J
John Saunders
<tongue in="cheek">
<p>
I've kept quiet about this for the past few weeks, but I just can't keep
silent any
more.
</p>
<p> There are too many people in this newsgroup who use the term "ASP" to
refer
to "ASP.NET". In the future, would you please try harder to use the correct
terminology:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
It's "ASP.NET", not "ASP". "ASP" refers to "ASP v3", which is not the same
thing
at all.
<li>It's "ADO.NET", not "ADO". "ADO" is that recordset thing. "ADO.NET" is
the DataSet
thing. "Data" is better than "Records", right?
<li>It's not "script"! Yes, I know that it lives within <script/>
blocks, but it's code, not "script"! Note that they called it "VB.NET", and
not "VBScript.NET".
</ul>
<p>
I'm willing to forgive those of you who call it "ASPNET" because you at
least got
the "NET" part right, and I can forgive the use of InCorrect cAse because,
after
all, VB.NET forgives it and it has that ".NET" thing in its name.
</p>
<p>
But could we all just try a little harder to get it right? We should be
setting
a better example for the next generation...
</p>
</tongue>
Thanks,
John Saunders
johnwsaundersiii at hotmail
and, yes, that was a joke! (-:
<p>
I've kept quiet about this for the past few weeks, but I just can't keep
silent any
more.
</p>
<p> There are too many people in this newsgroup who use the term "ASP" to
refer
to "ASP.NET". In the future, would you please try harder to use the correct
terminology:
</p>
<ul>
<li>
It's "ASP.NET", not "ASP". "ASP" refers to "ASP v3", which is not the same
thing
at all.
<li>It's "ADO.NET", not "ADO". "ADO" is that recordset thing. "ADO.NET" is
the DataSet
thing. "Data" is better than "Records", right?
<li>It's not "script"! Yes, I know that it lives within <script/>
blocks, but it's code, not "script"! Note that they called it "VB.NET", and
not "VBScript.NET".
</ul>
<p>
I'm willing to forgive those of you who call it "ASPNET" because you at
least got
the "NET" part right, and I can forgive the use of InCorrect cAse because,
after
all, VB.NET forgives it and it has that ".NET" thing in its name.
</p>
<p>
But could we all just try a little harder to get it right? We should be
setting
a better example for the next generation...
</p>
</tongue>
Thanks,
John Saunders
johnwsaundersiii at hotmail
and, yes, that was a joke! (-: