Sorry, Bill, I didn't know you had to be in from the start of a topic, to pass an opinion. (I'll remember your rule next time you chime in with your late comments).
I've been looking at the image as in my post at 1.30.48. It is not a "caret"- it is shorthand for "and". For some unknown reason you don't want it to read "and" and have dragged up a printing sign to try and show it isn't.
Sorry, Bill, I didn't know you had to be in from the start of a topic, to pass an opinion. (I'll remember your rule next time you chime in with your late comments).
You missed the point entirely. I can't believe I have to explain this.
It's not that you chimed in late. It's that you did so while looking at the WRONG image. You commented on Iacoletti's ampersand sign while believing you were commenting on what I believe is Hosty's inverted caret.
I've been looking at the image as in my post at 1.30.48. It is not a "caret"- it is shorthand for "and".
I don't have the same time stamps that you do.
Again, what you're looking at is Iacoletti's "shorthand for and", which is totally irrelevant. We are discussing the "v" symbol in Hosty's notes. Why are you having difficulty understanding this?
For some unknown reason you don't want it to read "and" and have dragged up a printing sign to try and show it isn't.
Wrong.
I absolutely believe that Iacoletti's post shows the logo for "and". However, Iacoletti's post is irrelevant. We're discussing Hosty's "v" (the inverted caret).
