First, DEI became DEIA under Biden, see the executive order [1] (now worryingly removed from the site). That had some logic as a mission creep which is always welcomed by the bureaucrats.
Second, when the Trump decided to dismantle DEI, keeping "DEIA" didn't make sense, and surgically removing DEI from DEIA is not his style. So it was removed altogether, and the bureaucrats cared more about going with pendulum swing more than caring about any unintended effects, so anything associated with DEI was removed without any care about accessibility.
OP is pointing out the stupidity of the custom citation syntax that the javascript library uses to create all those features, and highlighting how idiomatic HTML supports the same data markup requirements of the citation with far superior standards and styling support.
Look, not to be defensive but no academic work provides its citations in the Bibtex HTML microformat (they should, but they don't) or even heavyweight structured format like https://schema.org/Text. They provide BibTex syntax at best and DOIs and ISBNs at worst. I'm just meeting the academic standard where it is, and running the {citation format}->HTML conversion on the fly in an ergonomic manner.
For what it's worth, the Typst people are advocating a YAML-based competitor to BibTeX (that can convert to/from BibTeX). That, in JSON instead of YAML, would fit well in a web environment, and still be a "well-known format".
> The library seems to use BibLatex, which is pretty standard. No reference managers I know understands the above HTML.
It should be easy to write some once-and-for-all XSLT (or other processor, that's just what I'm used to for XML, but I don't know what's easy to call from JS) to transform well-formed HTML as above to a format that BibLaTeX understands. Since it'd be a one-size-fits-all transformer, anyone who wants to write the HTML can do so.
As someone new to cloud services, I'm curious are there better experiences with the billing of GCP, Azure or Oracle Cloud? Also, is the multi-cloud approach doable?
It's all in the article, the "offensive" communication examples you describe fall into author's definition of defensive communication categories, which he names "Control", "Strategy" etc.
The paper says about those, "Behavior which a listener perceives as possessing any of the characteristics listed in the left-hand column arouses defensiveness." So the author doesn't describe it as defensive behavior, and he's not even concerned with it as behavior, only as a perception that might arouse defensive behavior.
The Wikipedia article says there were at least 165 survivors of both bombings: "[Yamaguchi] was invited to take part in a 2006 documentary about 165 double A-bomb survivors".
First, DEI became DEIA under Biden, see the executive order [1] (now worryingly removed from the site). That had some logic as a mission creep which is always welcomed by the bureaucrats.
Second, when the Trump decided to dismantle DEI, keeping "DEIA" didn't make sense, and surgically removing DEI from DEIA is not his style. So it was removed altogether, and the bureaucrats cared more about going with pendulum swing more than caring about any unintended effects, so anything associated with DEI was removed without any care about accessibility.
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20250120152648/https://www.white...