Text 26443, 132 rader
Skriven 2006-03-18 10:54:00 av FRANK SCHEIDT (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av MICHIEL VAN DER VLIST
Ärende: Elist
=============
-=> Quoting Michiel Van Der Vlist to Frank Scheidt <=-

 MVDV>>> By your definition. According to Kernie and Ritchie an ellipses
 MVDV>>> consists of two dots.....
 >
 >> Who are Kernie and Ritchie?

 MVDV>> The guys who documented ANSI C.
 
 > I don't consider them any authority WRT the structure of the ellipsis ...

 MVDV> I don't consider you an authority WRT to who is an authority WRT the
 MVDV> structure of the ellipsis. In fact, I do not consider you an authority
 MVDV> on anything. 

Are you being intentionally funny or is that supposed to be an 
actual criticism of me?  In any event it fails in both respects.

 >>> You used *four*.

 MVDV>>> Yes, I typed for dots.

 MVDV>> Is there a law against typing four dots?
 
 > Not to my knowledge -- though there *might* be ...

 MVDV> Well, there is no such law *here*, I am pretty sure....

True.  You may be as ungrammatical as you please ... be my guest 
... heh heh heh ...

 MVDV>>> 1) What made you assume I meant to type an ellipsis according
 MVDV>>> to your definition instead of just four dots?
 
 >> I merely assumed

 MVDV>> You ASSumed I meant to type an ellipsis....
 
 > Yes, I made that logical assumption ...

 MVDV> Let's say, you made a predictable assumption. You have become very
 MVDV> predictable of late. Did it never occur to you, you are so predictable
 MVDV> that someone may intentionally type four dots to push your buttons?
 
Thank you for acknowledging my accuracy is now predictable.  As 
for your flawed "ellipsis", I suppose you really *didn't* know 
how to do it ... *now*, however, you do ...

 >> you had reached that level of literacy in English ... sorry ...

 MVDV>> What has literacy in English got to do with typing four dots? Or
 MVDV>> typing five dots. Or five plus signs. Here: +++++, there's five plus
 MVDV>> signs. Have I now know shown a lack of literacy in English? Or any
 MVDV>> other language ofr that matter?
 
 > Literacy in English is involved if you meant to type an ellipsis.

 MVDV> But, I didn't. I meant to type four dots. I may have typed four dots
 MVDV> to make you believe I meant to type an ellipsis though....

Yeah ... sure ... 'scuse my snicker ...
 
 > Since you *didn't*, and I have no reason to think you lied
 > when making that claim, you did not err.

 MVDV> Right, I did not err. You did however erred by assuming I meant to
 MVDV> type an ellipsis....

My assumption was accurate as you, and everyone else here, knows.  
You can squirm all you wish, but you've lost *this* mini-debate 
with me, too ...

 MVDV>>> 2) Or perhaps I typed one dot (terminating the sentence)
 MVDV>>> followed by three dots (your ellipsis).
 
 >> If that were the case the ellipsis would *still* have been separated
 >> from the sentence-ending period by at least one *space*.

 MVDV>> Says who?
 
 > Says *I* ...

 MVDV> So it is just your opinion. An opinion that is not shared by everyone
 MVDV> it seems. 

True.  It's shared only by those of us conversant with proper 
English grammar ... [sigh] ...

 MVDV>> So? I see no rule that an ellipsis must be encased with at
 MVDV>> least one space at either side. In fact - according to
 MVDV>> Kernie and Ritchie - spaces are not normally used to delimit
 MVDV>> an ellipsis. They are optional though.
 
 > *I* say it.

 MVDV> So I noticed. I do not consider you an expert in the matter.

That's *another* of your many flaws ... [sigh] ...
 
 > And *I* certainly know what is proper and what is
 > improper in this area ... the opinions of this Kernie and
 > Ritchie mean nothing to me ...

 MVDV> It means something to me though.

OK ... be happy as a frog in a small pond ... BTW, that's merely 
a figure of speech so don't worry about it -- I'm not calling you 
a "frog" ...

 MVDV>>> 3) Or maybe I use another definition of an ellipsis then yours.
 
 >> Like Bill Clinton with his alternative definition of "is"?

 MVDV>> No, there is no "maybe" about BC's alternative definition of
 MVDV>> "is". So no, not like BC.
 
 > "Like" doesn't mean "identical to" ... at least not in *English*.

 MVDV> How would you know? You were born in the USA, English is not your
 MVDV> native language.

How would I know?   Wow!!!!

BTW, despite your stubbornness in refusing to learn I must admit 
your English is *far* better than my (non-existent) Dutch ... 
brag about *that* if you wish.

... FYI: [Censored] You, Idiot.

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)