<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pushed too far</title>
	<atom:link href="http://brainsnorkel.com/2005/10/19/pushed-too-far-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://brainsnorkel.com/2005/10/19/pushed-too-far-2/</link>
	<description>Manifesto-driven development.  Eclectic thoughts.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:12:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris (not that one, another one)</title>
		<link>http://brainsnorkel.com/2005/10/19/pushed-too-far-2/comment-page-1/#comment-4735</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris (not that one, another one)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2005 05:58:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainsnorkel.com/?p=184#comment-4735</guid>
		<description>The pedant in me would insist that for TLA to be self-referrential, the A must stand for &#039;Abbreviation&#039; not &#039;Acronym&#039;, since TLA isn&#039;t the latter...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The pedant in me would insist that for TLA to be self-referrential, the A must stand for &#8216;Abbreviation&#8217; not &#8216;Acronym&#8217;, since TLA isn&#8217;t the latter&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://brainsnorkel.com/2005/10/19/pushed-too-far-2/comment-page-1/#comment-4734</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:55:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainsnorkel.com/?p=184#comment-4734</guid>
		<description>I think I remember IBM declaring that IBM no longer stood for International Business Machines and that the IBM TLA was canonised to proper noun status.  This, I surmise, was to stop pedants from wincing when people talked about their IBM machines.

SAS used to stand for Statistical Analysis Software.  People would talk about their SAS software and this presented the same marketing problem amongst the pedantic target audience as IBM. That explains why they moved to noun-ify SAS at about the same time as IBM.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I remember IBM declaring that IBM no longer stood for International Business Machines and that the IBM TLA was canonised to proper noun status.  This, I surmise, was to stop pedants from wincing when people talked about their IBM machines.</p>
<p>SAS used to stand for Statistical Analysis Software.  People would talk about their SAS software and this presented the same marketing problem amongst the pedantic target audience as IBM. That explains why they moved to noun-ify SAS at about the same time as IBM.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alastair</title>
		<link>http://brainsnorkel.com/2005/10/19/pushed-too-far-2/comment-page-1/#comment-4733</link>
		<dc:creator>Alastair</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:28:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brainsnorkel.com/?p=184#comment-4733</guid>
		<description>Yes, it was a bit of a TLA acronym overload.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, it was a bit of a TLA acronym overload.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

