The article's title reflects the content and purpose of the article?
Partially
Was the aim of the work clearly defined and successfully accomplished?
Partially
Does the article embrace contemporary issues in the area?
Yes
Does the article contain new and not published results?
Yes
Was the article clearly written and easily understood?
Easily understood
Conclusions illustrate the research results, recommendations and giving suggestions for future research
Partially
The references are full and grounded?
No
How adequate was the writing and used terminology?
Adequate
Remarks and suggestions to the authors of the article
- The authors noted that the regulatory framework for developing and implementing an urban geographic information system was reviewed and analyzed. Unfortunately, the article did not provide a minimal list of examples of the current regulatory framework of the subject area. Supplementing this list in the paper will confirm the actual study of regulations.
- The reviewed list of references contained works that have lost their relevance, while domestic developments in urban planning cadastre at the local, regional and national levels were absent.
The comments will allow us to account for the best experience in the development of GIS municipal and to research this issue more deeply.
I confirm that there is no conflict of interests regarding reviewed article.
I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have insignificant reservations, as outlined above.
Comments
Thanks to the authors!
Comments corrected