Chapter 14 Improvement

[aszasz]

Noticed the following during conversion:

• no landing page (and no formal explanation about what a financial model is anywhere... it would fit as a proper introduction) (partially fixed in Provisional land page content for Chapter 14 #141)
• there are no quotations (partially mitigated in Provisional land page content for Chapter 14 #141)
• Table 2 title does not fit with text (should check if values also)
• equation 1 has incorrect unit dimensions
• equation 2 is not an equation
• same url in all tables about exchange rates does not seem relevant
• there is an "i.e." in place of an "e.g"

---

Status:

• make provisional fixes
• get feedback from the the author (@aegauthier)

[aegauthier]

Okay -
Table 2: concern is correct - I will check with author

Equation 1: Are you saying that the denominator "hours" in the second variable should be "days"? I think I agree and can you change it? Do I need to change it? Do you want me to check with the author first? I will check nonetheless since I will be reaching out to him.

Equation 2: I agree. We can change it to Total days in the year - holidays - vacation - PTO (personal time off such as sick days) = available working days; although he wants to create a ratio...so let me check with the author about this as well, as I am not sure what he is trying to do here. Okay?

Exchange rate urls should just be deleted

Thanks for the diligence. Much appreciated

[aszasz]

I made provisional changes as I see fit, will wait for approval before merge (pr #146 ... to follow click in "show all checks" and "publication" at the end of the pull request):

Table title: "Fuel consuptiom cost by vehicle type"

Equation 1:

• The first part of equation results in hours, so the second should too (text is confuse but I guess it is about 15.04 hours for 2 drivers, so the result can be 42 and something (35 +15 would give 50 that is more than 44 as stated... by the paragraph following).
  Based on the title (hours/week) makes sense... check that out.
• Still... it is not an equation either, but an example: text was misleading on that regard, so I removed the saying "equation".
• It is a bad writing from my part but is, at least, making sense for now.

Equation 2:

• It is more like an equation for the ratio, but still is not on the sense that the text discusses input and output
• I've extended it and wrote text that would allow us to call it "Extra Human Resources for Rest Ratio Calculation Example"

[aegauthier]

I never heard from Diogo - will follow up now.