Posted by mbstevens on 12/08/07 03:00

dorayme wrote:

> Validity is purely a relation between statements and there are
> many assertions (including the conclusion) that can be false
> while yet the argument remains valid. (Just as a website can pass
> a validation test and yet have every other kind of fault)

Just to avoid confusion about something I think you already know,
but which got me thinking:

The 'validation' test of a website has an unclear relation to valid
arguments in logic. Validaton by the HTML validator
is about well formedness only, without a model (interpretation).

Valid in logic has to do not only with well formedness
of the argument, but with the interpretation of the logic
-- in the case of standard first order logic, of truth and falsity.

The 'model' of HTML, if it could even be called that,
_might_ have to do, vaguely, with either

1) semantic markup -- this
semantics not of truth and falsity but or some vague
relation to the use of terms like 'list' and 'title' in
natural languages to describe parts of a page.

or,

2) the way the client software 'interprets' the markup for actual display.
This is incompletely developed in the specs.


> ........
> If I thought anyone in the whole world was still awake I would go
> on... but even I have limits when I hear snoring... <g>

No, that was admirable.

[Back to original message]