Computer references changing written language?

Nov 12 18:42 UTC 2000

So how are computers affecting the English language?  I mean aside from the
obvious jargon and so forth.

For instance, using URLs in text is where I got to thinking about this. 
Systems like Grex that make URLs clickable tend to have less than perfect
rules, so things like periods might cause a problem in a URL.  Periods are
needed to end sentences, though!  So while you might say: "Check out
http://xxx.com.", it might work better as "Check out http://xxx.com for
more info.", or some other way to move the punctuation away from the URL.

response 2 of 151:

Nov 12 19:33 UTC 2000

(Yes, xxx.com is exactly what it sounds like... what sort of info did you
have in mind for us to find out there, Scott? ;))

What gives me difficulties is that a lot of computer terms don't seem to
be standardized.  Is "e-mail" hyphenated?  Is "website" one word or two?
I've seen both written both ways frequently enough that I have no idea
which is correct.  Plus, as there are more and more new terms, sometimes
there *isn't* really an established "correct" version.  I'm not, you know,
losing sleep over this, but I like to spell things correctly when I can.

And I've run into the period-at-the-end-of-the-URL problem a lot, where it
seems like it would be more concise to say (for example) "Over 300,000
explicit photos can be found at http://xxx.com.," but I have to rearrange
it to avoid that problem.  Even saying, "At http://xxx.com, one can find
over 300,000 explicit photos." screws it up with the comma.  So you have
to say something like, "The explicit photos at http://xxx.com number over
300,000.," which just doesn't sound as good.

response 4 of 151:

Nov 12 19:56 UTC 2000

Ummm, this may screw up your whole theory, but I'm using backtalk, and 
Grex did not add the period or the comma to the url in the example, 
http://xxx.com.  I've been on other systems that will screw it up, but 
grex seems pretty good about it.

response 6 of 151:

Nov 12 21:16 UTC 2000

yyy.com is a site for chocolate lovers. Which nature scenes were you seeing?

I assumed otter meant something like:
        Check out www.xxx.com .
That doesn't strike me as a very good solution at all. Where possible, of
course, one could avoid difficulty by underlining the URL (and not the
period).

Non-standard hyphenation and such will be typical until the MLA and APA and
other such watchdog groups settle on a consensus. Personally, I use e-mail
and the Internet (always capped), as well as my company's intranet (not
capped). I go to the Web (capped), and visit BBSs (no apostrophe) like
(properly punctuated) grex.cyberspace.org. Anyone who uses the Internet should
KNOW that URLs don't end in periods (typically), so it's not really all that
confusing, but then, anyone who really seeks to use proper punctuation should
know plurals don't take apostrophe (the so-called "green grocer's plural"),
but I see apostrophes after acronyms all the time.

response 8 of 151:

Nov 12 21:44 UTC 2000

I'm also often torn about punctuation and quote marks.

This is correct, according to english profs:
To continue, type "c."

But this is less confusing:
To continue, type "c".

response 10 of 151:

Nov 12 22:04 UTC 2000

I never put a period after a URL... commas are okay, periods bad.  If I'm
ending a paragraph with a URL, I'll just leave out the period.

response 12 of 151:

Nov 12 22:33 UTC 2000

foo.com doesn't exist yet because so many people are fighting about it.
They are, of course, the ... well, you finish it.

#10> Why are periods bad in their appropriate place? Your name is Rick, and
it doesn't end in a period, either. Is "Hi, Rick." bad form? URLs are, in a
sense, just names.

#8> that, I'll admit, is a problem. In my case, I break with traditional
convention and put the period outside the qoute mark.

response 14 of 151:

Nov 12 22:34 UTC 2000

well, now, if you pronounce "URL" as "earl"...
;}

response 16 of 151:

Nov 12 23:08 UTC 2000

I would agree.  "C" is correct in the grammatical sense.

response 18 of 151:

Nov 12 23:47 UTC 2000

Steve Weiss wrote the URL parsing for Backtalk.  I think it's pretty good,
but not perfect.  The URL parsing in Linux xterm seems substantially less
clever.  I like punctuation outside of quotes like "http://www.foobar.com".
I don't know if all URL parsers handle that right, but most seem to, since "
is a pretty rare (almost illegal) character in URLs.  By the way,
"http://www.foobar.com" does exist and has been doing nothing useful since
1993.

response 20 of 151:

Nov 13 01:31 UTC 2000

Unfortunately, typing "c." won't have the desired effect.

response 22 of 151:

Nov 13 03:21 UTC 2000

The Modern Language Association style guide for citing online
references calls for URL's to be enclosed in angle brackets.
For example:

    Mardesich, Jodi. "Online Music Stocks: Expect Plenty of
    Static Ahead." Fortune, 25 Oct. 1999: 382. Academic
    Search Elite. EBSCO Publishing. (AN:2341736) 13 Apr. 2000
    <http://www.epnet.com/ehost/indiana/ehost.html>. 

Assuming URL parsers handle such angle brackets okay, there 
shouldn't be any problem with a final period if you follow 
that convention.

response 24 of 151:

Nov 13 04:15 UTC 2000

See, I was told they *always* go inside the quote marks.  I figured this was
because it makes the typesetting look prettier.  I was chewed out by my boss
(mildly) for doing it the other way once. ;>

I've never noticed URL parsing in xterms, though I have noticed it in
gterms.  I'm not sure what it's supposed to *do*, though; if you put the
cursor over a URL, the cursor changes to a pointing finger, and the URL is
underlined, but clicking on it doesn't seem to do anything.