HTML code
in [Mac Applications]
|
Prev: Bean is much better than TextEdit -- it's worth switching
Next: 625108 Up to date Net and Tech news, knowledge, empowerment 08
From: Warren Oates on 26 Mar 2010 07:37 In article <slrnhqoosb.19ml.g.kreme(a)cerebus.local>, Lewis <g.kreme(a)gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > I mean, supposedly selling your daughter into slavery is every > father's GOD GIVEN right. I wouldn't know -- I was born in the wagon of a travellin' show. -- Very old woody beets will never cook tender. -- Fannie Farmer
From: Jeffrey Goldberg on 28 Mar 2010 14:57 John wrote: > In article<slrnhqnva3.304m.g.kreme(a)cerebus.local>, > Lewis<g.kreme(a)gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> Certainly. Keep in mind, this is the guy that sent two bears to maul >> dozens of children who called one of "God's" prophets "Baldy". > I did not. John, no one has accused *you* of sending bears to kill the kids who teased Elijah. But if you, John, identify so closely with the object of the accusation then you (John) have far more serious problems than I'd imagined. Seek counseling. There are clergy in mainstream churches who are trained at least well enough to refer you to proper sources if you don't wish to follow purely secular leads. Or were you just joking? -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg http://goldmark.org/jeff/ I rarely read HTML or poorly quoting posts Reply-To address is valid
From: dorayme on 28 Mar 2010 17:40 In article <819n47Ff20U1(a)mid.individual.net>, Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody(a)goldmark.org> wrote: > John, no one has accused *you* of sending bears to kill the kids who > teased Elijah. Is that right? Well, then, let me accuse him. I, dorayme, look you directly in the eye, John, and with an unblinking stare, accuse you explicitly and forthrightly of sending bears to kill the kids who teased Elijah. And now for a lighter moment: <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/jokes/filmCensor.html>> -- dorayme
From: Mike Rosenberg on 28 Mar 2010 18:11 dorayme <dorayme(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > Is that right? Well, then, let me accuse him. I, dorayme, look > you directly in the eye, John, and with an unblinking stare, > accuse you explicitly and forthrightly of sending bears to kill > the kids who teased Elijah. I thought we were talking about bare HMTL code, not a coded bear. -- My latest dance performance <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_9pudbFisE> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi>
From: dorayme on 29 Mar 2010 15:44
In article <paul.nospam-F3DE31.14543329032010(a)pbook.sture.ch>, Paul Sture <paul.nospam(a)sture.ch> wrote: > > When modern browsers find something they can't handle they fall back to > "quirks mode". > No, this is not right. Quirks mode is triggered by the presence or absence of doctypes, and in some cases whether there is a prolog to the doctype... Altogether different is error handling. When something occurs in a strict doctyped web page that has some CSS that is not udestood, it is usually simply ignored. There are other errors in the HTML that are compensated for in different browsers in various ways, but these ways are not by "going into quirks mode" -- dorayme |