mikes603

Forcing an author to write in a certain language is obviously wrong. One could argue you should write in Chinese simply because more people speak that language. A writer could chose pig Latin as his chosen language under artistic license and it would more then likely be accepted as a valid although unpopular choice. I am personally finding that technical engineering fields while having the same passion for thought,reason,imagination and happiness via creativity as writing, is granted no artistic license by most. This could be materialized in numerous extreme examples as with the writer, such as designing a house out of Popsicle sticks that is structurally sound. Basically using any unpopular method to reach an aim that is as sound as using a popular one. The results being the same technically as the popular method. I am finding that this unpopular method, whatever it may be in whatever realm, is apposed by the needs of the inability of others... Not all engineers know popsiclology, so if repairs down the road had to be made by a 3rd party it would not be advisable to use such a unpopular method. I feel that this is placing a need on the pro popsiclology engineer that is based upon the inability of others. Am i correct? If so, is this a valid reason not to use an unpopular method chosen under artistic license? I am looking for text on further thought on this. (ive read fountainhead&as) I guess pertaining to questions such as.. Should Engineers have artistic license? Should that license grant any chosen methods if yielding the same results? -Mike Spenard