|
|
Posted by Neo Geshel on 04/20/07 23:00
Sherm Pendley wrote:
> Neo Geshel <gotcha@geshel.org> writes:
>
>> NOTE: PAST EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT MANY ON USENET FAIL TO READ
>> ARTICLES PROPERLY PRIOR TO ANSWERING. I AM LOOKING FOR VERY SPECIFIC
>> INFORMATION, THEREFORE PLEASE READ AND UNDERSTAND THOROUGHLY BEFORE
>> RESPONDING; OR ASK QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY. I *WILL* APPRECIATE ANY
>> CONSTRUCTIVE REPLY.
>
> You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
> read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to post it
> that way.
Would you rather I multi-post? Having been using the Internet for 16+
years, it is my understanding that cross-posting is *far* more
preferable than multi-posting.
You know, in the future I could always multi-post articles, if that
would make you happy. That way, people reading in one NG would be unable
to see answers to the same post in another NG.
> Do you seriously expect constructive replies after that?
It’s always a fool’s hope to expect constructive replies from Usenet,
especially with more complicated or more detailed posts. That’s why I
tried to weed out those who would just parrot back that which I clearly
stated I wasn’t interested in, or had already discounted.
And yes, the more precise or more technical an article I post, the more
people that reply with an answer I had already clearly stated that I
discounted, or clearly stated I had no interest in. Hence, my attempt to
“focus” people.
> My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
> Problem solved.
I have far more problems with HTML and “quirks mode” rendering
differences between browsers with HTML that I have ever had with XHTML.
> Or, if you insist on using XHTML in spite of its many well-known problems,
Its *many* well-know problems? I know of only two problems - Internet
Explorer’s inability to handle application/xhtml+xml, and (by proxy)
IE’s “quirks mode” problems with the XML Prologue (which can be fixed by
getting it to conduct an XSLT transformation on a document served up as
application/xml).
Otherwise, XHTML 1.1 works just fine for me.
> don't come back here asking for solutions to the problems you've insisted
> on creating for yourself, and insulting the very people who tried to tell
> you how to avoid those problems in the first place.
Confusing cause and effect, are we? Having trouble with temporal
effects? You are the first person to reply to this post, dearie. No-one
has *tried* to help me with *this* post and *this* issue yet. Try to
avoid time-travel in the future, k? Pardon the pun.
Cheers.
...Geshel
--
*********************************************************************
My return e-mail address is an automatically monitored spam honeypot.
Do not send e-mail there unless you wish to be reported as a spammer.
Please send all e-mail to my first name at my last name dot org, with
a subject-line of “NEWSGROUP REPLY FOR NEO GESHEL” (all uppercase).
*********************************************************************
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|