- Apr 2024
-
Local file Local file
-
We quote because we are afraid to-change words, lest there be a change in meaning.
Quotations are easier to collect than writing things out in one's own words, not only because it requires no work, but we may be afraid of changing the original meaning by changing the original words or by collapsing the context and divorcing the words from their original environment.
Perhaps some may be afraid that the words sound "right" and they have a sense of understanding of them, but they don't quite have a full grasp of the situation. Of course this may be remedied by the reader or listener not only by putting heard stories into their own words and providing additional concrete illustrative examples of the concepts. These exercises are meant to ensure that one has properly heard/read and understood a concept. Psychologists call this paraphrasing or repetition the "echo effect" (others might say parroting or mirroring) and have found that it can help to build understanding, connection, and likeability between people. Great leaders who do this will be sure to make sure that credit for the original ideas goes to the originator and not to themselves simply because they repeated it, especially in group settings where their words may have more primacy amidst their underlings.
(I can't find it at the moment, but there's a name/tag for this in my notes? looping?)
Beyond this, can one place the idea into a more clear language than the original? Add some poetry perhaps? Make the concept into a concrete meme to make it more memorable?
Journalists like to quote because it gives primacy of voice to the speaker and provides the reader with the sense that they're getting the original from which they might make up their own minds. It also provides a veneer of vérité to their reportage.
Link this back to Terrence's comedy: https://hypothes.is/a/xe15ZKPGEe6NJkeL77Ji4Q
-
- Apr 2021
-
en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
-
The use of U+212B 'Angstrom sign', which was encoded due to round-trip mapping compatibility with an East-Asian character encoding, is discouraged, and the preferred representation is U+00C5 'capital letter A with ring above', which has the same glyph.
Is there a difference in semantic meaning between the two? And if so, what is it? 
-
-
stackoverflow.com stackoverflow.com
-
It should be defined inline. If you are using the img tag, that image should have semantic value to the content, which is why the alt attribute is required for validation. If the image is to be part of the layout or template, you should use a tag other than the img tag and assign the image as a CSS background to the element. In this case, the image has no semantic meaning and therefore doesn't require the alt attribute. I'm fairly certain that most screen readers would not even know that a CSS image exists.
I believed this when I first read it, but changed my mind when I read this good rebuttal: https://hyp.is/f1ndKJ5eEeu_IBtubiLybA/stackoverflow.com/questions/640190/image-width-height-as-an-attribute-or-in-css
-
-
stackoverflow.com stackoverflow.com
-
Which HTML tag I should use to enclose such notes to add a semantic meaning of a note that may be useful to read at a given point of a tutorial, but is not part of the main tutorial flow?
-
- Mar 2021
-
en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
-
An individual semantic feature constitutes one component of a word's intention, which is the inherent sense or concept evoked.
Would this be referring, then, to explicit meaning or implicit meaning -- or neither?
-
-
en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
-
grouped semantically (by meaning)
Tags
Annotators
URL
-
-
en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
-
is the capacity for a word or phrase to have multiple meanings, usually related by contiguity of meaning within a semantic field.
-
-
github.com github.com
-
The semantic has changed a bit as far as I understand. You need to select a pipeline in debug mode.
-
-
stackoverflow.com stackoverflow.com
-
HTML elements have meaning. "Semantically correct" means that your elements mean what they are supposed to.
-
Another example: a list (<ul> or <ol>) should generally be used to group similar items (<li>). You could use a div for the group and a <span> for each item, and style each span to be on a separate line with a bullet point, and it might look the way you want. But "this is a list" conveys more information.
-
Knowing what your elements are lets browsers use sensible defaults for how they should look and behave. This means you have less customization work to do and are more likely to get consistent results in different browsers.
-
-
trailblazer.to trailblazer.to
-
Since you can reference outputs by their semantic, you as a modeller only connect conceptual termini to ongoing connections!
-
- Feb 2021
-
alistapart.com alistapart.com
-
I use <b>s for the decorative portions of the layout because they’re purely decorative elements. There’s no content to strongly emphasize or to boldface, and semantically a <b> isn’t any better or worse than a <span>. It’s just a hook on which to hang some visual effects. And it’s shorter, so it minimizes page bloat (not that a few characters will make all that much of a difference). More to the point, the <b>’s complete lack of semantic meaning instantly flags it in the markup as being intentionally non-semantic. It is, in that meta sense, self-documenting.
-