[texhax] In defence of Edsko
Chris A Rowley
ca_rowley at yahoo.co.uk
Sun Nov 25 18:18:12 CET 2007
None of this should be construed as critcism or comment on Edsko's original question and the typographic design he describes; he and anyone can do whatever he/she wishes, IMNSHO.
But Phil (as ever:-) is WRONG! So there!
> Do we lose a great
> deal if we fail to identify each and every paragraph visually ?
Yes: a logical paragraph is neither more nor less than a unit of text that should be clearly and consistently distinguished by the design. It 'should be' used
to contain a single idea if one follows the rules of good writing style as in Wikipedia but it is not defined by the idea; if it were then any text in which more than one idea is intertwined within sentences would have paragraphs that do not consist of complete sentences; whilst such text may be bad style, it is grammatically correct and still needs splitting into paragraphs.
> Should not the /content/ make it plain what is, and what
> is not, a paragraph ?
Definitely not: a subset distinguished only by its content is not and never will be called a paragraph. Visual splitting into paragraphs helps identify the stucture and hence the details of the content,never the other way round.
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the texhax