纸的曲折故事，一封信和编辑

A博士向1996年发表的x杂志提交了一篇文章.B博士于1997年1月写信给编辑，指出A博士A的错误。之后，B博士向期刊讨论了这一期刊更广泛的上下文错误。然后，B博士撤回了这篇文章并在3月底之前将其提交给Y期刊Y，他写的求职信是：“我们没有意识到已经描述了这个问题的任何其他文件......本文未在其他地方考虑。“在5月初，y期刊y发送了B博士的审查文章。与此同时，六月初，X博士的信函被接受。6月10日返回了B博士的修订版。如果他对此有异议，编辑要求A博士回复并问B博士。B博士于7月1日发布了以下回复：“如果您愿意，请随时向DR A询问。当我们发现错误时，我们与他相对应。但是，请注意，我们将一封信给X的编辑写了一封关于这个错误的，并期望他和他的同事会回应这一点。“ The editor of journal Y decided not to pursue a reply from Dr A on the grounds that Dr A would eventually have a reply in journal X. On 15 July, the letter from Dr B was published in journal X, together with a strong rebuttal from Dr A. On 8 November, Dr B’s article was published in journal Y. No mention of either his letter or Dr A’s response in journal X was made, and the editor of journal Y had seen neither piece of correspondence. The editor of journal X complained to his colleagues at journal Y that this episode represented dual publication, for which he plans to publish a notice to this effect. (1) Is he right to do so? (2) What more should he do? (3) What should be the response of the editor of journal Y?