Problem with CSS file in IE7

Hi,

I have some html that relies on a stylesheet and although the styles
are recognised in FireFox 2, in IE7 the page displays without any
colour or font styles being applied.

My stylesheet.css contains several sections like the following :

my_section_head {
color: Red;
font-size: large;
position: absolute;
left: 0px;
visibility: visible;
}

These are referred to in the page.html file in a similar way to this :

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Mike wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have some html that relies on a stylesheet and although the styles
> are recognised in FireFox 2, in IE7 the page displays without any
> colour or font styles being applied.
>
> My stylesheet.css contains several sections like the following :
>
> my_section_head {
[declarations omitted]
> }
>
> These are referred to in the page.html file in a similar way to this :
>
>

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Mike wrote:
> ........the page displays without any
> colour or font styles being applied.
>
> My stylesheet.css contains several sections like the following :
>
> my_section_head {
> color: Red;
> ................
> Chroma Sub Sample

You don't get to invent tags like .

You could use something like

with css like
..my_selection_head {...........

Or, you could use something like

with css like
#my_section_head {.....
--
mbstevens
http://www.mbstevens.com

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Scripsit mbstevens:

> You don't get to invent tags like .

Correct so far.

> You could use something like
>
> with css like
> .my_selection_head {...........

That would be foolish for several reasons. One of them is that when CSS is
off, markup has no effect and its content is treated as text level
stuff with no special rendering. And the class name is not clever and
informative; just an example, yes, but a _bad_ example.

> Or, you could use something like
>

> with css like
> #my_section_head {.....

Wrong too. It's not a paragraph. It's a heading. You want it to appear as a
heading (whatever that means in each browser) even when CSS is not used.

And there's little reason to use an id attribute for styling when the
style_could_ well be something that you might use for other elements (other
headings) on the page as well.

The sensible approach is (assuming this is a 3rd level heading for
particularly sexy headings, among the different 3rd level headings on the
page)

...

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

mbstevens wrote:

> ..my_selection_head {...........

Don't know how that extra period got in there.
Should be

..my_section_head {...........

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit mbstevens:

>
>> You could use something like
>>
>> with css like
>> .my_selection_head {...........
>
> That would be foolish for several reasons. One of them is that when CSS
> is off, markup has no effect and its content is treated as text
> level stuff with no special rendering. And the class name is not clever
> and informative; just an example, yes, but a _bad_ example.

Yes, my examples could have been more specific to his tasks.
A CSS example like "h3 {........" would have been better.

The comment starting "...when CSS is off..." is unclear.
The op was worrying about coloring things _with_
CSS and is using CSS in separate files. What are you trying to
get at?

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Scripsit mbstevens:

> The comment starting "...when CSS is off..." is unclear.

Google for "css caveats".

> The op was worrying about coloring things _with_
> CSS and is using CSS in separate files. What are you trying to
> get at?

Write down 100 times:
"CSS is for optional presentational suggestions."
You're not qualified to give advice on CSS before you have yourself
understood this very basic thing.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit mbstevens:
>
>> The comment starting "...when CSS is off..." is unclear.
>
> Google for "css caveats".
>
>> The op was worrying about coloring things _with_
>> CSS and is using CSS in separate files. What are you trying to
>> get at?
>
> Write down 100 times:
> "CSS is for optional presentational suggestions."
> You're not qualified to give advice on CSS before you have yourself
> understood this very basic thing.
>
That goes without saying. Obviously an heading is better for headings.

The op's question, however, was not about that, but with why his
CSS was not working. To go beyond that in excruciating detail
is correct but pedantic.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Scripsit mbstevens:

> Obviously an > heading is better for headings.

Yet you suggested oops instead.

> The op's question, however, was not about that, but with why his
> CSS was not working. To go beyond that in excruciating detail
> is correct but pedantic.

When the markup was wrong (and that caused the CSS to fail), suggesting
correct markup is _essential_, and I commented on the wrong suggestions that
you made.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit mbstevens:
>
>> Obviously an >> heading is better for headings.
>
> Yet you suggested oops instead.
>
>> The op's question, however, was not about that, but with why his
>> CSS was not working. To go beyond that in excruciating detail
>> is correct but pedantic.
>
> When the markup was wrong (and that caused the CSS to fail), suggesting
> correct markup is _essential_, and I commented on the wrong suggestions
> that you made.
>
The suggestions were addressed to the mechanics of why the colors did not
appear. Interpretations of the _meaning_ of the symbols s/he was
using go beyond this. I believe his question was addressed to syntax.
Your comments had to do with semantics.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Scripsit mbstevens:

> Your comments had to do with semantics.

Yes, _my_ comments have a meaning. (Semantics is the study of meaning.) You
are whining about having been corrected in an essential point. The choice of
markup affects the styling as well (in addition to affecting non-CSS
rendering), since different elements have different default rendering.
Therefore, getting the markup right from the beginning is essential and
helps to avoid wasting time.

When corrected, you could just stand corrected.

You may sit down now.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

In article ,
"Jukka K. Korpela" wrote:

> Scripsit mbstevens:
>
> > Your comments had to do with semantics.
>
> Yes, _my_ comments have a meaning. (Semantics is the study of meaning.) You
> are whining about having been corrected in an essential point.

Well, it sure did not look like mbsteven disputed that your
comments had a meaning. Rather, he was emphasising that semantics
was not crucially relevant to the trouble experienced by the op.

--
dorayme

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

John Hosking wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have some html that relies on a stylesheet and although the styles
>> are recognised in FireFox 2, in IE7 the page displays without any
>> colour or font styles being applied.
>>
>> My stylesheet.css contains several sections like the following :
>>
>> my_section_head {
> [declarations omitted]
>> }
>>
>> These are referred to in the page.html file in a similar way to this :
>>
>>

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Mon, 03 Sep 2007 21:25:36
GMT dorayme scribed:

> In article ,
> "Jukka K. Korpela" wrote:
>
>> Scripsit mbstevens:
>>
>> > Your comments had to do with semantics.
>>
>> Yes, _my_ comments have a meaning. (Semantics is the study of
>> meaning.) You are whining about having been corrected in an essential
>> point.
>
> Well, it sure did not look like mbsteven disputed that your
> comments had a meaning. Rather, he was emphasising that semantics
> was not crucially relevant to the trouble experienced by the op.

Realistically, css is about as optional as the paint on a car. You don't
need it, the car will work, but... Anybody who turns css off is a nitwit.

Semantics, on the other hand, are particularly valuable to non-visual html
applications but not especially critical to visual rendering. Yeah, I know
all about "tag soup", but going overboard in the other direction is at
least as annoying and only dubiously productive. That other newsgroup
about html, ciwah, invariably puts me to sleep whenever I amble 'round
there looking for some, uh, "excitement".

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

In article
,
Neredbojias wrote:

> Realistically, css is about as optional as the paint on a car. You don't
> need it, the car will work, but... Anybody who turns css off is a nitwit.

I take that personally! I sometimes turn css off because a nitwit
did the css in the first place.

Actually, a white reflective paint job on a car keeps the inside
cooler. There is a moral here about meaning. The distinction
between style and content is not quite Sound of Music, it is
dirtier.

--
dorayme

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit mbstevens:
>
>> Your comments had to do with semantics.
>
> Yes, _my_ comments have a meaning. (Semantics is the study of meaning.)

In any formal system, there is the syntax, which is amenable to absolute
and decidable questions of correctness or incorrectness. Onto this syntax
there might or might not be tacked on a semantics which interprets it.

Certainly, the various organizations and such can give a clear picture
of HTML's syntax, including what is definitely correct and incorrect.
But given the nature of web pages, it is impossible for the organizations to
give a complete picture of the semantics. Suggestions of what constitutes
good style certainly have value, but
questions of semantics such as you brought up were, at best,
pedantic, given that the op was really interested in the mechanics of what
was making his markup fail to show a color.

(And this is especially true since we do not have the
complete webpage and some very good pictures of the inside of the
op's head so that we can somehow devine his or her complete intentions)

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Scripsit Neredbojias:

> Realistically, css is about as optional as the paint on a car.

Rather, the color(s) of the paint.

> Anybody who turns css off is a nitwit.

So you are saying - though you probably didn't mean to say - that a visually
impaired person who can use web pages only when font size is very large and
text appears in a simple font, black on white, is a nitwit if he uses the
web.

You are also saying that I am a nitwit when I turn CSS off to test how a
page works without it (as required by W3C and other recommendations), or to
be able to read a page at all because it has a mass of broken CSS that does
not work on standards-conforming browsers, or to switch off the 18pt bold
font or 9px font for copy text.

Being an experienced alt.html'er, you will now how have to write down _200_
times "CSS is for optional presentational suggestions, and I will learn
Finnish just to read Yucca's books on web design and on CSS to really
understand this".

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 04 Sep 2007 00:48:13
GMT dorayme scribed:

>> Realistically, css is about as optional as the paint on a car. You
>> don't need it, the car will work, but... Anybody who turns css off
>> is a nitwit.
>
> I take that personally! I sometimes turn css off because a nitwit
> did the css in the first place.

Well, yeah, okay, but how often? The point is that without using
deprecated markup, css is just about the only styling option left. (I
suppose

, etc., and things like could be considered styling,
but they are germane in but few cases.)

Furthermore, css actually goes beyond styling into layout with options like
positioning, :before - content:, and even overflow. Today's Web is css
dependent, and only the most bare-bones and undesirable sites could exist
without it (... _or_, as I said, deprecated markup.)

> Actually, a white reflective paint job on a car keeps the inside
> cooler. There is a moral here about meaning. The distinction
> between style and content is not quite Sound of Music, it is
> dirtier.

I rather agree although I'd say the distinction between styling and layout
is the issue. Layout is required; styling technically isn't, but paint on
a car...

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 04 Sep 2007 07:21:16
GMT Jukka K. Korpela scribed:

> Scripsit Neredbojias:
>
>> Realistically, css is about as optional as the paint on a car.
>
> Rather, the color(s) of the paint.
>
>> Anybody who turns css off is a nitwit.
>
> So you are saying - though you probably didn't mean to say - that a
> visually impaired person who can use web pages only when font size is
> very large and text appears in a simple font, black on white, is a
> nitwit if he uses the web.
>
> You are also saying that I am a nitwit when I turn CSS off to test how
> a page works without it (as required by W3C and other
> recommendations), or to be able to read a page at all because it has a
> mass of broken CSS that does not work on standards-conforming
> browsers, or to switch off the 18pt bold font or 9px font for copy
> text.
>
> Being an experienced alt.html'er, you will now how have to write down
> _200_ times "CSS is for optional presentational suggestions, and I
> will learn Finnish just to read Yucca's books on web design and on CSS
> to really understand this".

Naturally there are exceptions. Water is required to survive, but not
too many people are going to drink from a lake with green slime on it.
My comment was directed at the prevailing habit of the overall majority
whether or not to enable css, and I think it is evident they would be
foolish not to. Testing, compensating for inept web pages, and
instituting provisions for personal physical challenges hardly invalidate
the principle.

I understand current wisdom _suggests_ that css is optional, but
pragmatically, it just isn't. We are within the medieval ages of html
evolution. Eventually the renaissance will come when persons analogous
to Galileo, Copernicus, and others with a brain will lift us all out of
the great Darkness and whoosh us into the light of a simpler html where
most of the average, general public might learn how to make a webpage
without the illogicalities and inconsistencies that plague mankind today.

Btw, I'm Swedish so learning Finnish might be heretical to my heritage.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

In article
,
Neredbojias wrote:

> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 04 Sep 2007 00:48:13
> GMT dorayme scribed:
>
> >> Realistically, css is about as optional as the paint on a car. You
> >> don't need it, the car will work, but... Anybody who turns css off
> >> is a nitwit.
> >
> > I take that personally! I sometimes turn css off because a nitwit
> > did the css in the first place.
>
> Well, yeah, okay, but how often? The point is that without using
> deprecated markup, css is just about the only styling option left. (I
> suppose

, etc., and things like could be considered styling,
> but they are germane in but few cases.)
>
> Furthermore, css actually goes beyond styling into layout with options like
> positioning, :before - content:,
>
> > Actually, a white reflective paint job on a car keeps the inside
> > cooler. There is a moral here about meaning. The distinction
> > between style and content is not quite Sound of Music, it is
> > dirtier.
>
> I rather agree although I'd say the distinction between styling and layout
> is the issue. Layout is required; styling technically isn't, but paint on
> a car...

The distinction between styling and layout is not quite "the'
issue when it comes to the question about style and meaning
generally. When style is spoken of in the context of these
matters, it is almost always meant to include both colouring,
sizing, and yes, positioning and layout too. And quite rightly
for most purposes.

An example of where layout is *obviously* crucial to meaning is a
tabular table. A table is a good example of where how something
is laid out determines its meaning. Once the basic
meaning-related layout is achieved (greatly assisted by built in
HTML table magic), there comes a time for the *stylistic*
enhancements like colours, types of fonts, border types,
background colours and so on. But it is not a clear cut thing. If
you look at a table of atomic elements, you will see that some of
the styling, especially background colours, play a more than mere
optional role. These more than optional roles are where the
blurring occurs. It is often quite difficult to think up ways to
communicate things without the help of style.

Another way to look at it is this. There is a built in styling
(and I am not talking about default values, paras indented just
so so) to writing html itself. The order of the paras are
important to meaning. You can't be messing too much with classes
and positioning here otherwise you will change the meaning of the
whole, or confuse it. A list, visually, naturally, goes down the
page in the order it is written. It does not change the meaning
much if it is put inline. But there are constraints, you can't do
just anything in css without affecting the meaning communicated.

There is sometimes more than a marriage of convenience between
HTML and CSS, sometimes it is a holy union. Its sanctity is only
obscured by the triviality of so much that passes by on the
internet.

The best thing that any author can do is create create html that
can stand on its own as much as possible. That means it will mean
as much as what the author wants to convey as possible on its
very own. Then it is time to hitch up. The marriage will be all
the more successful, the more independent the html is in the
first place. But that does not mean that the marriage *merely*
enhances the meaning.

--
dorayme

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Scripsit Neredbojias:

>> Being an experienced alt.html'er, you will now how have to write down
>> _200_ times "CSS is for optional presentational suggestions, and I
>> will learn Finnish just to read Yucca's books on web design and on
>> CSS to really understand this".
>
> Naturally there are exceptions.

So did you write it down 200 times? You're not allowed to talk before you've
done that and shown it to us. And no exceptions allowed.

> Water is required to survive,

I'm impressed by the wealth of new information I get in alt.html every day.

> Btw, I'm Swedish so learning Finnish might be heretical to my
> heritage.

Yeah, I guess Finnish is still more or less illegal in Sweden.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:11:57
GMT dorayme scribed:

>> I rather agree although I'd say the distinction between styling and
>> layout is the issue. Layout is required; styling technically isn't,
>> but paint on a car...
>
> The distinction between styling and layout is not quite "the'
> issue when it comes to the question about style and meaning
> generally. When style is spoken of in the context of these
> matters, it is almost always meant to include both colouring,
> sizing, and yes, positioning and layout too. And quite rightly
> for most purposes.
>
> An example of where layout is *obviously* crucial to meaning is a
> tabular table. A table is a good example of where how something
> is laid out determines its meaning. Once the basic
> meaning-related layout is achieved (greatly assisted by built in
> HTML table magic), there comes a time for the *stylistic*
> enhancements like colours, types of fonts, border types,
> background colours and so on. But it is not a clear cut thing. If
> you look at a table of atomic elements, you will see that some of
> the styling, especially background colours, play a more than mere
> optional role. These more than optional roles are where the
> blurring occurs. It is often quite difficult to think up ways to
> communicate things without the help of style.
>
> Another way to look at it is this. There is a built in styling
> (and I am not talking about default values, paras indented just
> so so) to writing html itself. The order of the paras are
> important to meaning. You can't be messing too much with classes
> and positioning here otherwise you will change the meaning of the
> whole, or confuse it. A list, visually, naturally, goes down the
> page in the order it is written. It does not change the meaning
> much if it is put inline. But there are constraints, you can't do
> just anything in css without affecting the meaning communicated.
>
> There is sometimes more than a marriage of convenience between
> HTML and CSS, sometimes it is a holy union. Its sanctity is only
> obscured by the triviality of so much that passes by on the
> internet.
>
> The best thing that any author can do is create create html that
> can stand on its own as much as possible. That means it will mean
> as much as what the author wants to convey as possible on its
> very own. Then it is time to hitch up. The marriage will be all
> the more successful, the more independent the html is in the
> first place. But that does not mean that the marriage *merely*
> enhances the meaning.

Reading all that made me really sleepy. Anyway, I think we're
generally in accord here and I particularly agree with you about html
standing on its own as much as possible. That's like the skeleton of the
proverbial animal. "There's no pheremones without dem dere bones."
However, semantics and separation and all that can be overstated as to
importance because the really important thing is how the page works and
looks, not how well it follows some hypothetically-optimal formulae.
Even validation can take second-seat if real world experience bears out
that a method or procedure is recognized overall and functional despite
what the w3c mopes have to say.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:29:03
GMT Jukka K. Korpela scribed:

>> Naturally there are exceptions.
>
> So did you write it down 200 times? You're not allowed to talk before
> you've done that and shown it to us. And no exceptions allowed.

I did but the dog ate it.

>> Water is required to survive,
>
> I'm impressed by the wealth of new information I get in alt.html every
> day.

Yep. Things are much more succinct here than, say, ciwah.

>> Btw, I'm Swedish so learning Finnish might be heretical to my
>> heritage.
>
> Yeah, I guess Finnish is still more or less illegal in Sweden.

Well, the king got taken once by a Finnish aphrodesiac service. Swedes can
be stubborn.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

In article
,
Neredbojias wrote:

> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:11:57
> GMT dorayme scribed:
>
> >> I rather agree although I'd say the distinction between styling and
> >> layout is the issue. Layout is required; styling technically isn't,
> >> but paint on a car...
> >
> > The distinction between styling and layout is not quite "the'
> > issue when it comes to the question about style and meaning
> > generally. When style is spoken of in the context of these
> > matters, it is almost always meant to include both colouring,
> > sizing, and yes, positioning and layout too. And quite rightly
> > for most purposes.
> >
> > An example of where layout is *obviously* crucial to meaning is a
> > tabular table. A table is a good example of where how something
> > is laid out determines its meaning. Once the basic
> > meaning-related layout is achieved (greatly assisted by built in
> > HTML table magic), there comes a time for the *stylistic*
> > enhancements like colours, types of fonts, border types,
> > background colours and so on. But it is not a clear cut thing. If
> > you look at a table of atomic elements, you will see that some of
> > the styling, especially background colours, play a more than mere
> > optional role. These more than optional roles are where the
> > blurring occurs. It is often quite difficult to think up ways to
> > communicate things without the help of style.
> >
> > Another way to look at it is this. There is a built in styling
> > (and I am not talking about default values, paras indented just
> > so so) to writing html itself. The order of the paras are
> > important to meaning. You can't be messing too much with classes
> > and positioning here otherwise you will change the meaning of the
> > whole, or confuse it. A list, visually, naturally, goes down the
> > page in the order it is written. It does not change the meaning
> > much if it is put inline. But there are constraints, you can't do
> > just anything in css without affecting the meaning communicated.
> >
> > There is sometimes more than a marriage of convenience between
> > HTML and CSS, sometimes it is a holy union. Its sanctity is only
> > obscured by the triviality of so much that passes by on the
> > internet.
> >
> > The best thing that any author can do is create create html that
> > can stand on its own as much as possible. That means it will mean
> > as much as what the author wants to convey as possible on its
> > very own. Then it is time to hitch up. The marriage will be all
> > the more successful, the more independent the html is in the
> > first place. But that does not mean that the marriage *merely*
> > enhances the meaning.
>
>

I have always suspected that there is only one really good and
entertaining way to deal with you that would not make you cease
yawning so: to send Officer White around to have a little word.
Actually, I have asked him to come and beat me up afterwards
after he has dealt with you - after I discovered myself yawning
at the above. Or maybe it is just the boozy afternoon that i have
had with Bush and Putin. Bush is a bit prissy (his wife was
watching us), but my god, that Putin can drink! I will tell you
the jokes we three shared one day.

--
dorayme

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

In article
,
dorayme wrote:


> that would not make you cease
> yawning so:

that would make you cease... beware of double negatives after an
avo with Putin

--
dorayme

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 06 Sep 2007 08:29:30 GMT
dorayme scribed:

>>
>
> I have always suspected that there is only one really good and
> entertaining way to deal with you that would not make you cease
> yawning so: to send Officer White around to have a little word.
> Actually, I have asked him to come and beat me up afterwards
> after he has dealt with you - after I discovered myself yawning
> at the above. Or maybe it is just the boozy afternoon that i have
> had with Bush and Putin. Bush is a bit prissy (his wife was
> watching us), but my god, that Putin can drink! I will tell you
> the jokes we three shared one day.

"Bush and Putin" - sounds like a vaudeville team. Btw, "Putin"
dyslexically in "Input".

When I refered to being sleepy, I didn't mean to suggest that your
overlong, rambling message was boring or anything like that. (If you're
confused by the lack of an included referral, that's because you snipped it
whilst retaining said to wit overlong and rambling missive.) But don't
worry, I have taken the liberty of exorcising the morphoditic morsel and we
all can rest easier knowing that we won't be put to sleep at our keyboards.

Is it warming up thare in Sydney yet?

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 06 Sep 2007 08:38:55 GMT
dorayme scribed:

> dorayme wrote:
>
>
>> that would not make you cease
>> yawning so:
>
> that would make you cease... beware of double negatives after an
> avo with Putin

Negatives can actually be summary as opposed to antipodal. I had an
acquaintance once who sucked. He told me about this acquaintance of his
whom he said sucked. Naturally, I thought that this acquaintance of my
acquaintance and I might share some common ground, -you know, like
opposites of opposites are the same or the enemy of your enemy is your
friend...that kind of thing. Boy, was I wrong! Not only did this twice-
removed acquaintance suck at least three times as much as my original
acquaintance, she even wanted to charge for the privilege!

Hmm, sounds kind of like a bin Hassid story, don't it?

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

In article
,
Neredbojias wrote:

> Is it warming up thare in Sydney yet?

In the centre of town, it is very hot at the moment. Snipers
everywhere. Everyone has pissed off to the bush while the APEC
circus is in town.

--
dorayme

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

In article
,
Neredbojias wrote:

> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 06 Sep 2007 08:38:55 GMT
> dorayme scribed:
>
> > dorayme wrote:
> >
> >
> >> that would not make you cease
> >> yawning so:
> >
> > that would make you cease... beware of double negatives after an
> > avo with Putin
>
> Negatives can actually be summary as opposed to antipodal. I had an
> acquaintance once who sucked. He told me about this acquaintance of his
> whom he said sucked. Naturally, I thought that this acquaintance of my
> acquaintance and I might share some common ground, -you know, like
> opposites of opposites are the same or the enemy of your enemy is your
> friend...that kind of thing. Boy, was I wrong! Not only did this twice-
> removed acquaintance suck at least three times as much as my original
> acquaintance, she even wanted to charge for the privilege!
>
> Hmm, sounds kind of like a bin Hassid story, don't it?

I don't know what the hell you are talking about, you
barely-quarter-articulate Neanderthal.

But I do know a joke about sucking. I was visiting an elderly
relation once in a nursing home and as I was walking past one of
the rooms, I heard an old feller from the other side of the door
say: "Suck, Mildred, suck! "Blow" is just an expression!".

That should guarantee that only Travis will ever talk to me again
on this ng. Oh, well, them's the breaks.

--
dorayme

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Neredbojias wrote:

>>> that would not make you cease
>>> yawning so:
>> that would make you cease... beware of double negatives after an
>> avo with Putin
>
> Negatives can actually be summary as opposed to antipodal.

Recently posted to another group:
A linguistics professor was lecturing his class one day.

"In English," he said, "a double negative forms
a positive. In some languages, though, such as Russian, a double negative is
still a negative. However, there is no language wherein a double positive
can form a negative." A loud voice from the back of the room piped up:
"Yeah, right."

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

In article <13e2mte3lbth5c9@corp.supernews.com>,
mbstevens wrote:

> Neredbojias wrote:
>
> >>> that would not make you cease
> >>> yawning so:
> >> that would make you cease... beware of double negatives after an
> >> avo with Putin
> >
> > Negatives can actually be summary as opposed to antipodal.
>
> Recently posted to another group:
> A linguistics professor was lecturing his class one day.
>
> "In English," he said, "a double negative forms
> a positive. In some languages, though, such as Russian, a double negative is
> still a negative. However, there is no language wherein a double positive
> can form a negative." A loud voice from the back of the room piped up:
> "Yeah, right."



--
dorayme

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Fri, 07 Sep 2007 07:10:21
GMT dorayme scribed:

>> Negatives can actually be summary as opposed to antipodal. I had an
>> acquaintance once who sucked. He told me about this acquaintance of
>> his whom he said sucked. Naturally, I thought that this acquaintance
>> of my acquaintance and I might share some common ground, -you know,
>> like opposites of opposites are the same or the enemy of your enemy
>> is your friend...that kind of thing. Boy, was I wrong! Not only did
>> this twice- removed acquaintance suck at least three times as much as
>> my original acquaintance, she even wanted to charge for the
>> privilege!
>>
>> Hmm, sounds kind of like a bin Hassid story, don't it?
>
> I don't know what the hell you are talking about, you
> barely-quarter-articulate Neanderthal.

Cro-Magnon, please... The Neanderthals were a side-branch of dweebo-
stupidos that died out because they listened to their women too much.

> But I do know a joke about sucking. I was visiting an elderly
> relation once in a nursing home and as I was walking past one of
> the rooms, I heard an old feller from the other side of the door
> say: "Suck, Mildred, suck! "Blow" is just an expression!".
>
> That should guarantee that only Travis will ever talk to me again
> on this ng. Oh, well, them's the breaks.

Wow, a dirty joke. I didn't think you were that kind of a girl. 'Hope
this wasn't just an oblique reference to a personal experience you felt you
had to get off your chest. Women do those kinds of things...

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:12:37
GMT mbstevens scribed:

>> Negatives can actually be summary as opposed to antipodal.
>
> Recently posted to another group:
> A linguistics professor was lecturing his class one day.
>
> "In English," he said, "a double negative forms
> a positive. In some languages, though, such as Russian, a double
> negative is still a negative. However, there is no language wherein a
> double positive can form a negative." A loud voice from the back of
> the room piped up: "Yeah, right."

Excellent! -My kind of anecdote. I also like the phrase "Yeah, right," in
real life for it's sarcastically scintillating ironic tones.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Problem with CSS file in IE7

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Fri, 07 Sep 2007 06:58:10 GMT
dorayme scribed:

>> Is it warming up thare in Sydney yet?
>
> In the centre of town, it is very hot at the moment. Snipers
> everywhere. Everyone has pissed off to the bush while the APEC
> circus is in town.

Snipers? What are they sniping for, rightside-upness?

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.