<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Squircle is the new rounded rectangle</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lillesvin.net/archives/162/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lillesvin.net/archives/162</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 16:53:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anders K. Madsen</title>
		<link>http://lillesvin.net/archives/162/comment-page-1#comment-660</link>
		<dc:creator>Anders K. Madsen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:23:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lillesvin.net/archives/162#comment-660</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Words such as &quot;semi-transparent&quot; and &quot;glossy gradients&quot; are both composite words (komposita el. sammensatte ord på dansk), the hyphen doesn&#039;t make a difference. I&#039;m not entirely sure what you mean, but if you&#039;re suggesting that our language becomes poorer (vocabulary-wise) when we use composite words, then I&#039;ll have to disagree.&lt;br /&gt;
People don&#039;t forget the meaning of the word &quot;bad&quot; if they say &quot;ungood&quot;, and besides, &quot;ungood&quot; can be understood as meaning &quot;not good, but still better than bad&quot; and then there&#039;ll still be room for both &quot;good&quot;, &quot;ungood&quot; and &quot;bad&quot; in the language. (True synonyms are hard to find, thus, there&#039;ll always be situations where one is more preferable than the other.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I&#039;m wondering, what triggered this question, was it &quot;squircle&quot; or &quot;semi-transparency&quot;? (Just for the record, I didn&#039;t invent the word &quot;squircle&quot; - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squircle .)&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Words such as &#8220;semi-transparent&#8221; and &#8220;glossy gradients&#8221; are both composite words (komposita el. sammensatte ord på dansk), the hyphen doesn&#8217;t make a difference. I&#8217;m not entirely sure what you mean, but if you&#8217;re suggesting that our language becomes poorer (vocabulary-wise) when we use composite words, then I&#8217;ll have to disagree.<br />
People don&#8217;t forget the meaning of the word &#8220;bad&#8221; if they say &#8220;ungood&#8221;, and besides, &#8220;ungood&#8221; can be understood as meaning &#8220;not good, but still better than bad&#8221; and then there&#8217;ll still be room for both &#8220;good&#8221;, &#8220;ungood&#8221; and &#8220;bad&#8221; in the language. (True synonyms are hard to find, thus, there&#8217;ll always be situations where one is more preferable than the other.)</p>
<p>I&#8217;m wondering, what triggered this question, was it &#8220;squircle&#8221; or &#8220;semi-transparency&#8221;? (Just for the record, I didn&#8217;t invent the word &#8220;squircle&#8221; &#8211; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squircle" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squircle</a> .)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steffen</title>
		<link>http://lillesvin.net/archives/162/comment-page-1#comment-658</link>
		<dc:creator>Steffen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:30:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lillesvin.net/archives/162#comment-658</guid>
		<description>Erm, we know the meaning of &#039;semi&#039; and &#039;transparency&#039;. So when we connect them to form a new word, semi-transparency, we kind of already know what that means. Thats what i mean by a &quot;constructed language&quot;. I might well be called something else in academia. Such &quot;constructed-ness&quot; rimes with newspeak [1], doesn&#039;t it? Hence moving away from using a constructed word like semi-transparency and instead use a non-constructed word like glossy gradients is (in maybe sloppy logic) like moving way from a languages that rimes with newspeak. 

Was that more clear? Was it clear enough? 

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Erm, we know the meaning of &#8216;semi&#8217; and &#8216;transparency&#8217;. So when we connect them to form a new word, semi-transparency, we kind of already know what that means. Thats what i mean by a &#8220;constructed language&#8221;. I might well be called something else in academia. Such &#8220;constructed-ness&#8221; rimes with newspeak [1], doesn&#8217;t it? Hence moving away from using a constructed word like semi-transparency and instead use a non-constructed word like glossy gradients is (in maybe sloppy logic) like moving way from a languages that rimes with newspeak. </p>
<p>Was that more clear? Was it clear enough? </p>
<p>[1] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anders K. Madsen</title>
		<link>http://lillesvin.net/archives/162/comment-page-1#comment-651</link>
		<dc:creator>Anders K. Madsen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 02:30:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lillesvin.net/archives/162#comment-651</guid>
		<description>The new hardware, is actually just an old workstation, but where the old web server was a 633 MHz Celeron w/ 128 MB RAM, the new(er) one is a 1.2 GHz Athlon with something as odd as 448 MB RAM or so – if I recall correct, and it&#039;s running Ubuntu (7.04/Feisty Fawn).

There aren&#039;t many thing I&#039;d like more than a brand spankin&#039; new server, but I don&#039;t have teh monies (and I&#039;d probably rather spend them on a Wii, if I did).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The new hardware, is actually just an old workstation, but where the old web server was a 633 MHz Celeron w/ 128 MB RAM, the new(er) one is a 1.2 GHz Athlon with something as odd as 448 MB RAM or so – if I recall correct, and it&#8217;s running Ubuntu (7.04/Feisty Fawn).</p>
<p>There aren&#8217;t many thing I&#8217;d like more than a brand spankin&#8217; new server, but I don&#8217;t have teh monies (and I&#8217;d probably rather spend them on a Wii, if I did).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bjarke Sørensen</title>
		<link>http://lillesvin.net/archives/162/comment-page-1#comment-649</link>
		<dc:creator>Bjarke Sørensen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lillesvin.net/archives/162#comment-649</guid>
		<description>Also.. what&#039;s the new hardware?

I have plenty of old hardware if there are any takers. I&#039;ve had it with old hardware -- that&#039;s why I opted to buy a HP server a couple of months back, just for the home-lan. I still rely on renting hardware for the hosting &quot;franchise&quot; :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also.. what&#8217;s the new hardware?</p>
<p>I have plenty of old hardware if there are any takers. I&#8217;ve had it with old hardware &#8212; that&#8217;s why I opted to buy a HP server a couple of months back, just for the home-lan. I still rely on renting hardware for the hosting &#8220;franchise&#8221; :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bjarke Sørensen</title>
		<link>http://lillesvin.net/archives/162/comment-page-1#comment-647</link>
		<dc:creator>Bjarke Sørensen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:42:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lillesvin.net/archives/162#comment-647</guid>
		<description>I would just like to add &quot;huh&quot; and superellipsis is cool.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would just like to add &#8220;huh&#8221; and superellipsis is cool.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anders K. Madsen</title>
		<link>http://lillesvin.net/archives/162/comment-page-1#comment-644</link>
		<dc:creator>Anders K. Madsen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 01:40:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lillesvin.net/archives/162#comment-644</guid>
		<description>Actually, &#039;squircle is the new rounded rectangle&#039; just refers to my dislike for over-use of rounded rectangles on websites. I&#039;m more into the squircle (or super ellipsis, if you will) for the time being. (Maybe because I totally want Piet Hein&#039;s Super Ellipsis dinner table for our living room... Or maybe just a cheap knock-off, since I don&#039;t really feel like shelling out €2k for a table at this very moment.)

I&#039;m not sure what you mean by the second part of your comment or maybe I&#039;m just too tired, but would you care to elaborate a bit on it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, &#8216;squircle is the new rounded rectangle&#8217; just refers to my dislike for over-use of rounded rectangles on websites. I&#8217;m more into the squircle (or super ellipsis, if you will) for the time being. (Maybe because I totally want Piet Hein&#8217;s Super Ellipsis dinner table for our living room&#8230; Or maybe just a cheap knock-off, since I don&#8217;t really feel like shelling out €2k for a table at this very moment.)</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure what you mean by the second part of your comment or maybe I&#8217;m just too tired, but would you care to elaborate a bit on it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steffen</title>
		<link>http://lillesvin.net/archives/162/comment-page-1#comment-643</link>
		<dc:creator>Steffen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:53:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lillesvin.net/archives/162#comment-643</guid>
		<description>Super cool with a more responsive server, madsen! Thumbs up.

What do you mean that squircle is the new rounded rectangle? You know that making fancy words is a core part of academia.

Moving away from semi-transparency is another matter though. I don’t under stand that one. A part from not having constructed language, that makes sense by adding properties from one word to another when they meet — or fleeing from building a language that rimes with ‘newspeak’ — what justifies it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Super cool with a more responsive server, madsen! Thumbs up.</p>
<p>What do you mean that squircle is the new rounded rectangle? You know that making fancy words is a core part of academia.</p>
<p>Moving away from semi-transparency is another matter though. I don’t under stand that one. A part from not having constructed language, that makes sense by adding properties from one word to another when they meet — or fleeing from building a language that rimes with ‘newspeak’ — what justifies it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

