Yes I did worry too much about that question (among others), but then I realized that the word "vowel" does indeed have vowels, so at least some self-referential order is restored in the universe. Why separate form and substance if you don't have to?
And why aren't all occurrences of the word "red" not red? And why do I see no websites that show every occurrence of the word "big" in font size=+8? And so on.
Since we're being pedantic - we weren't? well so what? - I am sure diaerisis is the correct spelling.
Now, on the thread subject, what about humans? - eg there was a minister in the New South Wales government called Aquilina with an aquiline nose; our esteemed Vice-Chancellor here at ANU is called Chubb and has a chubby face.
Questions for serious consideration - was Albert Schweitzer in fact Swiss? Was Ike Eisenhower from an ironworking family? Did either Roosevelt own a field of roses? (Did Margaret Thatcher teach Sir Geoffrey Howe? Sorry - couldn't resist it.)
The people want to know.
Alas, our Prime Minister Rudd is not especially ruddy-featured.
heh.
apo'strophe
ellip...sis
I'm a big fan of abbrev.
Yes I did worry too much about that question (among others), but then I realized that the word "vowel" does indeed have vowels, so at least some self-referential order is restored in the universe. Why separate form and substance if you don't have to?
Fucking brilliant!
Hold on -- I thought of one: haÄek contains a haÄek!
(It works on preview. Of course, with ScienceBlogs horrible Unicode support, you'll probably just see some ASCII junk when I hit Post.)
Which is why you should use the HTML codes: háÄek... bugger!
Fücking brilliänt!
The above was written using HTML tags that don't work on your crüddy website!
A simple trick will make sure that UTF-8 gets through: do not ever use the preview window.
There are sometimes spelling errors in my comments, because I can't use the preview for proofreading. The glorious umlaut in my name would get borked.
And why aren't all occurrences of the word "red" not red? And why do I see no websites that show every occurrence of the word "big" in font size=+8? And so on.
Since we're being pedantic - we weren't? well so what? - I am sure diaerisis is the correct spelling.
Now, on the thread subject, what about humans? - eg there was a minister in the New South Wales government called Aquilina with an aquiline nose; our esteemed Vice-Chancellor here at ANU is called Chubb and has a chubby face.
Questions for serious consideration - was Albert Schweitzer in fact Swiss? Was Ike Eisenhower from an ironworking family? Did either Roosevelt own a field of roses? (Did Margaret Thatcher teach Sir Geoffrey Howe? Sorry - couldn't resist it.)
The people want to know.
Alas, our Prime Minister Rudd is not especially ruddy-featured.
I am sure diaerisis is the correct spelling
Not in Greek, so there.
Hm. Fiddling with HTML entities...
Ümläüt?
háček?
háček?
Gesundheit!
WIN!
HTML Entities used:
Ümläüt?
háček? (NB: This uses the Unicode character LATIN SMALL LETTER C WITH CARON' (U+010D))
háček? (NB: This uses Unicode character LATIN SMALL LETTER C (U+0063) COMBINING CARON (U+030C))
Reference used:
http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/index.htm
Hm.
The server headers do not appear to include a character set specification.
The header of this page includes:
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
Isn't that something you can directly configure to be UTF-8 on your end?