|
|
Posted by Wings on 04/22/07 04:11
I don't know what nummie first said that CAPS was shouting, but it didn't
take long for the followers to jump on the band wagon and declare it one of
the original sins - because some seem to have trouble reading it??? Weird.
Your real problem, Neo, is your failure to adequately kiss ass before asking
your question....
Oh?! I top posted. Shame. Must be because I didn't want anyone to have to
wade through all that stuff below first.
"Neo Geshel" <gotcha@geshel.org> wrote in message
news:q2hWh.106189$aG1.36943@pd7urf3no...
Sherm Pendley wrote:
> Neo Geshel <gotcha@geshel.org> writes:
>
>> Clearly, I haven't been doing much of anything wrong in terms of
>> cross-posting.
>
> You were off-topic in two of the four groups you posted to.
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.site-design
- In original post: "Any and all comments about the *design* would
also be appreciated." On-topic.
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html
- I am authoring an XHTML site. In the absence of an XHTML NG, I'd
say that this one is fair game.
alt.html
- see previous.
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.misc
- possibly off-topic (a nearly dead NG), but very debatable since
XHTML doesn't have a NG of its own, and I *am* doing something rather
esoteric...
I'd say I was on-topic for three out of the four, at the very least;
with the fourth being strongly debatable.
>> I will use whatever works to get people to read the *whole* post
>> *before* answering.
>
> Being polite works well for that. Much better, in fact, than shouting
> at and insulting the people whose attention you're hoping to retain.
I may have been too harsh in shouting it out; but - aside from the
shouting - if you found that paragraph insulting, you seriously need to
grow a thicker skin and actually get out into the real world once in a
while. That first paragraph was a simple request for people to read and
understand the entire post before giving their $0.02 worth, nothing more
or less.
So far, I have yet to see a single post that has understood my original
request (to any degree whatsoever), and provided an appropriate answer.
I'd say that the frustrations that drove me to create that first
"shouting" paragraph are well-founded.
>> And why should I go backwards to HTML? XHTML is working just fine for
>> me, on my own machine.
>
> Because first, it's not backwards. It's still the standard, and XHTML
> hasn't yet gotten to the point where it's reliably compatible.
>
> And second, the point is that, however well XHTML may work on your own
> machine, there are a *lot* of other machines out there on which it
> does not work, and won't in the forseeable future.
HTML is a dead end. It is no longer being extended or enhanced; there
will never be an HTML 5.0. Wikipedia: "HTML 4.01 and ISO/IEC 15445:2000
are the most recent and final versions of HTML."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Html)
The future is all about XHTML (and to a greater, long-term extent, XML),
and I intend to be at the head of the line. That is my choice, and so
far I have found plenty of cell phones, handhelds (like the Blackberry)
and other devices that work just fine with XHTML 1.1.
>> Fair enough. You've given your opinion. Good-bye.
>
> Oh, so you get to decide when the thread's over now, and who's allowed
> to post to it? Who made you King of Usenet?
One of my most important maxims is, "if you have nothing *constructive*
to say, don't say anything at all". While I don't always succeed in
following that maxim to the letter, at least I make the effort. The vast
majority of *his* post, however, was all about ridicule, sarcasm, his
own opinion and ad hominem attacks. Aside from one or two small points,
it was *far* from constructive.
....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]
|