God I miss tables-help needed!

[dorayme]

Maybe I should've said "my 'suggested method'"

No need to be too coy, some of your advice was good. That kchayka
fellow added some excellent points and revisions too. Adjust for
these and then simply assert best practice!

Incorporate and be bold!

 

[Randal L. Schwartz]

Karl> The "Worldwide Web" is *not* the Internet.
Karl> Please review - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web

Karl> You are confusing the Internet (the interconnected network of networks)
Karl> with Tim Berners Lee's vision of the WWW. To us pedants, the terms are not
Karl> synonymous.

And confusing The Internet for Usenet is also a gaffe of similar proportions.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[email protected]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***

 

[Richard]

Hey Neil, Karl, Mark & Jonathan,

You guys all seem to agree that I'm wrong in praising the Web for
providing the services I rely on in dealing with the myriad problems I
encounter in software development.

But according to the Wikipedia that one of you cited: "The World Wide
Web ("WWW" or simply the "'Web") is a global information space which
people can read-from and write-to via a large number of different
Internet-connected devices."

The key deal is: The Web is a global space we can read/write to/from
that is materialized on the Internet, the large number of
interconnected devices.

So, I assert that it is the Web that provides the services I'm thankful
to access to; Of course, I appreciate the 'Net that faciltates the
Web, but my focus is on the Web.

Do you guys think I still suffer a misconception?

Regards,
Richard

 

[JDS]

Excusing the word "force", this is where well-placed divs can eliminate
or reduce the need for the excessive class assignments in your #2.
Grouping elements in a div wrapper can make styling those elements a
breeze, using primarily descendant selectors.

Ah, so. Good clarifications.

Lets just hope that CSS newbs are reading threads such as these.

Tired...... to sleep i go

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Hey Neil, Karl, Mark & Jonathan,

You guys all seem to agree that I'm wrong in praising the Web for
providing the services I rely on in dealing with the myriad problems I
encounter in software development.

But according to the Wikipedia that one of you cited: "The World Wide
Web ("WWW" or simply the "'Web") is a global information space which
people can read-from and write-to via a large number of different
Internet-connected devices."

The key deal is: The Web is a global space we can read/write to/from
that is materialized on the Internet, the large number of
interconnected devices.

So, I assert that it is the Web that provides the services I'm thankful
to access to; Of course, I appreciate the 'Net that faciltates the
Web, but my focus is on the Web.

Do you guys think I still suffer a misconception?

Just imprecise in your perception. Usenet predates the Web. Yes uses the
same hardware, the Internet, but is a different service than the WWW aka
Web. Even from your Wiki link a little farther along it stakes:

....The term is often mistakenly used as a synonym for the Internet
itself, but the Web is actually a service that operates over the
Internet, just like e-mail...

Notice the article separates email from the web as a separate service
over the Internet. Well Usenet is another service as well not a subset
of the Web see Usenet in the Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Usenet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Richard]

Hi Jonathan,

Usenet predates the Web

I accept that.

but is a different service than the WWW aka Web.

But I think the service you're talking about uses UUCP protocol, or
something like that. But I use Google Groups via HTTP, the Web
protocol. As I'm typing this, I see in the Address bar:
"http://groups.google.com/group/comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets/...".


There may be some lower-level protocol that drives Usenet, but *I*
wouldn't have known about if the higher-level HTTP didn't allow my
Google search to turn up a Usenet group in my browser.

That's why I celebrate the Web. It is the techology at that allowed me
to discover and ultimately access this NG (among many other things).
You and others may access it in a different manner, but I remain
blissfully ignorant about that except for the few details you and the
other guys imparted.

So has my perception gotten an enhanced standing in your eyes, or
should we just agree to disagree and go on trying to make computers do
neat tricks?

Best wishes,
Ricard

 

[Jerry Stuckle]

Hi Jonathan,




I accept that.




But I think the service you're talking about uses UUCP protocol, or
something like that. But I use Google Groups via HTTP, the Web
protocol. As I'm typing this, I see in the Address bar:
"http://groups.google.com/group/comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets/...".


There may be some lower-level protocol that drives Usenet, but *I*
wouldn't have known about if the higher-level HTTP didn't allow my
Google search to turn up a Usenet group in my browser.

That's why I celebrate the Web. It is the techology at that allowed me
to discover and ultimately access this NG (among many other things).
You and others may access it in a different manner, but I remain
blissfully ignorant about that except for the few details you and the
other guys imparted.

So has my perception gotten an enhanced standing in your eyes, or
should we just agree to disagree and go on trying to make computers do
neat tricks?

Best wishes,
Ricard

Richard,

Yes, and Google has to use UUCP protocol to access usenet - both to retrieve and
post messages. Without UUCP, Usenet (and Google Groups) wouldn't exist.

When you send email, you use SMTP protocol. When you receive it, you use POP3
or IMAP protocol. Email is also part of the internet. But because you use a
graphical interface, you don't see that.

A very little research on your part would show you there are much better ways to
access usenet than Google Groups.


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
(e-mail address removed)
==================

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Hi Jonathan,


I accept that.


But I think the service you're talking about uses UUCP protocol, or
something like that. But I use Google Groups via HTTP, the Web
protocol. As I'm typing this, I see in the Address bar:
"http://groups.google.com/group/comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets/...".

Did you not recall my previous statement:

"DejaVue and now Google just repackage the content into a webpage for
folks without newsserver access or those who are unaware of such access."

Usenet, like email is a separate service and and different protocol
(kinda like language for the service, NNTP for news and SMPT and POP3
for email) that predates the 'Web' HTTP the making of (graphic web pages).

There may be some lower-level protocol that drives Usenet, but *I*
wouldn't have known about if the higher-level HTTP didn't allow my
Google search to turn up a Usenet group in my browser.

I wouldn't really call it higher level, just a different protocol. Kind
of like TV and radio and wireless Ethernet. All use the common medium,
electromagnetic radiation but the service and protocols are different.

You may get email via a webpage with webmail and Usenet via a webpage
via a webpage with Google Groups but the process must be converted
first. Usenet as email does not use HTTP protocol it must be access via
the native protocol and Google or whatever must have a program to
convert and reformat the data into a webpage.

That's why I celebrate the Web. It is the techology at that allowed me
to discover and ultimately access this NG (among many other things).
You and others may access it in a different manner, but I remain
blissfully ignorant about that except for the few details you and the
other guys imparted.

So has my perception gotten an enhanced standing in your eyes, or
should we just agree to disagree and go on trying to make computers do
neat tricks?

I guess the important point here is that Usenet requires NNTP, Google
Group is just Usenet data reformatted into a webpage but does not
replace Usenet.

 

[Richard]

Hi Jerry,

much better ways to access usenet than Google Groups

OK, I did "A very little research". I visited http://www.disenter.com/
and observed their claim of monitoring 56,000+ servers.

I searched for Ruby: it reported 117 NGs, but didn't list any
(presumably because of heavy load on their servers). Ajax: one
listing, but for soccer. C++: regexp failure. C#: 0.

I don't think that site serves me better than Google Groups, which
lists groups in categories and recommends related groups. I'm
presently registered in almost a dozen NGs on Google. They were easy
to find, easy to assess in terms of number of users and frequency of
response.

I'm glad you feel well servered by Usenet. I think I'll stick to my
"church", which I think of as the Web, no mind if I happen
occassionally to use my Outlook Express newsreader or whether a site I
visit uses a newsreader to serve me web pages.

Best wishes,
Richard

 

[Richard]

Hi Jonathan,

I guess the important point here is that Usenet requires NNTP, Google

Group is just Usenet data reformatted into a webpage but does not
replace Usenet.

I understand exactly the point you're making. For people that think
about protocol stacks and other aspects of digital communicationsm
those caveats are significant. That's presumably your baliwick.

For me, I access Google Groups via a Web protocol to get answers to
occassional technical questions. That those answers arrive abetted by
some other protocols doesn't diminish my appreciation for the Web.
Some might think I should be equally appreciative of Edison's DC
generators or Westinghouse's alternators, but that wasn't my focus
when I exclaimed, Hooray for the Web.

Thanks for enlightening me, however.

Best wishes,
Richard

 

[dorayme]

That's why I celebrate the Web. It is the techology at that allowed me
to discover and ultimately access this NG (among many other things).
You and others may access it in a different manner, but I remain
blissfully ignorant about that except for the few details you and the
other guys imparted.

So has my perception gotten an enhanced standing in your eyes, or
should we just agree to disagree and go on trying to make computers do
neat tricks?

Perhaps your perception is like that of person watching through
binoculars a naked dancer (you perv!) in a distant flat. You see
what another person - who sits (out of sight to you) on a chair
in the dancer's flat - is enjoying. This person has gone to some
expense and trouble to gain such direct access. Why would your
perception deserve any enhanced standing?

 

[Neredbojias]

To further the education of mankind, dorayme

Perhaps your perception is like that of person watching through
binoculars a naked dancer (you perv!) in a distant flat. You see
what another person - who sits (out of sight to you) on a chair
in the dancer's flat - is enjoying. This person has gone to some
expense and trouble to gain such direct access. Why would your
perception deserve any enhanced standing?

Deserved or not, it usually just happens.

 

[Jerry Stuckle]

Hi Jerry,




OK, I did "A very little research". I visited http://www.disenter.com/
and observed their claim of monitoring 56,000+ servers.

I searched for Ruby: it reported 117 NGs, but didn't list any
(presumably because of heavy load on their servers). Ajax: one
listing, but for soccer. C++: regexp failure. C#: 0.

I don't think that site serves me better than Google Groups, which
lists groups in categories and recommends related groups. I'm
presently registered in almost a dozen NGs on Google. They were easy
to find, easy to assess in terms of number of users and frequency of
response.

I'm glad you feel well servered by Usenet. I think I'll stick to my
"church", which I think of as the Web, no mind if I happen
occassionally to use my Outlook Express newsreader or whether a site I
visit uses a newsreader to serve me web pages.

Best wishes,
Richard

Try a real newsreader, not a web based abortion. It works much better.

You did research. But none on what usenet really is.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
(e-mail address removed)
==================

 

[Paul Ding]

I guess the important point here is that Usenet requires NNTP, Google
Group is just Usenet data reformatted into a webpage but does not
replace Usenet.

Usenet does not *require* NNTP. If a usenet server is on the internet,
then NNTP is the most common protocol used when servers talk to each
other, but not all usenet servers are on the internet.

The OP isn't beholden to the web to access usenet so much as he is
beholden to a *chair* and a table or desk. It's almost impossible to
type when both you and the computer are resting on the floor.