\documentclass{cj} % This is the right format to use next round up --dl
\usepackage{times}
\input{defs}

\newif\ifprintletter

%%% Set this to true to print a4 on letter 
%%% (it moves the page up a little bit, so the whole printable
%%% area fits on a letter page). However, on my previewer, it cuts off the top
\printlettertrue
\printletterfalse

%%% Set this to false to get rid of the debug text and reviews
\debugtexttrue
\debugtextfalse

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%%% This is a hack to make the pages come out closer to the top when printing on letter paper
\ifprintletter \special{header=printa4} \fi 
%%%

%\usepackage{verbatim}
\usepackage{graphicx}

\pagestyle{plain} % show page numbers --dl
\input{title}

\begin{document}

\maketitle
\input{abstract}

\Section{Introduction}{intro}
\input{intro}

\Section{Desired Properties}{properties}
\input{properties}

\Section{Challenge Problem}{challenge}
\input{challenge}
\input{aj-solution}
\input{hj-solution}
\input{requirements}

\Section{Combining Modules and Aspects}{motiv}\label{Section:syntax}
\input{motiv} 

\Section{{\longAC}s}{ac}
\input{ac-solution}
\input{langnotes}

\Section{Evaluation and Related Work}{lesson}
\input{related}

\Section{Conclusion}{conc}
\input{conclusion}

\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
\bibliography{%
references%
,crossref%
,biblio%
}

\RevB{
A great strength of the paper is the comparison of the same example in the three different systems. This could be in the body of the paper, not as an appendix.
}

\RevC{I am somewhat concerned about the appendices. I am not sure why this material was even included as an appendix. It seems like it could have easily served as a 
comparative section in the main paper (perhaps somewhere between sections 3 and 4). Or, if you feel it needs to remain as an appendix, I would suggest trimming it down somewhat. My primary recommendation to the editor will be to do something to fix the length of the appendices.}

\RevB{
After having presented the main thesis, the authors can touch upon the advantages. 
After providing the details of the language, the authors need to return to the advantages in more detail, discussing how the features of the language support each of them in term.
}
\RevB{The paper needs at least a couple  of paragraphs on the implementation.  }

\revC{
Page 11- references: first reference does not seem to be properly cited (?) begins with "1999" 
Page 11- references: Do you have the page numbers for Aldrich and Chambers, Clarke and Walker, and Kiczales (96)? 
Page 11- references: "AspectJ Team, X.P." What does the "X.P." mean here? 
Page 12- references: Would it be better to cite the GoF book, rather than this tech report? 
Page 12- references: the reference to the Ossher et al. paper has a mixture of references to 1993 and 1995. Please make the year references consistent, and the
complete reference consistent with the other OOPSLA references. 
Page 12- references: the two papers referenced by Tarr et al. are actually the same paper. Please delete one of the references, and fix the citation in the manuscript.

REFERENCES: 

I have noticed that there are some details missing from the reference section. Please could you answer my queries below.
  
Queries: 
General. Please construct references in the following style: 
1. The references should appear in the text in numerical order, as should the reference list. 2. Where there are more than 10 contributing authors please list only the first author and use et al. 3. The following format for references should be followed:

 
Journal article: 
Galton, A. (1992) Logic as a formal method. Comp. J., 35, 431-440. (author name, year, title of paper, title of journal, volume number, page numbers)

 
Book: 
Hogger, C. (1990) Essentials of Logic Programming. Clarendon Press, Oxford. (author name, year, title of book, publisher, publisher location)

 
Chapter: 
Harel, D. (1984) Dynamic logic. In Gabbay, D. and Guenther, F. (eds), Handbook of Philosophical Logic. D. Reidel, Dordrecht. (author name, year, title of chapter, editors names, title of book, publisher, publisher location)

 
Conference: 
Crochemore, M. and Verin, R. (1997) Direct construction of compact directed acyclic word graphs. Proceedings of CPM 97, Cambridge, MA, 12-14 August, pp.~192-211. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. (author name, year, title of conference, place of conference, date of conference, page numbers in proceedings, publisher, publisher location)

 
Technical documents: 
ITU-T. Z.500 (1997) Framework on formal methods in conformance testing. International Telecommunications Union, Geneva, Switzerland. 

(document number, year, document title, publisher, publisher location) 
  
In particular, some of your references   are missing various details such as conference dates, publisher name and location,  page numbers in proceedings, or publisher location in books references.
 
Please could you check your references carefully and make sure that they comply with the format above? 
  
Thank you. 
}

%%% \appendix
%%% \HIDE{
%%% johan oct 25,2002:
%%% The stuff in here is both out of date and overly verbose.
%%% Some of it is good: the current paper has NOTHING about
%%% sharing or multiple attachments
%%% \Section{Sharing and State}{motiv2} 
%%% \input{motiv2}
%%% \Ssect{Join Graphs and Multiple Attachments}{join}
%%% \input{join} 
%%%}

\end{document}