I think the point is that the main text should make up a readable, complete thought. The purported citations are in the nature of asides. Who checks the citations for each segment before reading the whole thing all the way through?
Me?
Clearly, you’re doing it wrong.
Well, I don’t do that if it’s a direct quote, but IME most legal citations- unless well known in the area of law- either fudge or totally misrepresent the case law being cited.
Absolutely, but in reading a claim I don’t find it useful to parse out each fragment separately until after I’ve read the whole sentence through. And that’s really the way text should be written – to make sense as a unit. Then you go back and check that each citation supports the portion that it’s tagged to.
Really?
Remarkable, isn’t it, how many people think it’s unfair to hold them responsible for their behavior?
Thank you. That was hysterectomal!