<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 02/08/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">John Zelle</b> <<a href="mailto:john.zelle@wartburg.edu">john.zelle@wartburg.edu</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br><br>> Kay's big objection, that children have unequal rights as publishers,<br>> is still a concern.<br>><br><br>At the risk of sounding like Arthur, quotes (actually indirect references)<br>like this make me question the wisdom of Kay as an education guru. I have no
<br>idea what the context for this statement is, but it sounds patently<br>ridiculous. The "right to publish" is [etc .... etc.]</blockquote><div><br>I have no idea of the context either that's why I prefer to go for the scientific approach and won't develop more:
<br><br>1) Is it possible to have the source (link) of the statement to see the context and to judge by myself eventually ?<br><br>2) while not the case:<br><br><font size="2"><span>"If you're looking at something and you don't know where it comes from, if there's no pointer to the source, you can ignore it."
</span><br></font><br><span>Tim <b class="hilt">Berners</b>-<b class="hilt">Lee</b> (WWW 'father')</span><br><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4132752.stm" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" rel="nofollow">
<span>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4132752.stm
</span></a><br><br>Judging without sources (on faith then) seems a lot like "Guru" behavior to me . Maybe that's why some countries go easily to war, following their Guru without asking for the sources (something which could have been part of the curriculum maybe ).
<br><br>francois<br> </div><br></div><br>