sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality
- From: Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>
- To: "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT sourcemage.org>
- Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:54:15 -0800
I think it was meant in terms of "intersection" as in "perpendicular" as
opposed to the "statistically independent" meaning.
"gaze show-" would be the intersection point.
I think the prefixing was done that way to put them in the manual so as
to be near each other instead of scattered about on the first level, or
rather, I think the real answer is that it was like that in sorcery
before it was moved into gaze.
Seth
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:29:17PM -0500, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
> And I thought we're trying to be "parallel," 'cause "orthogonal" usually
> means "contrary to" or "regardless of" ;-D. FWIW, my variant is shorter...
>
> Seth Alan Woolley wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:18:26PM +0100, neuron wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:48:08AM -0800, Andrew wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 11:21:40AM -0500, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Why not simply "gaze exiled" or even "gaze exile" (it's both a
> >>>>verb and a noun)?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>I think we were trying to be orthoganol to gaze show-held
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Exactly :)
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Well, not quite "exactly". I thought it was spelled "orthogonal".
> >
> >Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >SM-Discuss mailing list
> >SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> The information contained in this message is intended only for the
> recipient, and may be a confidential attorney-client communication or may
> otherwise be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If
> the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or
> agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,
> please be aware that any dissemination or copying of this communication is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please immediately notify us by replying to the message and deleting it
> from your computer.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
--
Seth Alan Woolley [seth at positivism.org], SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id EF10E21A = 36AD 8A92 8499 8439 E6A8 3724 D437 AF5D EF10 E21A
http://smgl.positivism.org:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xEF10E21A
Security Team Leader Source Mage GNU/Linux http://www.sourcemage.org
Attachment:
pgpo5DNwGcBVO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
neuron, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Andrew, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
neuron, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Andrew, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Duane Malcolm, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Andrew, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Andrew, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Andrew, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Arwed von Merkatz, 01/25/2005
- Sorcery Consistency (WAS: Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality), Paul Mahon, 01/25/2005
- Re: Sorcery Consistency (WAS: Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality), Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, David Kowis, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
neuron, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Andrew, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.