Re: Merging sections 2 and 3

I have no objection to a single guidelines section with an A and B subsection.

Jutta

At 6:58 AM -0700 5/10/99, William Loughborough wrote:
>JT:: "...both guideline 2 and 3 are ultimately for everyone."
>
>WL: See how easy it is?  You've just merged *Sections* 2 & 3 by making
>them *guidelines* <g>.  The contents of Sections 2 & 3 are *just*
>guidelines and the differentiation along lines of whether they refer to
>the interface or the output are entirely specious. Because we arrived at
>the notion of separating them into "sections" on a particular basis
>doesn't mean that such a division has any useful purpose - and many of
>us feel that it is just a (very subtle?) form of ghettoization.  I still
>vote for merger.
>--
>Love.
>            ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
>http://dicomp.pair.com

Received on Monday, 10 May 1999 12:28:47 UTC