terminological obscurity

["Martin v. Löwis"]

Arthur wrote:
> But then nothing can be determined about the hetergenousity or the
> homogenousity of any particular context for this data  by reference to
> the data itself.
> 
> Though the reverse is not true.
> 
> In the conversation I am having this is a significant point.
> 
> But I suspect we are not having the same conversation.

I'm uncertain. I would see a significant point if you would
admit that "a list is for homogenous data" is not a tautology.
You certainly need a context to make a statement about
homogeneity, but that context is *not* the mere fact that
the data are all stored in the list.

Regards,
Martin