[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...
URL: http://tug.org/pipermail/texhax/attachments/20071125/035d21f2/attachment.html 

More information about the texhax mailing list