(note: this is a repeat of a posting that was badly
formatted which I attempted to abort -- if you receive this
twice, please excuse me.)
Chris and Jill Wren wrote on Dec. 1st:
" It strikes us that this focus and assumption have obscured
the benefits offered by page numbers -- benefits that match
or surpass the benefits citation-reform proponents have
noted for paragraph numbers and that can with equal
effectiveness achieve the goal of providing citable
public-domain divisions that work in all media."
=================================================
We started off in our discussions in Wisconsin with a
"vendor-neutral" page numbering system. In the end we
abandoned it in favor of what all saw as a superior system,
paragraph numbering.
The reasons for preferring paragraphs to pages have been
previously enumerated:
(1) integral part of the author's communication,
(2)not dependent upon a particular medium (or preparation
for a medium),
(4) precision.
Your article ,it seems to me, suggests some ways in which
page numbering can approach paragraph numbering in utility,
but doesn't make a convincing case that it equals or
surpasses paragraph numbering. Some of the argument rests
on converting a fault into a virtue, i.e. page numbering is
good because it's imprecision allows a lawyer to avoid being
nailed for malpractice when he miscites.
But, what is lacking is an honest appraisal of page
numbering's faults.
The principal one is that page numbering is media and
edition specific. Page breaks doen't just depend on paper
size, but on typeface, font, margins, letterspacing,
leading, etc. All of these have to do with the method of
publication, not the author's communication.
Page breaks are inherently dependent on some reference
printed (or prepared for printing) document. In the absence
of having that particular physical document in hand, they
are simply arbitrary marks. To one who does not have the
reference document before him, page numbers ( as in star
pagination) are simply a sequential number inserted at
points somewhat equal in distance from each other.
All documents printed on cut paper have , however, their own
physical page breaks. Because of all the variables that
make up the page numbering on the reference document, page
breaks can rarely be physically duplicated in another
edition. Thus,page systems always have the problem of "page
32 of the court's opinion, printed on page 129-131 of your
edition of case law and on page 788-789 of my edition". We
invented parallel cites to make up for this deficiency, but
parallel cites are grossly inefficient, and can only
support use of a very few editions.
Compare that to a paragraph numbering system. If I say
"Genesis 11:7", you, I, and anyone else with a Bible can find
the same cite (of course, religion being what it is, we may
have different wording <g>). We can do so easily, and
without concern for whether I have the "easy reading"
version and you have the pocket version.
Note that so far in this discussion I have not referred to
new technology. Paragraph numbering makes sense on paper.
"U.S. Constitution, Art III, Sec. 2" points to the same
place regardless of whether we have the original or a
reprinted copy. "U.S. Constitution, p. 12" is futile unless
we have the same precise copy of the Constitution.
Technology does enter into it, however. It does so in this
sense, in my opinion:
We ought not lightly change citation systems. If we do
change them, we ought to change them so that the new one
lasts a long time.
I have a reasonable expectation that paragraphs will last a
long time regardless of what our media turn into. I do not
have the same expectation for pages, because pages are a
byproduct of a particular way of publishing opinions .
Pages came into our life when we began printing on cut paper.
I expect their use to decline as printing on paper becomes obsolete.
I probably won't live to see that, but at this point I would
be foolish not to see the handwriting (without page numbers)
on the wall.
Indeed, the signs are perhaps too evident. Your article, in
this medium, had no page numbers, nor did my reply.
Regards,
John Lederer
Chair, Technology Committee, Wisconsin
State Bar
(but speaking only for myself)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST