I think a summary to start a long article is a good practise and should
be encouraged.

I'm not the first to write that having some sort of summary to introduce
a *long* posting is sensible, if for no other reason than to give the
reader a heads-up on what's to follow.

However, I'm not sure making it a "rule" to have an "abstract" is going
to help.  These are heavily loaded words.  And in any event, how would
we define "long"?

Perhaps, we can just "encourage" posters of long messages to put a bit
of a "summary" at the beginning?

Cheers.
Fil
PS: note: the first sentence of this post is a short summary of a short
post. :-)

Ken Friedman wrote:
> Friends,
>
> Tim's comments sent some interesting emails my way. After with Tim's on
> list post asking me NOT to write abstracts, I got a few off-list notes
> arguing both sides of the case. Interestingly, these were opposing
> positions. Each emphasized different aspects of the question.
>
> When Rosan suggested that we preface long notes with an abstract, I
> thought that was OK. Again, this assumes that we all treat these matters
> equitably, each of us working in a way that makes our views clear. The
> request for an abstract represents a desire for clarity and concise
> information. So does a request for an explicit statement, clarification
> on a puzzling issue, or the answer to a question. Since I am usually
> ready to provide these, I thought the request for abstracts reasonable
> enough. I did qualify my response in terms of reciprocity and equality.
>
> Now some of the notes I have had suggest that abstracts would be a
> disservice to the list. One argument is that some list members will find
> them intimidating because they might feel obliged to write abstracts as
> well. Another argument is that we should read what our colleagues post
> in a list of this kind. A third argument is that even long posts are
> usually not the kinds of journal articles that require an abstract. (I
> admit that my long post the other day was journal length. The word count
> was roughly 5,500 words.)
>
> I am curious about how others feel. We have had a request for abstracts.
> That sounds reasonable to me. We have had a request not to post
> abstracts. That sounds equally reasonable to me.
>
> This kind of question helps to shape list practice. I would welcome
> comments to the list that allow everyone to read and respond.
>
> Warm wishes,
>
> Ken
>
> p.s. I can truly say that I agree with both sides on this question. My
> equanimity reminds me of an interesting story about Franklin Delano
> Roosevelt when he was president of the United States.
>
> When Congress was considering an important bill, the majority leader of
> the Senate came to ask Roosevelt for his support. The president listened
> carefully to the case, nodded as he listened, and finally said,
> "Senator, I agree with you 100%."
>
> Later the same day, the minority leader came to him, asking for his
> support again the same bill. Roosevelt listened, nodded wisely, and
> ended the meeting. As the senator left, Roosevelt shook his hand, and
> said, "Senator, I'm glad you took the time to share your views with me.
> You can count on my support. I agree with you 100%."
>
> Eleanor Roosevelt was present at both meetings. After the second
> meeting, she looked at President Roosevelt, shook her head, and said,
> "Franklin! I'm ashamed of you. You have promised to support both men on
> diametrically opposing grounds. You should take a position and hold to it!"
>
> "Eleanor," smiled Mr. Roosevelt. "You're perfectly right. I agree with
> you 100%."
>
>

--
Prof. Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University                         Tel: 416/979-5000 x7749
350 Victoria St.                           Fax: 416/979-5265
Toronto, ON                                email: [log in to unmask]
M5B 2K3  Canada                            http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/