ferrari

This word is mentioned often, yet understood. The harmony of yours, in this community, is disturbed by my recklessness.

That has been exactly my point. The intention with that sentence was to complete the first post by defining the aim, where the "by this" refers to the prior written in the first post, meaning the conditions which have been set. Excuse me for being so provoking, I have been paying attention to these differences.

The offense has been taken.

It can be just one key on the typing keyboard to switch the color on the display. Which I do state, to have it even more stripped down. To have the software working, two colors need to be defined and the switching function needs to be defined, where the function can be controller by one key on the typing keyboard already. Considering, that the software is saved on the hard drive disk, the "booting" does become a question, which is something the BIOS does take over.

The set of fonts equipped at default in the operating systems, in their current version, has been the assumption.

Thanks for the links, Ignace, I will have a closer look at those. As stated, this topic has been troublesome to tap it out for me, where I would mess up the writing consequently. When thinking it through I brought it to the following scenario, which still does lead to the question I was initially interested in. Let's say a display has a hardware controller connected to it, where the hardware controller can switch the color on the display - for example from "green" to "yellow". Now, it comes to the question, how such basic function can be saved as software on a hard disk drive, so that the switching of the color can happen with the typing keyboard. Basically, this scenario, this process, has been the interest of mine. It may simply require LEDs with a hardware controller to switch the color in the electrical engineering field. Whereas, in the scenario with the display it may require the arrow keys for the navigation and the return key for the confirmation of a typing keyboard to have the control over the switching of the color. As a further notice, the functions "previous" and "next" are used for the switching of the color. Where, exactly this scenario does lead, again, to the question of how such basic functions (like "previous" and "next") are saved in a software on the hard disk drive, so that the functions can be called simply with the typing keyboard. And, also, not to be forgotten, it does require the set of colors, one can switch in between as well.

How come? The operating systems are "equipped" with a default set of fonts. The web browser accesses those fonts off the operating system on the client side. The intention is to narrow down the possible list of selections by the current operating system with no backwards compatibility. . To successfully narrow it down to the possible list of selections, it now takes a comparison to the other two operating systems OSx and Linux at their current version. So that one can know with certainty which fonts are supported on the client side. Now, it takes the research to have the supported set of fonts narrowed down in a list. So that the question "which fonts are those?" can be answered, comprehensively. Windows 7 is mentioned specifically, where I do not know if Windows 8 has the default set of fonts Windows 7 has.

The intentions are to have those fonts, which are supported by the major operating system, and that by the given conditions. The question is: which fonts are those?

To clarify, I thought of it as the attribute "font-family" where it does take place in HTML, yet does get selected by the HTML tag selector of CSS.

I have attempted to showcase a bit of my intentions in regards to English, and have also addressed this topic of the thread again, to complete it a bit. Despite having admitted to have messed up this topic, which has given me a hard time to formulate it, I can not really relate to what you are addressing. Unless you are choosing something specific to showcase the "incorrect" English you are stating to perceive. Addressing your post. You do start with a sentence which does not extend properly, I am saying this since you have addressed "the grammar". In the following sentence you are addressing the proper use of words, and have the word "intent" in use, where I still do suspect it, since a word needs to be pronounceable in English. And I am saying this despite the fact that Meriam-Webster has it defined. Furthermore, Google Translate which you have mentioned, is experienced buggy on my side. I do not imagine your last suggestion as much as beneficial, to have that suggestion addressed as well, and this writing completed as such.

As a Notice Merriam-Webster may have the word "intent" defined, though I suspect the word. By the rules of English, a word has to be pronounceable. To Answer Your Post I have been messing up this topic with my writings, because of troubles of formulating it (it = the topic). The other writings have been a few sentences, where I do not think it can be that misleading (the writings). I do aim for a systematic and tight formulation. Where the thought is intended to be extended with the following paragraph. Where the thoughts are also separated into paragraphs. Which means the thought starts in one paragraph and does get extended with the next paragraph. In this scenario for example stating "next" instead of "following" as I did, can be more concise. Those are ideas I do figure out and aim to keep remembered. Where the previous sentence could be also extended with "... aim to keep them remembered". Addressing the Topic of this Thread This topic, here in this thread, is something I brought till to the following: The first "thing" which is done, to have the "functions", so that it takes forms into a BIOS system. Where this question does direct towards the electrical engineering field. The question also does target a scenario, where it is not done in Windows. (At this point, I am purposely not saying "an OS already around" or "an alternative OS" or something similar, because it does not convey as well. Which means "the example scenario" does not become translated as concise. By the Way I have written this post out a bit, with reformulations, to see it for myself.

Taking this thread as an example - click here - to complete this conversion a bit. Since you also address the English. When the sentence is written: Then the "by this" does describe the written - the statements and conditions done - in that thread before this quoted sentence. The intention is to write systematic. Besides that you also seem to perceive the support of fonts across major operating system as well as off the scope. Where the "font-family" does not account - to this - as well anymore.

As I did state, there has been not many places to post this. The threads do stretch the scope of this forum. "Little sense making"? Not, at all. I may have disturbed your harmony by stretching the scope. Since you often say "troll". Good then, I am off, you are for yourselves, and can continue socializing with the "like button".

Stop over reacting man. The thread derailed because of mentioning too much and not bringing it immediately to the question. Yet, you may be addressing that I am stretching it off the scope of this forum, where I did agree with it. Describing it as "little sense making" is simply, incorrect.

You make it seem like there is a place for that one, nevertheless I do agree, the questions, do not suite this place here. And after all the miscellaneous area here is still preferred on my side, compared to the other options, which are not much. This question does also not belong, yet there also not many options. Whereas this thread derailed, though the topic is hard to write on. I narrowed to the question I stated above. Furthermore, I do think it through on my own as well. till to the solution, but I also write out of boredom, so the "rant" description is agreed on too. In regards, to those threads you mentioned, it are thoughts which do come together later on. The idea that they make "little sense most of" is incorrect. EDIT: In this thread I could have brought it immediately to the question. I was mentioning too much. It is basically about the first attempt to write software (the operating system) when it is not written in Windows.

So this was to be the question:

You assumed I read this in an article. The title may have lead you to this. You can consider this as a starting from scratch, basically starting the decision making with the binary system. Where I do not account the "writing machine" analogy to your assumption, because if all is stripped of, you are left with that, a writing machine. The topic is difficult to write on, the writing, yet has to work with the people. I am looking to go through it one more time.

Though, I do notice I have written the question with the thought of no operating system around already and having to create everything from scratch, even the base and the BIOS (Basic Input/Output System) if you want so. EDIT: I cannot add this to the first post anymore. EDIT 2: The topic is hard to write on, I will go through it one more time.

The cold west area on board again with the attempt to harsh criticism, and down play with target on the intelligence. And the US region, as well on board with the slogans. A constellation I often notice.

It are concluding words, you idiots. Did you guys expects a function namespace. You pricks, constantly looking to insult. The writing has been concise. I am not seeing where it turns vague.

The Priority to Have It Decided By 1. Windows 7 2. OSx 3. Linux The backwards compatibility is not a decision factor. The 8th version of Windows has not been chosen for this priority list. The current versions of those listed operating systems are to be decided by. The aim is to have those fonts which are always supported by this.

The intentions with this question are to get a more concise perspective on the process of operating system creation when starting with the binary system. One could create a base system which would take over the tasks of the BIOS system including "booting". And from there the attempt for the operating system creation can be done. Whereas, this process does require to have the set of tools for the programming procedure. To get started - the character set - is in focus or "perhaps" to be focused on. Furthermore the set of actions have to be - united with system - and user interface. Where the start can make the computer seem like a simple writing machine with display. The writing of text with the editing and saving of, may be approached soon - (by this topic, in the sense of alphanumeric). To sum it up and formulate it differently, it does start by compressing the code into a file, with its corresponding file type - also, opening, saving, and editing the file, or perhaps the program, or, also the content created in the program. And furthermore animating the program or, also its content which may have gotten created in the program. The Question At this moment it comes to the question, how actions are defined? Which means, how is the attempt done to have the actions defined? As a notice, the question can be answered by started with a blank computer - whereas the hardware does provide possibilities and the capabilities.

When reloading the page with Firefox, it does aim to "repeat the action" - which means send "the search", or "the order confirmation" one more time. The question is, is this beneficial in contrast to having the cache emptied? In which forms may this be beneficial, if so? Which approach may be beneficial for dynamic pages?

It are the same format panels, somebody may have created it initially. Where can it be found, was the question, though.