On 10/06/2014 09:32 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschnei...@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.
Of course, this is an extreme example, although not an unrealistic one.
It is fundamentally any different from my desire as I get older to be
able to change font size and refill paragraphs with ease. I see a
difference of scale, that is all.
I see these as completely different. There are some aspects of rendering that
generally do not interfere with intent. There are other aspects of rendering
that can easily interfere with intent.
Similarly for reading papers, if the rendering of the paper interferes
with the authors' message, that is a failure of the process.
Yes, I agree. Which is why, I believe, that the rendering of a paper
should be up to the reader
As this is why I believe that the authors' should be able to specify the
rendering of their paper to the extent that they feel is needed to convey the
intent of the paper.
.
Phil
peter
