- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 11:30:42 -0700
- To: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
- CC: semantic-web@w3.org, public-lod@w3.org
On 10/06/2014 11:00 AM, Phillip Lord wrote: > "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> writes: > >> On 10/06/2014 09:32 AM, Phillip Lord wrote: >>> "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> writes: >>>>> Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the >>>>> paper, are they? >>>> >>>> For reviewing, what the authors intend is extremely important. Having >>>> different rendering of the paper interfere with the authors' message is >>>> something that should be avoided at all costs. >>> >>> Really? So, for example, you think that a reviewer with impared vision >>> should, for example, be forced to review a paper using the authors >>> rendering, regardless of whether they can read it or not? >> >> No, but this is not what I was talking about. I was talking about >> interfering with the authors' message via changes from the rendering >> that the authors' set up. > > It *is* exactly what you are talking about. Well, maybe I was not being clear, but I thought that I was talking about rendering changes interfering with comprehension of the authors' intent. peter [...]
Received on Monday, 6 October 2014 18:31:21 UTC