- From: Lars Eighner <eighner@crl.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 03:01:08 -0500
- To: www-html@w3.org
I find the following statement in the draft: ><h2>Lines and Paragraphs<a name="h-7.3.3"> </a></h2> >Authors traditionally divide their thoughts and arguments into >sequences of paragraphs. The organization of information into >paragraphs is not affected by how the paragraphs are presented: >paragraphs that are double-justified contain the same thoughts as >those that are left-justified. -- http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-html40-970708/struct/text.html#h-7.3.3 This statement appears to be summary. It is not qualified in any way. If it had said "So far as can be expressed in HTML, the organization of information into . . ." I would not have found it remarkable. But as it is, the statement seems to mean to be universal in it applicability. This has lead me to believe that there simply are dissenting opinions within "the HTML community" and that this is an expression of a central doctrine that is not open to question. Some people have told me that I have drawn the wrong conclusion, so I am here to see whether I have. I am not interested in engaging in a debate of the truth value of the proposition, but only in understanding the nature of the statement. To this end, I pose these questions: 1. Is the sentence "The organization of information into paragraphs is not affected by how the paragraphs are presented: paragraphs that are double-justified contain the same thoughts as those that are left-justified," meant to be universal in its application, or does it apply to some more restricted domain such "documents in HTML." If it is meant to be less than universal, why isn't it qualified in some way? 2. If it is meant to be universal, is its basis in doctrine or in evidence? If this is meant to be a summary of some body of evidence, wouldn't some reference to this material be in order? 3. Is there any conceivable evidence that could disprove this statement? This is not the question of whether any contrary evidence exists, it is the question of whether this statement could be contradicted by any conceivable evidence. Is this a question that could be resolved by science, or is it a matter of faith? 4. Is there any discernible dissent from this statement within "the HTML community"? Could dissent possibly exist? Thank you for your consideration of these particular questions. -- Lars Eighner= http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner = http://www.crl.com/%7Eeighner = 12550 Vista View #302 (210)979-7124 eighner@crl.com eighner@io.com == San Antonio TX 78231 alt.books.lars-eighner "At better ISPs everywhere"= ===NEW!==Lizbeth's Home Page ==> http://www.crl.com/%7Eeighner/lizbeth.html=
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 1997 04:29:03 UTC