I had to change PCs, and thus had to reinstall POV.

At the end of the install, it asks if we want to install the editor 
"DLL's" and sends us to the POV site where we can download the "DLL's"

Excpet plurals don't use apostrophes.  It should be "DLLs".
-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Le 03/07/2015 22:22, Francois Labreque a écrit :
> I had to change PCs, and thus had to reinstall POV.
> 
> At the end of the install, it asks if we want to install the
> editor "DLL's" and sends us to the POV site where we can download
> the "DLL's"
> 
> Excpet plurals don't use apostrophes.  It should be "DLLs".

Even on acronym ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iJwEAQEIAAYFAlWW+5IACgkQhKAm8mTpkW27ZwQAvhYtzLPdIGRcZBtpOsNWTETp
bfcKXeEwAvQv8A3PDI/EOp1/kXdM9zKIezToy62hjKaCh/om6/XadqCb77qFlKUl
MuiVDh1/DRiioAf/4vLqAHXPRc8ZU4dI9JrK4Gi0Ev5dinl/K/kBeIS5IW32yMOe
lvR0WJEHDFV/l7wgIpQ=
=ICgG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message

Le 15-07-03 17:16, Le_Forgeron a écrit :

>
> Le 03/07/2015 22:22, Francois Labreque a écrit :
>> I had to change PCs, and thus had to reinstall POV.
>>
>> At the end of the install, it asks if we want to install the
>> editor "DLL's" and sends us to the POV site where we can download
>> the "DLL's"
>>
>> Excpet plurals don't use apostrophes.  It should be "DLLs".
>
> Even on acronym ?

Yes

The apostrophe denote a pocessive, never plural.

So, it should be "editor's DLLs"

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Jul 2015 23:16:02 +0200, Le_Forgeron wrote:

>> Excpet plurals don't use apostrophes.  It should be "DLLs".
> 
> Even on acronym ?

Generally, yes.  Certainly the technical writing guides I use strongly 
discourage it, but there are some style guides that do use an apostrophe 
(even though it's wrong to do so. ;) )

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

> I had to change PCs, and thus had to reinstall POV.
>
> At the end of the install, it asks if we want to install the editor
> "DLL's" and sends us to the POV site where we can download the "DLL's"
>
> Excpet plurals don't use apostrophes.  It should be "DLLs".

Except not always. DLL's is acceptable, DLLs is also ok, as is the fact 
that there are too many e's in this sentence, or that so many 6's come 
up when I roll dice.

Usually you'd use an apostrophe for an acronym plurar to avoid any 
possible ambiguity (eg if "DLLS" was an equally valid acronym, you 
wouldn't write DLLs for a plural). In this case though I don't think it 
matters.

Post a reply to this message

Le 2015-07-06 08:42, scott a écrit :
>> I had to change PCs, and thus had to reinstall POV.
>>
>> At the end of the install, it asks if we want to install the editor
>> "DLL's" and sends us to the POV site where we can download the "DLL's"
>>
>> Excpet plurals don't use apostrophes.  It should be "DLLs".
>
> Except not always. DLL's is acceptable, DLLs is also ok, as is the fact
> that there are too many e's in this sentence, or that so many 6's come
> up when I roll dice.
>
> Usually you'd use an apostrophe for an acronym plurar to avoid any
> possible ambiguity (eg if "DLLS" was an equally valid acronym, you
> wouldn't write DLLs for a plural). In this case though I don't think it
> matters.
>
That's a new one!  So, you're saying the plural of GP shouldn't be GPs, 
because GPS is another viable acronym?

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

On 7/6/2015 1:42 PM, scott wrote:
> as is the fact that there are too many e's in this sentence, or that so
> many 6's come up when I roll dice.


So, that's where my pills went. ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 06.07.2015 um 14:42 schrieb scott:
>> I had to change PCs, and thus had to reinstall POV.
>>
>> At the end of the install, it asks if we want to install the editor
>> "DLL's" and sends us to the POV site where we can download the "DLL's"
>>
>> Excpet plurals don't use apostrophes.  It should be "DLLs".
>
> Except not always. DLL's is acceptable, DLLs is also ok, as is the fact
> that there are too many e's in this sentence, or that so many 6's come
> up when I roll dice.
>
> Usually you'd use an apostrophe for an acronym plurar to avoid any
> possible ambiguity (eg if "DLLS" was an equally valid acronym, you
> wouldn't write DLLs for a plural). In this case though I don't think it
> matters.

The use of apostrophes for plural of both all-caps and all-digits 
"words" to avoid ambiguity seems to have been common teaching some 
decades ago (to my surprise; maybe it was an American thing), but 
according to Oxford Dictionaries (not to be confused with the OED, from 
which I couldn't find an answer) nowadays it is being strongly discouraged:

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/apostrophe

It might have had to do with old information technology where lowercase 
letters were not always available. (Telegraphy, anyone?)

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 13:42:11 +0100, scott wrote:

>> I had to change PCs, and thus had to reinstall POV.
>>
>> At the end of the install, it asks if we want to install the editor
>> "DLL's" and sends us to the POV site where we can download the "DLL's"
>>
>> Excpet plurals don't use apostrophes.  It should be "DLLs".
> 
> Except not always. DLL's is acceptable, DLLs is also ok, as is the fact
> that there are too many e's in this sentence, or that so many 6's come
> up when I roll dice.
> 
> Usually you'd use an apostrophe for an acronym plurar to avoid any
> possible ambiguity (eg if "DLLS" was an equally valid acronym, you
> wouldn't write DLLs for a plural). In this case though I don't think it
> matters.

As I said, generally, no, apostrophes are not used in acronyms in 
technical writing.

The Microsoft Manual of Style says this:

"In general, form the plural of a noun by adding s. If the noun already 
ends in s, form the plural by adding es. This rule applies to proper 
nouns as well as common nouns.

Microsoft style

the Johnsons

the Joneses

Form the plural of an abbreviation by adding an s with no apostrophe.

Microsoft style

ISVs

DBMSs

If an abbreviation already represents a plural, do not add an s. For 
example, the abbreviation for Microsoft Foundation Classes is MFC, not 
MFCs.

Form the plural of a single letter by adding an apostrophe and an s. The 
letter itself (but not the apostrophe or the ending s) is italic.

Microsoft style

x’s

Form the plural of a number by adding an s with no apostrophe.

Microsoft style

486s

the 1950s"

The Chicago Manual of Style:

"7.14
PLURALS FOR LETTERS , ABBREVIATIONS , AND NUMERALS
Capital letters used as words, numerals used as nouns, and abbreviations 
usually form the plural by adding s. To aid comprehension, lowercase 
letters form the plural with an apostrophe and an s."

(Chicago notes some exceptions in chapter 10, but they're extremely rare).

Jim (technical writer by day)
-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 7/6/2015 4:24 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> The Microsoft Manual of Style says this:

'am no' gettin' involved. ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:34:34 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 7/6/2015 4:24 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> The Microsoft Manual of Style says this:
> 
> 'am no' gettin' involved. ;-)

Heh.

Like it or not, though, for technical writing, there are two style guides 
that are the standards - the Microsoft guide, and the IBM guide.

Microsoft is more commonly used in software AIUI, though the IBM guide 
is, I think, more established.

Microsoft defers to the Chicago Manual of Style for most non-technology 
things, and Chicago (interestingly) defers to Eric S. Raymond's "Jargon 
file" section on writing.

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 7/6/2015 4:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Heh.
>

Ho!

> Like it or not, though, for technical writing, there are two style guides
> that are the standards - the Microsoft guide, and the IBM guide.
>

Is that an accepted international standard? You are the expert, be 
honest. ;-)
Remember you are talking to a dyslectic. And I have no standards. I 
worked for multi national Oil companied. Showing I have no morals, either.


> Microsoft is more commonly used in software AIUI, though the IBM guide
> is, I think, more established.
>
> Microsoft defers to the Chicago Manual of Style for most non-technology
> things, and Chicago (interestingly) defers to Eric S. Raymond's "Jargon
> file" section on writing.

Sorry! is it my turn?
Oxford Circus.

:-P

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 18:08:55 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 7/6/2015 4:45 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Heh.
>>
>>
> Ho!
> 
>> Like it or not, though, for technical writing, there are two style
>> guides that are the standards - the Microsoft guide, and the IBM guide.
>>
>>
> Is that an accepted international standard? You are the expert, be
> honest. ;-)

It is. :)

> Remember you are talking to a dyslectic. And I have no standards. I
> worked for multi national Oil companied. Showing I have no morals,
> either.

LOL

>> Microsoft is more commonly used in software AIUI, though the IBM guide
>> is, I think, more established.
>>
>> Microsoft defers to the Chicago Manual of Style for most non-technology
>> things, and Chicago (interestingly) defers to Eric S. Raymond's "Jargon
>> file" section on writing.
> 
> Sorry! is it my turn?
> Oxford Circus.

Ipswitch.



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 7/7/2015 5:38 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Sorry! is it my turn?
>> >Oxford Circus.
> Ipswitch.


Sorry, I woke up with a start and thought I was in another thread.

Since you mentioned Ipswich. Here is the conclusion of a "feel good" 
story, from there.

High society news. ;-)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7-7-2015 7:48, Stephen wrote:
> High society news. ;-)
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>

Oh yes! I read about that! They did a beautiful restoration job indeed. 
They did not tell in how many pieces the kid was but he probably was 
traumatised for life :-/

I didn't know about puzzle jugs...

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

> That's a new one!  So, you're saying the plural of GP shouldn't be GPs,
> because GPS is another viable acronym?

"GPS TO STOP WORKING BY 2020!"

It's not a case of should or shouldn't, just the option is there to use 
an apostrophe to denote plural for the purpose of making the text 
clearer to read. It's not normally needed for acronyms (more usually for 
letters or numbers), but it's incorrect to state that an apostrophe is 
never used for plurarls.

Post a reply to this message

On 7/7/2015 8:23 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 7-7-2015 7:48, Stephen wrote:
>> High society news. ;-)
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>>
>
> Oh yes! I read about that! They did a beautiful restoration job indeed.
> They did not tell in how many pieces the kid was but he probably was
> traumatised for life :-/
>

I suppose he will get over it. :-)
The family did the right thing by remaining anonymous.

> I didn't know about puzzle jugs...
>

They are an interesting folly. More for decoration than use, I think.
A bit like a yard of ale or a Bierstiefel.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7-7-2015 10:39, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/7/2015 8:23 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 7-7-2015 7:48, Stephen wrote:
>>> High society news. ;-)
>>>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>>>
>>
>> Oh yes! I read about that! They did a beautiful restoration job indeed.
>> They did not tell in how many pieces the kid was but he probably was
>> traumatised for life :-/
>>
>
> I suppose he will get over it. :-)
> The family did the right thing by remaining anonymous.

Yes, I thought that was a smart thing to do.

>
>> I didn't know about puzzle jugs...
>>
>
> They are an interesting folly. More for decoration than use, I think.
> A bit like a yard of ale or a Bierstiefel.
>

I can imagine its use during a wild party :-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 7/7/2015 12:16 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:

>>
>>> I didn't know about puzzle jugs...
>>>
>>
>> They are an interesting folly. More for decoration than use, I think.
>> A bit like a yard of ale or a Bierstiefel.
>>
>
> I can imagine its use during a wild party :-)
>

Was there ever a craze for drinking wine using a porron, in the Netherlands?
There was one in the UK when cheap flights to Spain became available in 
the 60s/70s (no apostrophe)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 07.07.2015 um 07:48 schrieb Stephen:

> Since you mentioned Ipswich. Here is the conclusion of a "feel good"
> story, from there.
>
> High society news. ;-)
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896

Gives a whole new meaning to the term "puzzle jug"...
(or at least it would, had I known the term before ;))

But I /think/ this thread is diverging...

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 07 Jul 2015 08:53:35 +0100, scott wrote:

>> That's a new one!  So, you're saying the plural of GP shouldn't be GPs,
>> because GPS is another viable acronym?
> 
> "GPS TO STOP WORKING BY 2020!"
> 
> It's not a case of should or shouldn't, just the option is there to use
> an apostrophe to denote plural for the purpose of making the text
> clearer to read. It's not normally needed for acronyms (more usually for
> letters or numbers), but it's incorrect to state that an apostrophe is
> never used for plurarls.

The style guide in use or context would determine whether or not you read 
that as "GPs" or "GPS".

Context would be the more likely indicator.  If you're reading a medical 
journal, it's not likely to be a global positioning system.  If you're 
reading a tech journal, it's not likely to be your doctor.

When writing, you *must* take the audience and context into 
consideration, or you will fail to communicate clearly.

There is no circumstance I can think of where "GP's" would be considered 
a proper plural of "GP".  It would *always* be a possessive.

Jim

-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 07 Jul 2015 06:48:08 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 7/7/2015 5:38 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> Sorry! is it my turn?
>>> >Oxford Circus.
>> Ipswitch.
> 
> 
> Sorry, I woke up with a start and thought I was in another thread.
> 
> Since you mentioned Ipswich. Here is the conclusion of a "feel good"
> story, from there.
> 
> High society news. ;-)
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896

I've seen the trick for drinking from a jug like that - it's actually 
pretty easy to do. :)

Jim

-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 7-7-2015 14:27, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/7/2015 12:16 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
>>>
>>>> I didn't know about puzzle jugs...
>>>>
>>>
>>> They are an interesting folly. More for decoration than use, I think.
>>> A bit like a yard of ale or a Bierstiefel.
>>>
>>
>> I can imagine its use during a wild party :-)
>>
>
> Was there ever a craze for drinking wine using a porron, in the
> Netherlands?
> There was one in the UK when cheap flights to Spain became available in
> the 60s/70s (no apostrophe)
>

I am not sure. I do not really remember but I suppose there was, at 
least in some Spanish restaurants which started round that time. I did 
fieldwork in South Spain in the early 70s, but they were not in use in 
the rural areas where I dwelt.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 7-7-2015 18:34, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2015 06:48:08 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 7/7/2015 5:38 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> Sorry! is it my turn?
>>>>> Oxford Circus.
>>> Ipswitch.
>>
>>
>> Sorry, I woke up with a start and thought I was in another thread.
>>
>> Since you mentioned Ipswich. Here is the conclusion of a "feel good"
>> story, from there.
>>
>> High society news. ;-)
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>
> I've seen the trick for drinking from a jug like that - it's actually
> pretty easy to do. :)
>

With /three/ spouts? ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 7/8/2015 8:36 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> High society news. ;-)
>>>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>>
>> I've seen the trick for drinking from a jug like that - it's actually
>> pretty easy to do. :)
>>
>
> With /three/ spouts? ;-)


If you look at the bottom image. You will see that there are more than 
three ways the wine can get out of the jug.

For your convenience.

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1C09/production/_83877170_jug3.jpg


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7/8/2015 8:34 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> Was there ever a craze for drinking wine using a porron, in the
>> Netherlands?
>> There was one in the UK when cheap flights to Spain became available in
>> the 60s/70s (no apostrophe)
>>
>
> I am not sure. I do not really remember but I suppose there was, at
> least in some Spanish restaurants which started round that time. I did
> fieldwork in South Spain in the early 70s, but they were not in use in
> the rural areas where I dwelt.

They are from Catalan. And seas of them came back from the Costa Blanca 
with the first wave of tourists.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 8-7-2015 10:14, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/8/2015 8:34 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> Was there ever a craze for drinking wine using a porron, in the
>>> Netherlands?
>>> There was one in the UK when cheap flights to Spain became available in
>>> the 60s/70s (no apostrophe)
>>>
>>
>> I am not sure. I do not really remember but I suppose there was, at
>> least in some Spanish restaurants which started round that time. I did
>> fieldwork in South Spain in the early 70s, but they were not in use in
>> the rural areas where I dwelt.
>
> They are from Catalan. And seas of them came back from the Costa Blanca
> with the first wave of tourists.
>

Ah yes, indeed. Somehow it passed me by and I don't remember ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 8-7-2015 9:54, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/8/2015 8:36 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> High society news. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>>>
>>> I've seen the trick for drinking from a jug like that - it's actually
>>> pretty easy to do. :)
>>>
>>
>> With /three/ spouts? ;-)
>
>
> If you look at the bottom image. You will see that there are more than
> three ways the wine can get out of the jug.
>
> For your convenience.
>
> http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1C09/production/_83877170_jug3.jpg
>
>
>

Yes, there seem to be many little holes around the neck at different 
levels too :-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 7/8/2015 12:21 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 8-7-2015 10:14, Stephen wrote:
>> On 7/8/2015 8:34 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> Was there ever a craze for drinking wine using a porron, in the
>>>> Netherlands?
>>>> There was one in the UK when cheap flights to Spain became available in
>>>> the 60s/70s (no apostrophe)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am not sure. I do not really remember but I suppose there was, at
>>> least in some Spanish restaurants which started round that time. I did
>>> fieldwork in South Spain in the early 70s, but they were not in use in
>>> the rural areas where I dwelt.
>>
>> They are from Catalan. And seas of them came back from the Costa Blanca
>> with the first wave of tourists.
>>
>
> Ah yes, indeed. Somehow it passed me by and I don't remember ;-)
>

Embarrassment, most likely. ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7/8/2015 12:24 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 8-7-2015 9:54, Stephen wrote:
>> On 7/8/2015 8:36 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>> High society news. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>>>>
>>>> I've seen the trick for drinking from a jug like that - it's actually
>>>> pretty easy to do. :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> With /three/ spouts? ;-)
>>
>>
>> If you look at the bottom image. You will see that there are more than
>> three ways the wine can get out of the jug.
>>
>> For your convenience.
>>
>> http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1C09/production/_83877170_jug3.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Yes, there seem to be many little holes around the neck at different
> levels too :-)
>

Still, if you drink out of the spout facing the camera. There are only 
four holes to cover if the jug is not too full.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 08/07/15, at 10:14, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/8/2015 8:34 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> Was there ever a craze for drinking wine using a porron, in the
>>> Netherlands?
>>> There was one in the UK when cheap flights to Spain became available in
>>> the 60s/70s (no apostrophe)
>>>
>>
>> I am not sure. I do not really remember but I suppose there was, at
>> least in some Spanish restaurants which started round that time. I did
>> fieldwork in South Spain in the early 70s, but they were not in use in
>> the rural areas where I dwelt.
>
> They are from Catalan. And seas of them came back from the Costa Blanca
> with the first wave of tourists.
>

In southern (or the whole) Spain you should find the botijo:

http://www.botijopedia.com/en/index.php

and I'd say they would have been much more common in rural areas, and in 
the 70's than they are now. Botijos are made of clay and used for water 
(which they cool).

The porrón (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porron), typically made of 
glass, is used for wine, and it's indeed more typical of north-east.

Another related device is the bota 
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bota_bag), which is made of leather and 
used for wine.

PS. Sorry, Stephen, for the duplicate email reply.

-- 
      Ignacio __ Fernández Galván
             / /\
Linux user / /  \
#289967   / / /\ \ PGP Pub Key
          / / /\ \ \ 0x01A95F99
         / /_/__\ \ \
        /________\ \ \
jellby \___________\/ yahoo.com

Post a reply to this message

On 7/8/2015 6:33 PM, Jellby wrote:
>
> In southern (or the whole) Spain


Oops! Did you press reply all?

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 08/07/15, at 21:07, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/8/2015 6:33 PM, Jellby wrote:
>>
>> In southern (or the whole) Spain
>
>
> Oops! Did you press reply all?
>

I have to "reply" buttons in Firefox, one is by email, the other is to 
the news. Of course, I pressed the wrong one (and I did again now, but 
this time I noticed before clicking on "send" ;) ).

-- 
      Ignacio __ Fernández Galván
             / /\
Linux user / /  \
#289967   / / /\ \ PGP Pub Key
          / / /\ \ \ 0x01A95F99
         / /_/__\ \ \
        /________\ \ \
jellby \___________\/ yahoo.com

Post a reply to this message

On 7/8/2015 8:32 PM, Jellby wrote:
> On 08/07/15, at 21:07, Stephen wrote:
>> On 7/8/2015 6:33 PM, Jellby wrote:
>>>
>>> In southern (or the whole) Spain
>>
>>
>> Oops! Did you press reply all?
>>
>
> I have to "reply" buttons in Firefox, one is by email, the other is to
> the news. Of course, I pressed the wrong one (and I did again now, but
> this time I noticed before clicking on "send" ;) ).
>
Your one to me is date stamped 2 minuets before the Newsgroup one. 
Tolerances!

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 8-7-2015 19:33, Jellby wrote:
> On 08/07/15, at 10:14, Stephen wrote:
>> On 7/8/2015 8:34 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> Was there ever a craze for drinking wine using a porron, in the
>>>> Netherlands?
>>>> There was one in the UK when cheap flights to Spain became available in
>>>> the 60s/70s (no apostrophe)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am not sure. I do not really remember but I suppose there was, at
>>> least in some Spanish restaurants which started round that time. I did
>>> fieldwork in South Spain in the early 70s, but they were not in use in
>>> the rural areas where I dwelt.
>>
>> They are from Catalan. And seas of them came back from the Costa Blanca
>> with the first wave of tourists.
>>
>
> In southern (or the whole) Spain you should find the botijo:
>
> http://www.botijopedia.com/en/index.php
>

Oh yes, that one was much in use of course, and I took a score back with 
me in my ramshackle car. To make a little profit no doubt ;-)


-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 8-7-2015 15:27, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/8/2015 12:21 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 8-7-2015 10:14, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 7/8/2015 8:34 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>> Was there ever a craze for drinking wine using a porron, in the
>>>>> Netherlands?
>>>>> There was one in the UK when cheap flights to Spain became
>>>>> available in
>>>>> the 60s/70s (no apostrophe)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure. I do not really remember but I suppose there was, at
>>>> least in some Spanish restaurants which started round that time. I did
>>>> fieldwork in South Spain in the early 70s, but they were not in use in
>>>> the rural areas where I dwelt.
>>>
>>> They are from Catalan. And seas of them came back from the Costa Blanca
>>> with the first wave of tourists.
>>>
>>
>> Ah yes, indeed. Somehow it passed me by and I don't remember ;-)
>>
>
> Embarrassment, most likely. ;-)
>

No doubt, no doubt...

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 8-7-2015 15:34, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/8/2015 12:24 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 8-7-2015 9:54, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 7/8/2015 8:36 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>>> High society news. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>>>>>
>>>>> I've seen the trick for drinking from a jug like that - it's actually
>>>>> pretty easy to do. :)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With /three/ spouts? ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> If you look at the bottom image. You will see that there are more than
>>> three ways the wine can get out of the jug.
>>>
>>> For your convenience.
>>>
>>> http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1C09/production/_83877170_jug3.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes, there seem to be many little holes around the neck at different
>> levels too :-)
>>
>
> Still, if you drink out of the spout facing the camera. There are only
> four holes to cover if the jug is not too full.
>

You need to be careful anyway and I can imagine people becoming careless 
when drunk :-) A shame if the wine was good, but probably not.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 08 Jul 2015 09:36:05 +0200, Thomas de Groot wrote:

> On 7-7-2015 18:34, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Jul 2015 06:48:08 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/7/2015 5:38 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>> Sorry! is it my turn?
>>>>>> Oxford Circus.
>>>> Ipswitch.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, I woke up with a start and thought I was in another thread.
>>>
>>> Since you mentioned Ipswich. Here is the conclusion of a "feel good"
>>> story, from there.
>>>
>>> High society news. ;-)
>>>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-33389896
>>
>> I've seen the trick for drinking from a jug like that - it's actually
>> pretty easy to do. :)
>>
>>
> With /three/ spouts? ;-)

Yep, very easy to do.

Cover the spouts on the left and right with a finger each, drink from the 
third.

Easy. ;)

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 7/9/2015 6:02 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> >With/three/  spouts?;-)
> Yep, very easy to do.
>
> Cover the spouts on the left and right with a finger each, drink from the
> third.
>
> Easy.;)

Do you want a towel?
The holes in the middle of the neck will leak. If they don't the ones 
further down will get you.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:22:41 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 7/9/2015 6:02 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> >With/three/  spouts?;-)
>> Yep, very easy to do.
>>
>> Cover the spouts on the left and right with a finger each, drink from
>> the third.
>>
>> Easy.;)
> 
> Do you want a towel?
> The holes in the middle of the neck will leak. If they don't the ones
> further down will get you.

Didn't see those other holes, but the number of holes IIRC is easily 
covered with additional fingers. :)

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 7/9/2015 6:35 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:22:41 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 7/9/2015 6:02 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>> With/three/  spouts?;-)
>>> Yep, very easy to do.
>>>
>>> Cover the spouts on the left and right with a finger each, drink from
>>> the third.
>>>
>>> Easy.;)
>>
>> Do you want a towel?
>> The holes in the middle of the neck will leak. If they don't the ones
>> further down will get you.
>
> Didn't see those other holes, but the number of holes IIRC is easily
> covered with additional fingers. :)
>

Do you want to look again, remembering it is a "puzzle jug"?


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:42:45 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 7/9/2015 6:35 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 18:22:41 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/9/2015 6:02 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>>> With/three/  spouts?;-)
>>>> Yep, very easy to do.
>>>>
>>>> Cover the spouts on the left and right with a finger each, drink from
>>>> the third.
>>>>
>>>> Easy.;)
>>>
>>> Do you want a towel?
>>> The holes in the middle of the neck will leak. If they don't the ones
>>> further down will get you.
>>
>> Didn't see those other holes, but the number of holes IIRC is easily
>> covered with additional fingers. :)
>>
>>
> Do you want to look again, remembering it is a "puzzle jug"?

Oh, right, it's not just that there are holes to cover, but you have to 
suck the spout to get the liquid to come out.

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> Except not always. DLL's is acceptable, DLLs is also ok

It reminds me of the phenomenon that if, for example, the title of a
popular YouTube video uses 's with a proper name (such as "Fitts's Law"),
the comment section will be flooded with comments trying to "correct"
that spelling ("it's Fitts' law!")

(According to most English style guides, the possessive of proper names
should always use 's, even if the name ends in s. Thus it's for example
"workers' rights" but "Fitts's law".)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 7/30/2015 10:35 AM, Warp wrote:
> scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
>> Except not always. DLL's is acceptable, DLLs is also ok
>
> It reminds me of the phenomenon that if, for example, the title of a
> popular YouTube video uses 's with a proper name (such as "Fitts's Law"),
> the comment section will be flooded with comments trying to "correct"
> that spelling ("it's Fitts' law!")
>

Well, I have had someone here complain of my use of commas.

> (According to most English style guides, the possessive of proper names
> should always use 's, even if the name ends in s. Thus it's for example
> "workers' rights" but "Fitts's law".)
>

It is so long since I was at school and opinions change in time. I might 
be outdated in my knowledge.
But "workers' rights" and "Fitts's law" sounds correct to me. I would 
pronounce "Fitts's law" as "Fitts-is law"



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 30/07/15, at 11:35, Warp wrote:
>
> (According to most English style guides, the possessive of proper names
> should always use 's, even if the name ends in s. Thus it's for example
> "workers' rights" but "Fitts's law".)
>

Unless the law is named after several people named "Fitt", I guess.

-- 
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby

Post a reply to this message

Le 15-07-30 10:35, Jellby (POV-Ray) a écrit :
> On 30/07/15, at 11:35, Warp wrote:
>>
>> (According to most English style guides, the possessive of proper names
>> should always use 's, even if the name ends in s. Thus it's for example
>> "workers' rights" but "Fitts's law".)
>>
>
> Unless the law is named after several people named "Fitt", I guess.
>

Last time I checked, proper names are always invariable. At least, they 
are in French, and as English borrowed many grammatical rules from 
French along with a few 1000s words, having that rule been identical 
would have a prety high probability.
You have the Fitt family and the Fitts family.

Post a reply to this message

On 30/07/15, at 21:27, Alain wrote:
> Le 15-07-30 10:35, Jellby (POV-Ray) a écrit :
>> On 30/07/15, at 11:35, Warp wrote:
>>>
>>> (According to most English style guides, the possessive of proper names
>>> should always use 's, even if the name ends in s. Thus it's for example
>>> "workers' rights" but "Fitts's law".)
>>>
>>
>> Unless the law is named after several people named "Fitt", I guess.
>>
>
> Last time I checked, proper names are always invariable. At least, they
> are in French, and as English borrowed many grammatical rules from
> French along with a few 1000s words, having that rule been identical
> would have a prety high probability.
> You have the Fitt family and the Fitts family.

Not in English, as far as I know:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Simpsons

Yes, you'd have "the Fitt family" and "the Fitt brothers", both of which 
could be referred to as "the Fitts" (the Fitts family would be "the 
Fittses")

http://grammarist.com/style/last-names/

As I see it, it would be:

Fitt's -> belonging to one Fitt
Fitts' -> belonging to several Fitt
Fitts's -> belonging to one Fitts
Fittses' -> belonging to several Fitts

-- 
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby

Post a reply to this message

Am 30.07.2015 um 12:19 schrieb Stephen:
>
> Well, I have had someone here complain of my _MIS_use of commas.

There - I corrected that for you :-P

Post a reply to this message

On 7/31/2015 5:24 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 30.07.2015 um 12:19 schrieb Stephen:
>>
>> Well, I have had someone here complain of my _MIS_use of commas.
>
> There - I corrected that for you :-P
>

So kind.
Let me give you some gold in Lave. ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message