- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 12:39:26 +0000
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Cc: jjc@hpl.hp.com, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 06:47 PM 11/4/02 -0500, Frank Manola wrote: >Graham, Jeremy-- > >A couple of comments about your example in section 2.4.3.1, paragraph (C), >of http://schmuk.example.org/ > >a. it's usually spelled "schmuck" > >b. I'm aware of the colloquial use, and am not meaning to be overly >delicate about the contents of W3C normative specifications, but you do >know that "schmuck" is Yiddish for "penis", right? Er, no I didn't. Thanks for spotting this. My dictionary has: [[ schmuck // n. esp. US slang a foolish or contemptible person. [Yiddish shmok 'penis'] ]] Changed to "skunk" ... I think that carries the idea without possibility of offense: [[ skunk // n. & v. n. 1 a any of various cat-sized flesh-eating mammals of the family Mustelidae, esp. Mephitis mephitis having a distinctive black and white striped fur and able to emit a powerful stench from a liquid secreted by its anal glands as a defence. b its fur. 2 colloq. a thoroughly contemptible person. v.tr. 1 N.Amer. slang defeat soundly. 2 fail to pay (a bill etc.). [Algonquian] ]] #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 08:59:23 UTC