Hi all,
I wonder when the term 'Table 1' entered Newspeak. I heard students use it
rather recently, and to me it sounds derogative, as though they would treat that
table as a black box generated by some program and better not look at it.
The data statistics are an attempt to describe the quality of the actual data as
a result of an experiment. Whether or not this could be done in a better way is
not my point (most crystallographers with some experience will draw their
conclusions from the statistiscs), but people should realise its importance -
everything else in an article is merely interpretation, most of all the model
itself (which is not data, as many often confuse), and to a large extend even
the electron density map.
As I pointed out this is based on my personal impression, based on which I would
like to encourage people not to use the term 'Table 1'. Language has an
influence on how we think, so language should be kept from too much degradation.
All the best,
Tim
--
--
Dr Tim Gruene
Institut fuer anorganische Chemie
Tammannstr. 4
D-37077 Goettingen
GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A
|