#ossasepia | 2020-03-10

what a great #o log to start the day to! BingoBoingo draft looks good, I'd probably just add a comma after "to take shape"; and congrats to jfw on a straight-to-the-point quote!

03:29

BingoBoingo: dorion is right though, that #select is borked

~ 6 hours 25 minutes ~

09:55

tyvm

~ 1 hours 41 minutes ~

11:36

thanks diana_coman, and BingoBoingo for the asking & article.

~ 3 hours 22 minutes ~

14:59

BingoBoingo, next time you're on YH check the category on your March 9-15 plan

15:00

seriously, BingoBoingo, you should also fix once and for all your proofreading process re qntra as I think there's almost ~always some typos making it in.

15:01

while yes, can live with it, it's still both ugly and unnecessary really

15:05

diana_coman: Thank you, I'll work on a fix for it.

15:06

jfw: to expand on http://younghands.club/2020/03/09/jfw-review-week-of-2-mar-2020/#comment-560 - your priorities for this week are easy to pick /quite clear so I suspect you'd have done exactly what you say whether explicitly set out or not; and the clarity there comes really from what you perceive to be at stake, which is just another way of saying ...firefighting really

15:06

BingoBoingo: ok but how /what exactly do you have in mind?

15:08

diana_coman: I'm thinking a checklist at the moment, but I'm very open to suggestions.

15:08

jfw: to the extreme I suppose you can even simply use that approach on purpose ie make sure you have high stakes on precisely what you are aiming for otherwise but it sounds rather stressful/not all that healthy to me.

15:09

BingoBoingo: well, what have you been doing so far and why/where is it not working?

15:10

diana_coman: Well, so far I'm been stopping to read the pieces before publishing and trying to spot mistakes with my own eyes. On submitted links I do follow them, and read them as part of the fact checking though I don't much follow my own links.

15:11

diana_coman: first part makes sense, I might have to revisit the firefighting part.

15:12

BingoBoingo: uhm, why would the proofreading process be different for your pieces vs someone else's anyway? it doesn't seem to be worth making the difference at *proofreading* stage

15:12

I understand the difference at editing stage, sure but proofreading is the same check for everyone really

15:13

diana_coman: Right, the proofreading process ought to be the same.

15:13

BingoBoingo: do you spot mistakes at times *after* publishing?

15:13

diana_coman: On occasion

15:15

dorion: for that matter this proofreading thing is something you really need to get the hang of, too; iirc I suggested already you use a spellchecker since it seems you really need one, but - are you using it?

15:15

ossabot

Logged on 2020-01-13 15:58:35 diana_coman: dorion: why so...hm, fitful (and do use a spellchecker or something!); and give the guy first some time to react at all, first step is a more relaxed hi in and then depending on reaction, it moves forward one way or another; also, did you check with trinque as he was saying iirc he'll contact this guy, did he get around to contact him?

15:16

*

BingoBoingo probably ought to break down and start using a spell checker as well.

15:17

BingoBoingo: well, if it's only on occasion, you clearly just don't focus on that level of detail enough; so for starters and as it's meant to be published, I guess you need a spell checker - not to rely on it but as a safety net you require currently

15:18

BingoBoingo: the alternative is really to *force* your slowdown but it doesn't sound like the sort of think to focus on atm, there are plenty others way more important so use the spell checker you need, make sure you read *slowly* and literally word by word; at this stage you don't even want to focus on the meaning but on the spelling.

15:19

diana_coman: Alright, I'll get one set up.

15:21

BingoBoingo: how are those scripts/crawler/filters coming up? when is your eta for something concrete out of them?

15:23

diana_coman: I should have some filters in presentable condition Thursday afternoon or evening. Eating the regex way of seeing the world is taking some time, but it's coming together.

15:24

Particularly "." as a metacharacter

15:24

BingoBoingo: more than filters it would be some data that I'd like to see, lol

15:24

BingoBoingo: oh, huh; why /what's tripping about .?

15:25

diana_coman: It's a sort of wildcard in the regex, but it's also what all these .xyz file extension I want to cull start with.

15:29

BingoBoingo: special characters are simply escaped, no?

15:29

BingoBoingo: hm, I can share a textbook-style regexp reference I wrote, one sec.

15:29

ie if you want the character they represent rather than their interpretation in whatever context

15:32

jfw: you know, why didn't you publish that on your blog?

15:33

It predated blog. http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/regexp-ref.html

15:33

In some contexts I want the character they represent. In other contexts I want that kind of wildcard.

15:33

jfw: tyvm

15:33

jfw: yes,yes but on all those days when "could not write anything!!!"

15:33

haha

15:33

BingoBoingo: of course; but so your problem is that you are not used to keeping different contexts in mind or what?

15:34

jfw: :P

15:36

diana_coman: In this way it's rather new to my head.

15:37

BingoBoingo: it's just a different ...context for the notion of context. Same letters mean different things depending on the quotes!

15:37

ossabot

Logged on 2020-03-09 21:52:00 BingoBoingo: There's probably a better way to do it, and it may not be necessary, but if the listing comes from you it... has greater authority than if I'd typed out the exact same sequence of letters.

15:39

quite; recursive contextualization ftw!

15:46

Come to think of it, that regexp ref is more qntra-style than textbook-style.

15:47