Re: OT: query regarding HTML

["Carl Distefano" cld@xxxxxxxx]

Reply to note from Harry Binswanger  Sat, 25 Feb 2017
13:53:35 -0500

Harry,

> Then we can ask the deeper question: is there an objective value
> in printing these things out, as opposed to having them available
> onscreen?

Good question. This Scientific American piece summarizes the state of
research as of about four years ago:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/#

And this paper from 1992 reviews empirical studies from the early days:

https://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~adillon/Journals/Reading.htm

Both articles conclude that there's no pat answer, but I think your
question can safely be answered "Yes", at least some of the time. At
any rate, the common wisdom in the legal profession, at least among my
colleagues, is that you catch more errors by proofreading from paper
than from a screen. For myself, I always review the last several
versions of a pleading on paper before filing the final version -- even
though, ironically, most court filings these days are done
electronically. On the other hand, after reviewing several drafts on
paper, I often find that I catch additional errors when I go back to
the screen, so it may be that the change of medium, rather than the
medium itself, is what aids proofreading. It's pretty clear from the
studies, though, that the medium affects the way in which one's
perceptual apparatus is deployed, and that paper and screen each have
their unique advantages.

--
Carl Distefano
cld@xxxxxxxx