pythonOCC examples doesn't work?

[Dwight Hutto]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Dwight Hutto <dwightdhutto at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Prasad, Ramit
> <ramit.prasad at jpmorgan.com> wrote:
>> Dwight Hutto wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>  Others would be able to see this for themselves but
>>> > you insist on sending email without context.  Please don't do this.
>>>
>>> How are my emails without context? I'm referring the OP to the docs,
>>> as well as posts related to their question. It goes to use google, and
>>> RTFM, and putting it politely to them.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I have noticed that you do not always quote what you are talking about.
>> Sometimes I can guess or look at another message and see what you
>> are talking about, but not always. This list philosophy seems to be
>>  "quote what is relevant and trim what is not". Not on a
>> "go lookup the previous message to find context".
>>
>>> I could summarize, but they have to do the real reading. I'm not
>>> researching this, and if I was, I'd charge for the time. This is to
>>> show that things can get complex if you don't use google, or read the
>>> docs.
>>
>>
>> Context is not the same as explaining absolutely everything.
>> It means that I, the reader, can see *what* you are talking about
>> and what you are responding *to*.
>>
>> I do agree with the stance not to spoon feed OP(s).
>>
>>>
>>> Why does the OP keep asking here, when there are answers out there.
>>> especiThey would still need to process transactions like cash while offline, and they would also need access to their inventory.ally on the pywin list, which Windows users are usually referred
>>> to.
>>
>> I was not aware that Windows users were "usually" referred anywhere.
>> Most referrals are on a case-by-case basis as many problems or
>> questions from Windows Python developers are Python questions and
>> not specific to pywin.
>>
>>>
>>> Please point out what's out of context. The links and references place
>>> it into context if the OP finds them useful, and I believe I searched
>>> well for them.
>>>
>>> Would the OP like to tell me I wasn't helpful? Because now they're
>>> probably on a search to figure out how to make these compatible, which
>>> means more questions, and more reading.
>>
>> Nobody is claiming you are not helpful. I appreciate your effort,
>> I just do not always know what is going on in a thread especially
>> if I see the thread jump to something I can contribute to but now have
>> no context with which to help. Not to mention that the archive for
>> this list is searchable. Your answer is much more useful for future
>> searchers if you leave some context for someone reading this.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>
>>> Let's not argue about this, I was pointing them to what I saw as the
>>> best possible resources to overcome his current problem, and it was
>>> all in context of the conversation as far as I'm concerned.
>>>
>>
>> It is in context of the "thread", but the context of the
>> "conversation" was lost.
>>
>>
>> This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
>> conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
>> securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
>> confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
>> available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.
>> --
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
> Your point is taken. Most of the time, if it's in an in line response
> I would write the email line by line, with the referenced text shown
> above my response.
>
> However, when it seems like a conversation, I just trim the above, and
> respond. That's how I view an e-mail, like an ongoing conversation.
>
> From now on, I'll leave the mailing I'm responding to above, and
> delete the point's I'm not talking about, which is about what I
> usually do.
>
> So being attacked about no context(which was an attack out of context,
> based on a few messages one night), when the whole conversation is in
> the topic reader/gmail/etc seemed a little ignorant to reading
> through. All he had to do was look back up to the email s just above
> my response, and see, or read just through mine, not read everyone.
>
> But anyway, I'll be more informative as to exactly what I was
> referencing, instead of treating it like an ongoing conversation where
> everyone was present, and paying attention to the whole of the topic.
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> David Hutto
> CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com

And if you look at the above in gmail, you can see the ...'s that when
not clicked, won't show some of the responses I leave just above, and
it clips my signature line as well.

-- 
Best Regards,
David Hutto
CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com