On Wednesday 10 December 2003 06:48 pm, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Kuba Ober wrote:
> > Methinks s/mislead/misled/, but you've had your mandatory punishment
> > anyway and this is just a freebie :)
>
> Well, if you think in American English, then there's nothing I can do
> to help you.
I didn't know i
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 06:45:02PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Naughty boy, Angus, naughty boy :)
> > s/there/their/
>
> Actually, you're exactly wrong.
Cool stuff. More.
Andre'
Kuba Ober wrote:
> Methinks s/mislead/misled/, but you've had your mandatory punishment
> anyway and this is just a freebie :)
Well, if you think in American English, then there's nothing I can do
to help you.
> Now I'll better shut up lest the gods ban me for being OT and such
My turn to smile
> > Now that the insets are handling [was: there] THEIR own
> > FuncRequests, THERE is no need ...
>
> Ahhh. Context. I was mislead:
Methinks s/mislead/misled/, but you've had your mandatory punishment anyway
and this is just a freebie :)
> > Naughty boy, Angus, naughty boy :)
> > s/there/their/
Kuba Ober wrote:
> Ekhm, this is not an argument. The two sentences you wrote above are
> both correct it seems, yet the one that I pointed to is still wrong
> :)
>
> Now that the insets are handling [was: there] THEIR own
> FuncRequests, THERE is no need ...
Ahhh. Context. I was mislead:
Kuba O
> >> And so, I suspect, is André's assertion that the concept is no
> >> longer needed. Now that insets are handling there
> >
> > Naughty boy, Angus, naughty boy :)
> > s/there/their/
>
> Actually, you're exactly wrong.
I don't think so :)
> 'Where is this concept handled? Over there, in the ins
Kuba Ober wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 December 2003 05:25 am, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> John Levon wrote:
>> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 09:34:25AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> >> As bold guess: 'noneditable' does not react at all, 'editable'
>> >> has some dialog attached and 'highly editable' is math
On Wednesday 10 December 2003 05:25 am, Angus Leeming wrote:
> John Levon wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 09:34:25AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >> As bold guess: 'noneditable' does not react at all, 'editable' has
> >> some dialog attached and 'highly editable' is math & inner text.
> >
> > T
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:25:41AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> John Levon wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 09:34:25AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >
> >> As bold guess: 'noneditable' does not react at all, 'editable' has
> >> some dialog attached and 'highly editable' is math & inner text.
John Levon wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 09:34:25AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
>> As bold guess: 'noneditable' does not react at all, 'editable' has
>> some dialog attached and 'highly editable' is math & inner text.
>
> That's exactly correct.
And so, I suspect, is André's assertion that
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 09:34:25AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> As bold guess: 'noneditable' does not react at all, 'editable' has some
> dialog attached and 'highly editable' is math & inner text.
That's exactly correct.
john
--
Khendon's Law:
If the same point is made twice by the same pers
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:28:26AM +0100, Michael Schmitt wrote:
> Just a short question (and hopefully also a short answer):
>
> What is the difference between a noneditable, and editable,
> and a highly editable inset?
If I knew...
As bold guess: 'noneditable' does not react at all, 'edita
12 matches
Mail list logo
