You top posted on purpose. Didn't you? Ahh, you rat bastard! ;) On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 09:34:05PM -0600, John Galt wrote: > > Well that's the problem, isn't it? Karsten (and yourself, variously) > isn't really "putting up" with it, now is he? > > On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote: > > >On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:11:03PM -0700, Eric G. Miller wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 03:10:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > >> > but this practice is strongly deprecated. > >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> Hell does that mean? > >> > >> Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary has this to say... > >> > >> dep-re-cate 1. to express mild or regretful disapproval of 2. > >> DEPRECIATE > >> > >> I "strongly mildly dissapprove" of that quoting convention! Huh? > > > >"deprecate" is a common technical term (hang out at the IETF for a > >while). When a standard is trached, it is marked "deprecated" so > >people know that though they might have to put up with it from others, > >they shouldn't implement or use it themselves. > > > >Perhaps Karsten should have used "discouraged" rather than deprecated, > >but close enough. > > > >
-- Eric G. Miller <egm2@jps.net>
