"The paper linked is Jim Griffin's paper, and it's not accurate at all."
http://forum.soundillusions.net/showthread.php?t=38445&page=1&pp=15
Then he said here days later;
"Anyway, IF you had to do a near-field line array, I think Dr. Griffin's paper is a good starting point, and said so up-front."
**********
It's not a big deal really, but it's easy to misjudge when the
poster is sending mixed signals or changing their minds midstream :)