I spotted a T-shirt at school bearing this inscription, but I don't think it quite means what some people assume it means.
I take it that it's supposed to mean "end hate." But when you use a tag like </i>, you don't mean "end italics" in the sense "abandon italics forever." You mean "I've been using italics for a bit, I'm stopping for a while now, but I'll get back to using it later."
Substitute "hate" for "i," and you'll get my drift. I bet the guy has a <hate> T-shirt in his closet that he was wearing three days before; he's hated all the stuff between then and the </hate> shirt; and he'll be wearing the <hate> shirt next time he's got some hating to do. Plus he certainly wouldn't just wear the </hate> shirt without having worn <hate> before, and on the same page -- that would be syntactically non-compliant.
I'm starting the HTML Slang League today!
This is actually TSML: t-shirt markup language. It follows a different set of rules.
http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts/frustrations/5aa9/
"There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't."
I can say that, because I'm geeky enough to get it, agree with you, and laugh at the spin you're putting on it!
If one wears a shirt with <hate> on one side and </hate> on the other side, the logical conclusion is everything between the two is hated, that is, one's body or one's self.
Now whether you agree with that or not is a different matter. But it could be a coherent message.
rm hate
This would go with a button which I once saw:
rm /bin/laden
Perhaps, but that won't matter to originalists.
I prefer this variant:
"There are 11 types of people in the world.
Those who understand binary, those who don't,
and those who try to tell this joke out loud."
A geeky reply: The person who closes a tag need not always be the one who opened it. For example, it is common on web forums (at least poorly designed ones) for a poster to forget to close an italic or bold tag, causing everything everyone else posts thereafter to be italic. At some point someone else will post a closing tag to end the madness.
I have no idea if that's the point of the t-shirt, but it would be consistent with the presumed sentiment.
Now, you could say that a </hate> t-shirt meant this guy was previously hating and that would be accurate... :)
We all love you, but this needs to stop. Right now. No interrogating what the crazy kids these days are saying and wearing on their tshirts. Please.
rm /bin/laden
Thats awesome! It might be more accurate though to include the necessary force. Don't want to have to be asked if we really mean it!
rm -f /bin/laden
I don't know. If you used italics once, I think the chances are very high -- approaching 100% -- that you will use it again. I think there is at least a weak implication there.
No such thing!
s/o[qbt]\S{2}s(tic)[aeiou](?:ted)/$1/gims;
tic!
"If this is blue, you're driving too fast."
sed -e 's/hate//g' world or just the regexp in the middle, 's/hate//g'.
P.S. It took me a while to get my wife to agree, but finally named the new kitten: "/bin/grep" . Had to get the vet to change the back slashes to forward slashes on my pet reminders.
;-)
01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 01101100 01111001 00111111 00001010
"I prefer this variant:
'There are 11 types of people in the world.
Those who understand binary, those who don't,
and those who try to tell this joke out loud.'"
As one who's done that, I concur. That said, I prefer:
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world: People who understand binary, people who don't, and people who understand trinary. Recurse to taste."
>shirt
Actually, I think it would mean that the viewer has had to hate the wearer since they last saw him in the <hate> shirt and are not allowed to stop hating him.
ifoughtthelaw,
Methinks you're overthinking Prof. Volokh's post. It's a geeky, joking post about a funny little observation (obviously). And one of the reasons I love coming to the Vol.Consp. Keep up the interesting observations of little oddities, Prof. Volokh!
<hate />
This would specify that hate has both started and ended, but contains no content.
Alternatively, you could do it as a RELAX NG schema, which is prescriptive (or as prescriptive as an XML schema gets):
<rng:choice><hate><rng:empty /></hate></rng:choice>
You have a choice to hate, but you don't have to (you can always have another choice). No problems with free will either.
To the commenter above who suggested that it is not correct to have a closing tag on it's own: that's not strictly correct. It's not valid XML. It can, if I recall correctly, be valid SGML - and there are various other markup languages which have end tags but not start tags.
Byomtov: is there a schema available for T-Shirt Markup Language?
As far as T-Shirt Mark-up Language, I know of at least one generally accepted attribute:
Size(p): with acceptable parameters of S, M, L, XL and XXL.
< construction > and < /construction > on them?
Cool.
That depends on whether you are an Original Render Engine originalist or an Original Specifications originalist. Letting evolving specifications govern the layout of a document is too much like "The Living Hompage" theory of interpretation.
Eugen's position is the classic Linux/Mosaic one.
Why not? He's already shown himself to be an idiot.
OK - how'd you get this post up if "h" tag is disallowed?
The </hate> shirt is purely an attempt by the relative-morality folx to usurp our judgement.
By declining to fully qualify the namespace of the (local-name) "hate" element, we are being told that 'hate' means nothing unless we have a source of reference, moral in this analogy.
A deeper meaning can be ferreted from this as well by considering that we are only presented with a closing tag. A closing tag has no attributes, namespace or otherwise.
Without knowing the namespace attributes of the opening tag (or the namespace prefix and root element namespace shorthand definitions), there is no moral guidance by which to judge this 'hate' element, or its contents.
Hence, the t-shirt says "An end to hate has no meaning."
Now, if instead the t-shirt said:
<hate xmlns="--insert reference to bible or work regarding morality here--">, we could conclude that it was delimiting a set of objects regarding 'hate', as determined by the referenced text or authority of morality.
I know little of morality, democracy knows none.
No. HTML doesn't require balanced tags. Furthermore, exactly how an unmatched tag is interpreted is quite browser dependent...er, vide supra.
Or, for Dave Barry fans, a good band name.
hate: none;
}
Front: < geek
Back: < / geek
Simple.
:)
(add the close tags in your minds - I couldn't remember the ascii)