By my reading, the meaning of that statement is that EY is claiming that elegance is (at least partially) objective.
Didn’t I cover that? (“Granted it rather looked like that’s the direction in which EY’s argument was going”)? Did you really read what I wrote?
But I think a statement like “you could say 2 x 3 = 6” would sound funny.
By my reading, the meaning of that statement is that EY is claiming that elegance is (at least partially) objective.
Didn’t I cover that? (“Granted it rather looked like that’s the direction in which EY’s argument was going”)? Did you really read what I wrote?
But I think a statement like “you could say 2 x 3 = 6” would sound funny.