|
|
>>>Tables are not "part of" the text.
>
>> Some are, some are not. Also depends on what you the
>> technical device 'table' for.
Thu, 31 Aug 2006 07:08:15 -0400: "Brian M. Scott"
<b.scott@xxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:
>No, Peter is perfectly correct, because he isn't talking
>about a technical device. He's using the word 'table' in
>its normal sense in reference to the content of printed
>books. In that context tables and figures are extra-textual
>items.
Yes, that must be the explanation.
Merriam-Webster 10, however, does not make such a distinction:
===
5 a : a systematic arrangement of data usually in rows and columns for
ready reference b : a condensed enumeration : LIST <a table of
contents>
===
>> That's one possible use of 'tables'. I put them to wider use.
>
>You'll continue to talk at cross purposes until you realize
>that 'table' is not just a data-processing concept. A great
>many of the uses to which HTML tables are put, for instance,
>do not produce anything that Peter would call a table.
Probably, yes. So what would he call them?
|
|