- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 08:56:01 +0900
- To: public-html WG <public-html@w3.org>
Just to illustrate why some arguments can be misunderstood sometimes
(and there are more than two sides). James it is just taken as an
example, so let's not make it a personal issue.
Le 1 août 2007 à 06:29, James Graham a écrit :
> I would argue that semantics-for-the-sake-of-semantics is not
> Solving Real Problems (c.f. the design principles).
Why this sentence is an issue?
It paints a black and white situation. it characterizes two camps:
* one as a bunch of (not realistic) academics
* one as a bunch of (realistic) engineers.
I have seen this debate in many places in different circumstances.
* the student of humanities/the student of engineering
* the teacher/the factory worker
* etc.
academics, teachers, students of humanities are dealing with *real*
problems and they try to solve them. So in a discussion, if we start
by saying, "You are not in touch with reality", it removes all
possibility of discussions and convergence. Because on both camps,
people *know* they are dealing with real problems or issues. It is
specifically why they are talking about.
An electrician and a physicist knows what a lamp is and what it does.
They have a complete different understanding of it though. It doesn't
invalidate both of their points.
Just this simple sentence will put off many people in the discussion.
If repeated over and over, I would, personally, quit such a group.
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2007 23:56:07 UTC