And then your period ends up on the wrong side of the quote.
Why should it? In that case, since you're trusting the rendering software to place the full-stop mark, then that software has the flexibility to place the period either before or after the terminating quotation mark. That's a controversy, by the way; apparently it's common in British English to put punctuation outside of a quote in some circumstances if it doesn't belong to the quote, and it's becoming more common in American English, too. In your scheme, you could encode that meaning:
[sentence]He said, [quote][sentence]The dog walked[/sentence][/quote][/sentence]
and the rendering software should be smart enough to recognize that the outputted text should end with {." } and not {.". }. Or, if the nested sentence tags aren't there (as you have it), either {." } or { ". } according to locale rules or other preferences.
You mean Stephen Wolfram? I thought he founded Wolfram Research to build Mathematica so he'd have the tools to work on his cellular automata, long after he graduated from Caltech, and worked at the Institute for Advanced Study, and eventually University of Illinois I guess not having to move would be a good reason, too.:-)
I'm not really following you here. The 'of' before 'female' would seem to limit the requirement of National Guard membership to female citizens. In addition, the militia consists of all 17-45 U.S. male citizens. That doesn't really benefit the limited-to-militia case for gun control. Without expressing my own position on the issue, that's honestly the best reading of that I can come up with. But I'm not a lawyer, so what do I know.
I have believed that for a long time, too. Of course it makes little difference. The sky is blue in your world, and in my world, but your mental model of "blue" may be radically different from mine. We both call the sky "blue" because that's what everyone else calls it. OTOH the set of things you recognize as being the same color as the sky may be different from me. It would be interesting to find out how much of that is physiological and how much is due to our independent learning.
I think perception (of anything: colors, sounds, tastes, etc.) may also be to some extent culturally determined - Asian languages often have one word for blue and green, for example, and they would refer to the Sprite bottle and the blue Nalgene sitting next to me with the same word. They look completely distinct to me, though.
Or the ones whose homes slid down the mud cliffs they were built on the edge of. I think California millionaires are largely exempt from the common sense you might expect from older money.
Meteorites don't have aftershocks. Also consider that it occurred on the boundary of the Indian-Australian continental plate days after an 8.1 earthquake occurred on an opposite edge of the same plate. (That one caused no damage.) No meteors capable of causing this were, to my knowledge, reported.
According to the USGS, the pattern of aftershocks indicated 1000 km of the plate boundary had slipped. It would be extremely unlikely for the results of a meteorite to look that coherently like an earthquake.
In the Brave New World of agencies working together (hah, efficient government is the *last* thing we need) I'm pretty sure anyone you'd need to worry about in the federal government has access to all those records, and is already mining them to prove you're a terrorist.
tab browser exensions will let you do that. it is among the more heavyweight extensions and could slow your browser down a lot. mini-T is much more sprightly and will let you *copy* a tab into another window. No doubt there are others --
Maybe not, but he claims that he would have. Have you heard him claim otherwise? Kerry's stated and consistent position is that he would in fact have put us in Iraq. He thinks the president screwed it up, is all, and Europe should be sharing the tar-pit with us.
I hope you don't take away the idea that any books are banned in the US. With the exception of _Anarchist's Cookbook_ and, unfortunately, books with gay subjects, very few public school libraries won't carry these books. None of them are illegal to sell. (Admittedly, I have no experience off the liberal west coast.) Certainly not Huck Finn or Bridge to Terabithia. Actually, I think every public library I've ever been to has had this very list on display during Banned Books Week.
The only book I've ever heard of being legally challenged in the U.S. (I mean, actually being censored as opposed to just not published or carried in libraries) is explained here. I work for a bookstore - we've sold books like _How To Manufacture Methamphetamines_ without fear of legal retribution.
Now, Germany on the other hand actively bans nazi memorabilia (including books) and holocaust denial, and France bans those as well as "hate speech". In the U.K., you will be sued for selling Sean McPhilemy's _The Committee_. Not just writing it. Selling it.
5 The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain 6 Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck 7 Harry Potter (Series) by J.K. Rowling 9 Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson 17 A Day No Pigs Would Dieby Robert Newton Peck 22 A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L'Engle 32 Blubber by Judy Blume 44 The Pigman by Paul Zindel 51 A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein 52 Brave New World by Aldous Huxley 56 James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl 57 The Anarchist Cookbook by William Powell 62 Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret by Judy Blume 69 Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut 70 Lord of the Flies by William Golding 84 The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain 89 Summer of My German Soldier by Bette Greene 90 Little Black Sambo by Helen Bannerman 96 How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell
Quite a few on there that I've been meaning to read someday, too. I'm surprised that with two Roald Dahl books, _Fantastic Mr. Fox_ didn't make it. Pure Communist propaganda, that.:-)
I hope I don't seem trollish, because I'm really interested in your opinion on this.
Quite apart from details like the length of a day, order of creation, etc. the Bible also says that death entered the world through the Fall, and that specifically is what Jesus repaired when he allowed himself to be sacrificed. (Of course, there are many interpretations of the relevant parts of the Bible but to the best of my knowledge, that is the traditional Calvinist - i.e., Southern Baptist - approach.) Many creationists cite that as the main reason they reject the theory of evolution. If death is natural, and if we are basically apes, then there was no original sin, and therefore nothing for which Christ could atone. Our selfish and sexual instincts are normal and not, in fact, the result of the moral decay of the flesh. The ICR has a typical presentation of this viewpoint: http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-209.htm
As a Christian and a Southern Baptist who accepts the scientifically determined age of the earth and (I'm presuming) some form of theistic evolution, how do you address that argument?
But it won't take off anywhere else. Why wait five minutes for a book you can't flip through and pay the same price for what is practically guaranteed to be inferior to a cheap mass-market paperback? People like going to bookstores as an end in itself... even for new bestsellers it's not something that anyone will welcome being automated away.
the wide majority of mainstream Christian denominations
Hence the term, "fundies". You don't seem to be one, but there do exist Christians and other religionists who, at the extreme end of the scale, not only can't handle scientific results that threaten their dogma but also are offended by the scientific method itself. (Though they rarely reject useful technology on those grounds.) These are the people who refuse to allow any medical treatment / blood transfusions / etc., handle snakes, etc. From that point there is a continuous gradations of all kinds of mixtures of reality and wacky beliefs, and there are people who are perfectly rational except when it comes to evolution, and will believe anything Kent Hovind or Carl Baugh say on the subject. (Someone who I know to be an otherwise intelligent creationist "informed" me the other day that corn is not a grain, it is a starch, and is more closely related to the potato than to rice or wheat. *smacks forehead*) Those last are the people the parent was referring to, and there are quite a lot of them in the U.S. There are so many around here (Oregon) that they pretty much *are* the mainstream outside of Portland and Eugene.
Slashdot Mirror
And then your period ends up on the wrong side of the quote.
." } and not { .". }. Or, if the nested sentence tags aren't there (as you have it), either { ." } or { ". } according to locale rules or other preferences.
Why should it? In that case, since you're trusting the rendering software to place the full-stop mark, then that software has the flexibility to place the period either before or after the terminating quotation mark. That's a controversy, by the way; apparently it's common in British English to put punctuation outside of a quote in some circumstances if it doesn't belong to the quote, and it's becoming more common in American English, too. In your scheme, you could encode that meaning:
[sentence]He said, [quote][sentence]The dog walked[/sentence][/quote][/sentence]
and the rendering software should be smart enough to recognize that the outputted text should end with {
Self-important, smarmy, and pedantic do not add up to 'informative'.
You mean Stephen Wolfram? I thought he founded Wolfram Research to build Mathematica so he'd have the tools to work on his cellular automata, long after he graduated from Caltech, and worked at the Institute for Advanced Study, and eventually University of Illinois I guess not having to move would be a good reason, too. :-)
I'm not really following you here. The 'of' before 'female' would seem to limit the requirement of National Guard membership to female citizens. In addition, the militia consists of all 17-45 U.S. male citizens. That doesn't really benefit the limited-to-militia case for gun control. Without expressing my own position on the issue, that's honestly the best reading of that I can come up with. But I'm not a lawyer, so what do I know.
I have believed that for a long time, too. Of course it makes little difference. The sky is blue in your world, and in my world, but your mental model of "blue" may be radically different from mine. We both call the sky "blue" because that's what everyone else calls it. OTOH the set of things you recognize as being the same color as the sky may be different from me. It would be interesting to find out how much of that is physiological and how much is due to our independent learning.
I think perception (of anything: colors, sounds, tastes, etc.) may also be to some extent culturally determined - Asian languages often have one word for blue and green, for example, and they would refer to the Sprite bottle and the blue Nalgene sitting next to me with the same word. They look completely distinct to me, though.
Ring of fire, pah! Earthquakes and tsunamis will NEVER happen here!
Or the ones whose homes slid down the mud cliffs they were built on the edge of. I think California millionaires are largely exempt from the common sense you might expect from older money.
Meteorites don't have aftershocks. Also consider that it occurred on the boundary of the Indian-Australian continental plate days after an 8.1 earthquake occurred on an opposite edge of the same plate. (That one caused no damage.) No meteors capable of causing this were, to my knowledge, reported.
According to the USGS, the pattern of aftershocks indicated 1000 km of the plate boundary had slipped. It would be extremely unlikely for the results of a meteorite to look that coherently like an earthquake.
Though I usually have nothing but obsequious, fawning approval for people with three-digit UIDs, what part of "electric" did you not understand? ;-)
That's no moon.
(I have a bad feeling about this.)
Particularly when attempting to carry those books!
In the Brave New World of agencies working together (hah, efficient government is the *last* thing we need) I'm pretty sure anyone you'd need to worry about in the federal government has access to all those records, and is already mining them to prove you're a terrorist.
Send them a polite email. Chances are, no one at the dealership actually made that decision and they are probably unaware of the problem.
that's not the only reason ;-)
"Practically" a religion? Just thank Marc that you're not being proselytized by the Church of Emacs.
tab browser exensions will let you do that. it is among the more heavyweight extensions and could slow your browser down a lot. mini-T is much more sprightly and will let you *copy* a tab into another window. No doubt there are others --
Kerry would not have put us in Iraq.
Maybe not, but he claims that he would have. Have you heard him claim otherwise? Kerry's stated and consistent position is that he would in fact have put us in Iraq. He thinks the president screwed it up, is all, and Europe should be sharing the tar-pit with us.
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=269
Even _The Anarchist's Cookbook_ ?
I hope you don't take away the idea that any books are banned in the US. With the exception of _Anarchist's Cookbook_ and, unfortunately, books with gay subjects, very few public school libraries won't carry these books. None of them are illegal to sell. (Admittedly, I have no experience off the liberal west coast.) Certainly not Huck Finn or Bridge to Terabithia. Actually, I think every public library I've ever been to has had this very list on display during Banned Books Week.
The only book I've ever heard of being legally challenged in the U.S. (I mean, actually being censored as opposed to just not published or carried in libraries) is explained here. I work for a bookstore - we've sold books like _How To Manufacture Methamphetamines_ without fear of legal retribution.
Now, Germany on the other hand actively bans nazi memorabilia (including books) and holocaust denial, and France bans those as well as "hate speech". In the U.K., you will be sued for selling Sean McPhilemy's _The Committee_. Not just writing it. Selling it.
5 The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
:-)
6 Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
7 Harry Potter (Series) by J.K. Rowling
9 Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson
17 A Day No Pigs Would Dieby Robert Newton Peck
22 A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L'Engle
32 Blubber by Judy Blume
44 The Pigman by Paul Zindel
51 A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein
52 Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
56 James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl
57 The Anarchist Cookbook by William Powell
62 Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret by Judy Blume
69 Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut
70 Lord of the Flies by William Golding
84 The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
89 Summer of My German Soldier by Bette Greene
90 Little Black Sambo by Helen Bannerman
96 How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell
Quite a few on there that I've been meaning to read someday, too. I'm surprised that with two Roald Dahl books, _Fantastic Mr. Fox_ didn't make it. Pure Communist propaganda, that.
only 626,654 to go...
Quite apart from details like the length of a day, order of creation, etc. the Bible also says that death entered the world through the Fall, and that specifically is what Jesus repaired when he allowed himself to be sacrificed. (Of course, there are many interpretations of the relevant parts of the Bible but to the best of my knowledge, that is the traditional Calvinist - i.e., Southern Baptist - approach.) Many creationists cite that as the main reason they reject the theory of evolution. If death is natural, and if we are basically apes, then there was no original sin, and therefore nothing for which Christ could atone. Our selfish and sexual instincts are normal and not, in fact, the result of the moral decay of the flesh. The ICR has a typical presentation of this viewpoint: http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-209.htm
As a Christian and a Southern Baptist who accepts the scientifically determined age of the earth and (I'm presuming) some form of theistic evolution, how do you address that argument?
But it won't take off anywhere else. Why wait five minutes for a book you can't flip through and pay the same price for what is practically guaranteed to be inferior to a cheap mass-market paperback? People like going to bookstores as an end in itself... even for new bestsellers it's not something that anyone will welcome being automated away.
Hence the term, "fundies". You don't seem to be one, but there do exist Christians and other religionists who, at the extreme end of the scale, not only can't handle scientific results that threaten their dogma but also are offended by the scientific method itself. (Though they rarely reject useful technology on those grounds.) These are the people who refuse to allow any medical treatment / blood transfusions / etc., handle snakes, etc. From that point there is a continuous gradations of all kinds of mixtures of reality and wacky beliefs, and there are people who are perfectly rational except when it comes to evolution, and will believe anything Kent Hovind or Carl Baugh say on the subject. (Someone who I know to be an otherwise intelligent creationist "informed" me the other day that corn is not a grain, it is a starch, and is more closely related to the potato than to rice or wheat. *smacks forehead*) Those last are the people the parent was referring to, and there are quite a lot of them in the U.S. There are so many around here (Oregon) that they pretty much *are* the mainstream outside of Portland and Eugene.
Softball is a sport. Also bicycling, sailing, volleyball, etc...
Well, not to me. But YOU did, damn you to hell. Oh, God, the burning in my eyes!