Lineland vs. %list folks words - a brief review

[Dale L. Larson]

> accurate in this regard, it would have cleared up all confusion -- and the

I don't understand your several mentions of accuracy and attribution in
this post. I don't know of any inaccuracies. Could you please give me an
example of something you believe is inaccurate in Lineland's attributions? 

As a matter of style, you might have prefered court reporter style or
something.  It's OK if you don't like the book's style, but I don't think
it is fair to call it inaccurate. 

Yes, if you turn to page x and put your finger on a paragraph, you may
have to turn back a page or two and read forward to know who's talking. 
Every part is attributed, but in a back-and-forth, there often isn't an
attribution at the beginning of each paragraph, just one attribution at
the beginning of the exchange (which may go on for pages, mostly pages of
Jules) and then font changes or other indications let the reader know who 
is speaking. 

There may be some cases where the reader stumbles a little and has to
think for a minute to determine who's talking, where perhaps there should
have been better indications, but as far as I know, the reader always CAN
figure it out.  Obviously, we'd like to get rid of any such places,
because they make for less smooth reading. But they don't constitute
inaccuracy, just poor flow! 

dale