html bracket notation

JS: Dot and Bracket Notation

Learning goals.

• Use dot and bracket notation to access objects
• Compare expressions in dot and bracket notation and identify equivalent expressions
• Determine appropriate use cases for each notation
• Apply our knowledge of each notation to gain a deeper understanding about a familiar concept
• Object An unordered collection of related data in the form of key value pairs. JavaScript provides two notations for accessing object properties…
• Dot Notation A property in an object is accessed by giving the object’s name, followed by a period, followed by the property name (Example: user.name )
• Bracket Notation The object name is followed by a set of square brackets, with the property name specified inside the brackets via either a string (Example: user['name'] ) or a variable (Example: user[name] )

Watch the first 7 minutes of this video about dot and bracket notation.

• Independently, complete the exercise found on this repl .
• When you finish, use the zoom chat to DM me your answer to this question: Which of the following expressions is equivalent to car.brand ? A. car[brand] B. car['brand']

Equivalent Expressions

Objects are a key piece of working with JavaScript. In order for objects to be helpful for us, we have to be able to access the information inside of the objects. To do this, we can use dot notation or bracket notation .

Here are some examples of dot notation :

house.address student.gradeLevel school.classroom.teacher

Here are equivalent expressions in bracket notation :

house[‘address’] student[‘gradeLevel’] school[‘classroom’][‘teacher’]

Stop and Think

• What differences do you notice in the way each notation is written?

Key Point #1

You can write equivalent expressions using dot and bracket notation. For example: object.property is equivalent to object['property'] .

As you have seen in a couple of examples today, you can chain multiple properties onto an expression in order to dig in deeper on an object. Let’s take this object, for example:

If we wanted to access this user’s zip code using dot notation , we could write: user.contactInfo.address.zip

In order to access their zip using bracket notation , we would write: user[‘contactInfo’][‘address’][‘zip’]

You can also mix and match! We could write something like this and it would work: user.contactInfo[‘address’].zip

Notice how each block is formatted: user .contactInfo [‘address’] .zip

Paired Practice

• In a breakout room, complete the exercises found on this repl .
• When you finish, discuss this question with your partner: In your opinion, which notation is easier to read and write?
• Be prepared to discuss as a whole group after. Write down any questions that pop up along the way so we can discuss as a group!

Key Point #2

Whenever it is possible, we will default to using dot notation.

Bracket Notation & Variables

Dot notation only works if you have access to the exact property name. Dot notation interprets the expression literally. Meaning, it will look for the actual property that is passed in. Let’s take, for example, this code block :

If we ran the command below, we would get undefined. This is because the JavaScript interpreter is looking for a property that is literally called “lookupField” and it does not exist:

The same would happen in this case:

We can use bracket notation in our favor, by passing in the variable, like the example below. In this case, the interpreter will evaluate whats between the brackets, register lookupField as a variable and then pass in it’s value of ‘greeting’ to get the output of ‘hello’ :

If we reassigned the value of lookupField and then ran the same command as above, we’d get a new output:

Remember: a variable represents some other value, and that value could be reassigned/change over time. This means dot notation is not an option when using a variable to represent the object’s key we are trying to access because to use dot notation, we must be able to type out the exact letter-by-letter name the key. Bracket notation gives us the ability to use variables to access values in an object. This is especially helpful with the value of the variable changes.

Key Point #3

We must use bracket notation whenever we are accessing an object’s property using a variable or when the property’s key is a number or includes a symbol or is two words with a space .

Take a moment to read through this code:

What will be returned from the checkForFood function?

Applying What We’ve learned

Even if these concepts are new to you, you’ve actually been putting them into practice for awhile now! Let’s take a deeper look into something familiar to you: for loops .

Key Point #4

When we use dot notation, the JS interpreter looks in the object for a key that is an exact letter-by-letter literal match to whatever comes after the dot. When we use bracket notation, the JS interpreter evaluates everything between the brackets, then looks in the object for a key that matches whatever the code between the brackets evaluated to.

In your notebook, answer the following questions:

• How does the JavaScript interpreter handle dot and bracket notation differently?
• When should you use dot notation? Bracket notation?
• What is a limitation of using dot notation? How does bracket notation address this?

Homework (Optional and Spicy!)

• Complete the code challenges found on this repl . These are tough! Do what you can. Stuck? Look here .
• Answer the questions found in the JavaScript section of this codepen .

Lesson Search Results

Showing top 10 results.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to search
• Skip to select language
• Sign up for free

HTML Cheat Sheet

While using HTML it can be very handy to have an easy way to remember how to use HTML tags properly and how to apply them. MDN provides you with an extended HTML documentation as well as a deep instructional HTML how-to . However, in many cases we just need some quick hints as we go. That's the whole purpose of the cheat sheet, to give you some quick accurate ready to use code snippets for common usages.

Note: HTML tags must be used for their semantic, not their appearance. It's always possible to totally change the look and feel of a given tag using CSS so, when using HTML, take the time to focus on the meaning rather than the appearance.

Inline elements

An "element" is a single part of a webpage. Some elements are large and hold smaller elements like containers. Some elements are small and are "nested" inside larger ones. By default, "inline elements" appear next to one another in a webpage. They take up only as much width as they need in a page and fit together horizontally like words in a sentence or books shelved side-by-side in a row. All inline elements can be placed within the <body> element.

Block elements

"Block elements," on the other hand, take up the entire width of a webpage. They also take up a full line of a webpage; they do not fit together side-by-side. Instead, they stack like paragraphs in an essay or toy blocks in a tower.

Note: Because this cheat sheet is limited to a few elements representing specific structures or having special semantics, the div element is intentionally not included — because the div element doesn't represent anything and doesn't have any special semantics.

HTML Tutorial

Html graphics, html examples, html references, html symbols.

Symbols or letters that are not present on your keyboard can be added to HTML using entities.

HTML Symbol Entities

HTML entities were described in the previous chapter.

Many mathematical, technical, and currency symbols, are not present on a normal keyboard.

To add such symbols to an HTML page, you can use the entity name or the entity number (a decimal or a hexadecimal reference) for the symbol:

Display the euro sign:

Will display as:

Some mathematical symbols supported by html.

Full Math Symbols Reference

Advertisement

Some Greek Letters Supported by HTML

Full Greek Reference

Some Other Entities Supported by HTML

Full Currency Reference

Full Arrows Reference

Full Symbols Reference

COLOR PICKER

Contact Sales

If you want to use W3Schools services as an educational institution, team or enterprise, send us an e-mail: [email protected]

Report Error

If you want to report an error, or if you want to make a suggestion, send us an e-mail: [email protected]

Top Tutorials

Top references, top examples, get certified.

Ralp's Handy Guide to Bracket Notation

Table of contents.

• What is Bracket Notation?
• What are Parenthesis Brackets?
• Nested Parenthesis Brackets
• What are Emphasis Brackets?
• Nested Emphasis Brackets
• Alternate emphasis practices
• What are Quotation Brackets?
• Proper quotation inclusion/exclusion
• Differences from standard English usage
• Nested Quotation Brackets
• Quoting single characters
• What are Action Brackets?
• Bending the rules
• Abbreviated form
• What are Sarcasm Brackets?
• Sarcastic questions
• +/-/= Notation
• Nested Sarcasm Brackets
• Definition of Sarcasm
• Negation Hypothesis
• Addition Hypothesis
• Criticisms of Negation Hypothesis
• Quantum Sarcasm
• Criticisms of Addition Hypothesis
• Consortium Disapproval
• Compromisationalism
• Punctuation
• What is associativity?
• Handy Nesting Guide
• Hand-Bracketing

Miscellaneous Brackets

Second-order bracket notation.

• Extensible Bracket Notation

Late one early morning, I was attempting to cure my insomnia when blind inspiration struck. (This is usually better than deaf inspiration, and *certainly* better than blind perspiration.) The Ralpian Consortium Itself had enquested me with a Guide to Bracket Notation. Far be it for a Humble Disciple to question the Will of the Consortium; I slept. But then I got to work on the Quest the next morning. (Actually, I should say "when I woke up" or "next afternoon".) The document you read is the result of my endeavor.

II. INTRODUCTION

Bracket Notation is one of the Consortium's greatest Approved standards. It allows typed (and sometimes even hand-written) text to better approximate the expressiveness of spoken text (speech). In fact, some might argue that bracketed typed text is MORE expressive, citing the increasing usage of Hand-Bracketing (which will be discussed later) during speech. This issue will unlikely be settled unless the Consortium Approves us a quantitative standard for measuring expressiveness, which this Humble Disciple will lay long odds against. Who cares anyway.

As I recall, Bracket Notation was originally Approved in 1996. The first brackets to be Approved for general use were the versatile, yet often controversial Sarcasm Brackets, and the unique Action Brackets. As these brackets gained popularity and introduced a new level of content to typed text, the Consortium later Approved of Parenthesis Brackets, adding their existing meaning to the official bracket standard, usage virtually unchanged from the English standard. Over the next few years, another bracket-like notation worked its way into general use: the practice of encapsulating one or more words between two asterisks. The Consortium Approved of this practice, now known as Emphasis Brackets, and also added Quote Brackets to the bracket standard, albeit not without some noteworthy modifications from English. Following are typical self-referential examples of each bracket type:

{These are not Sarcasm Brackets.}

[demonstrates Action Brackets!]

(And by the way, these are Parenthesis Brackets.)

*Don't forget Emphasis Brackets!*

We also have Quote "Brackets", which are hardly "brackets" at all.

III. PARENTHESIS BRACKETS

My discussion begins with Parenthesis Brackets because I suspect that they are the most familiar to a beginning Bracketeer. Parenthesis Brackets (commonly called "parentheses", singular "parenthesis") are used in the same manner as in standard English: to encapsulate an interjected explanatory or qualifying remark. Sometimes even subwords are parenthesized, as demonstrated in the Consortium-Approved gender-neutral personal pronoun "(s)he".

It is a well-Approved (and even encouraged) practice to nest Parenthesis Brackets to arbitrary levels; quite convenient for recursive expression of ideas. However keep in mind that whenever Parenthesis Brackets are used, the surrounding text must be able to stand alone grammatically. Removing the parenthesized text should have no effect on the structure of the surrounding text (other than removal of the explanatory remark).

Example: The capital of North Dakota (where I've never been) is Bismarck (I think).

The thing to note here is that the sentence "The capital of North Dakota is Bismarck." survives on its own. As a general rule, text should not "know" about other text that is parenthesized more deeply. This is not necessarily true of equally-leveled parenthesized text, as demonstrated in the following examples.

OK: The Commodore 64 is more powerful than a Cray Supercomputer. (or so I've been told (by very reliable sources (well, somewhat reliable (Actually, I guess they're not reliable at all. (Come to think of it, no one has ever even told me that before.)))))

Though unwieldy, this would be a correct construction, since each parenthesized phrase refers directly to the one immediately before it. There's an easier way though, which eliminates what we computer scientists call "tail-recursion".

Better: The Commodore 64 is more powerful than a Cray Supercomputer. (or so I've been told) (by very reliable sources) (well, somewhat reliable) (Actually, I guess they're not reliable at all.) (Come to think of it, no one has ever even told me that before.)

Note that sometimes the first method is preferable if the absurdity of quintuply nested brackets is desired.

If all this seems complicated, it's really not. When using Parenthesis Brackets, problems can best be avoided if the base sentence is constructed first, then the parenthesized phrases are added where desired.

IV. EMPHASIS BRACKETS

Emphasis Brackets are represented by '*' (called an asterisk, or informally, a star). These are very easy to use: simply encapsulate one or more words between two asterisks.

Example: No, I didn't *kill* those men; I just fatally *wounded* them.

Alternatively, we could also type the same thing like so since capitalization is also an Approved method of emphasizing text.

Another Way: No, I didn't KILL those men; I just fatally WOUNDED them.

Emphasis Brackets are the only way to emphasize the singular first-person pronoun 'I' (which frequently needs to be done, especially if one's ego is large). It is also convention to use Emphasis Brackets rather than capitalization when stressing the word "quite", but there is no apparent reason for this.

Since the start and end symbols for Emphasis Brackets are the same, they cannot be nested without considerable risk of ambiguity. That is, a reader is likely to be confused whether a second level of emphasis is beginning, or whether the first is ending. If multiple emphasis levels are *really* needed capitalization can be mixed in.

One final note: It is a practice among some typists to indicate emphasis by placing underscores around and between words, apparently to simulate underlining, or sometimes even forward slashes, apparently to "push" the text slantwise to the right to simulate italics. The Consortium does /not/ Approve of _either_ of these practices.

V. QUOTATION BRACKETS

The usage of Quotation Brackets is rather obvious and mundane, but their status as full-fledged brackets has been confirmed by the Consortium. Unless otherwise noted, "quote" (the symbol used to mark both sides of quoted text) refers to the double quotation mark: the symbol used on both sides of "these three words". The Consortium does NOT approve of the typesetting practice of using two backquotes and/or two apostrophes as a replacement for real live double quotes.

In Consortium-Approved Bracket Notation, one main difference from English is that anything that doesn't belong inside the Quote Brackets does not go inside the Quote Brackets. Sounds logical enough? Well, that's not how formal English uses quotes.

English: The password is "borneo52."

Approved: The password is "borneo52".

Note that the period goes OUTside the Quote Brackets, since there's no '.' in the password! Another instance is the following.

Example: I named my pet Zerglings "Paul", "Sara", "Ralp Jr.", and "Kprxttx".

(Incidentally, the Consortium does NOT Approve of the ill-advised practice of omitting the final comma in lists.)

The convention of replacing periods with commas before the end quote when quoting speech is supported for backward-compatibility. It is always optional.

Example: "I have a cat," Ralp said.

Example: "Ha ha, I fooled you." Ralp also said.

Likewise, commas before the quoted text are not recommended, but allowed.

Example: Ralp said, "I have a comma."

Example: Ralp said "Ha ha no I don't!"

The convention of omitting the end quote before paragraph boundaries when the quote continues into the next paragraph is also supported, however, the quote has already begun, so a new beginning quote is NOT added to the second paragraph! The reason for this is because Quote Brackets do not have distinct start and end symbols, so a new quote would mark the end of quoted text, since the previous quote has no mate.

The versatile apostrophe, besides being used to form contractions and posessives, is further overloaded to serve as a type of quote bracket. Apostrophes (or "single quotes") are used when nesting Quote Brackets: a quoted subphrase within a larger quoted phrase must be encapsulated within single quotes. If it is ever necessary to quote a subphrase within a quoted phrase which in turn is within a quoted superphrase (!), this subphrase goes back again to double quotes. This is actually a little-known, seldom-used convention from English. Should this ever be invoked however, the Consortium highly recommends rewording the text to avoid it.

The other Approved usage for single Quote Brackets is actually based on a convention from the programming language C. Any quoted single character is quoted with single quotes.

Example: My modem wasn't working because it was clogged with '1's and '0's.

The only instance in which single quotes used in this manner should ever contain more than one character is when referring to non-printable control characters—ASCII codes 0-32. Actually character 32 is very printable; it happens to be a blank space. But typing about ' 's can be unclear, so the code 'sp' is used. (Actually, it's more common and usually easy just to type about "spaces".) To type any of these control characters, use the two or three character mneumonic within single Quote Brackets. (If you don't know what on Earth I mean by this, then you may safely ignore it.)

Example: ASCII characters 0, 9, 27, and 32 are 'nul', 'tab', 'esc', and 'sp'.

This is another convention the Consortium expects will not enjoy much use.

VI. ACTION BRACKETS

The functionality of Action Brackets overlaps much of that of IRC's vaunted /me command. In fact, Action Brackets are more flexible in most regards. The purest use of Action Brackets is to tell what the typist is doing. To do so, one constructs a sentence in which (s)he is the subject in the third person, present tense. The subject's name should be the first word in the sentence. The name is then removed, and the remaining fragment is encapsulated within Action Brackets (usually called square brackets, but sometimes just "brackets", especially if Sarcasm Brackets are called "braces").

Example: [clubs a baby seal to death]

Note that "clubs" is not capitalized for being the first word in the sentence, because we really don't have a complete sentence anymore. For the same reason the period is usually omitted. (But exclamation points are quite welcome.)

Now, actions in Action Brackets strictly *should* be self-referential and present tense. But they don't *have* to be present tense.

Example: [clubbed a dozen baby seals to death yesterday]

Nor do they *have* to even be self-referential, but in this case the subject must be explicit. As this makes the encapsulated text a complete sentence, it should be capitalized and punctuated as such.

Example: [The seals scramble in fear!]

This is usually only invoked during clever narratives in which it is necessary to describe the actions of someone/something other than the typist. Non-self- referential Action Bracket instances should not appear alone, and should be used sparingly.

Although encapsulated actions don't need to be present tense or self- referential (The term "first-person" is avoided since the typist refers to him/herself in the *third* person when using Action Brackets.), they should be at least one of these. There's no point in typing "[Twelve seals died yesterday.]" when "Twelve seals died yesterday." says the same thing. Action Brackets are normally intended to convey a sense of immediateness.

The other method of using Action Brackets is to simply encapsulate a quick description of the action being performed.

Example: [wink]

Example: [sigh]

Example: [leg falls off]

This can also be used to indicate sound effects.

Example: [running footsteps, slamming door, car starting, tires squealing]

(Incidentally, the Consortium has designated the above sequence of sound effects "sound effects suite #1", due to its frequent and hilarious usage. It can be invoked by typing [sound effects suite #1]. Oddly enough, this is the only sound effects suite that has been Approved (so far at least). Assumably the Consortium has plans to Approve other sound effects suites.)

Action Brackets cannot be nested within other Action Brackets.

VII. SARCASM BRACKETS

I have saved the discussion of Sarcasm Brackets for last, for their correct usage can be complex and often confusing. In their simplest form, text encapsulated by Sarcasm Brackets has its meaning negated in a sarcastic manner. The Consortium, in Its infinite wisdom (technically, no finite upper bound has been determined for the Consortium's wisdom), realized that sarcastically typed text—no matter how obvious the typist thinks (s)he is being—is never guaranteed to be interpreted sarcastically. Thus, we were granted the indispensible Sarcasm Brackets. Some critics have argued that explicitly marking sarcastic text as such defeats the purpose of negating its meaning in the first place. These individuals seem to be confusing sarcasm with lying. In the latter, the liar's intent is to deceive his/her audience into believing a statement which is contrary to fact. On the other hand, the intended effect of sarcasm is to convey information in an ironic and/or hilarious manner by stating the obvious denial of said information. The purpose of Sarcasm Brackets is to ensure that any denials made are obvious ones.

Example: {I thoroughly enjoyed Mission to Mars.}

Meaning: I thoroughly hated Mission to Mars.

Subsentences can also be bracketed.

Example: I fluently speak {French}.

Meaning: I fluently speak some language, but it's sure not French.

Example: I {fluently} speak Klingon.

Meaning: I speak some fractured Klingon.

Some translations can be more difficult.

Example: I {think} Starship Troopers was better than Mission to Mars.

Meaning: I *know* Starship Troopers was better than Mission to Mars.

Example: Jef has outclevered us all {again}!

Meaning: Jef has outclevered us for the first time ever.

Usages such as the above are usually best avoided due to the probability of misinterpretation. The sometimes subtle meaning of Sarcasm Bracketed text often lies in context, as in the following.

Example: I am {programming} HTML.

Translation of this would require the reader to know that HTML is often (arguably erroneously) labeled as a programming language. The main point is that the typist is writing HTML code, and the hidden reference is that HTML is not something that can be programmed (in the opinion of the typist (and also most certainly this Humble Disciple)). In this case, it might be clearer to use Quote Brackets to indicate the irony, since this would also show that it is not the typist, but rather someone else who would describe the action as "programming". (The someone else being the misguided geocities web authors who think they are programmers.)

Even questions can be sarcastified. Doing so implies the typist knows the answer to the question. Also, when a bitwise question is sarcastified, the correct (i.e. nonsarcastic) answer is almost always "no" by convention.

Example: {Where are my pants?}

Meaning: I know where my pants are.

The following example is quite noteworthy.

Example: {+}

Meaning: Yeah, right.

Discussion: '+' and '-' are the Consortium-Approved shorthand for the (admittedly already short) words "yes" and "no", respectively; but also for the more general concepts of "affirmative"/"negatory" or "correct"/"wrong". '+' and '-' are valid responses whenever a bitwise answer is appropriate. Related to '+' and '-' is the neutral abbreviation '=' which roughly translates to "acknowledged", "understood", or "OK".

Also interesting is that the interpretation given for this example, "Yeah, right." is in fact inherently sarcastic by its very nature. This phrase cannot be used without carrying a connotative sarcastic tone, due to the high frequency of its use in a sarcastic sense. Encapsulating this phrase in Sarcasm Brackets will lead to a highly unstable result, and should not be attempted under any circumstances. In fact, extreme care must always be taken not to sarcastify an already sarcastic expression. The most obvious way that this error can occur is by nesting Sarcasm Brackets.

NOTE: The remainder of this section may be omitted without loss of continuity to the text, as it contains an introduction to Formal Sarcasm Theory, which is necessarily more technical than the discussion up to this point. Feel free to skip to the section on Punctuation , or read on for an in-depth explanation of the dangers of nested Sarcasm Brackets.

Nested Sarcasm Brackets have been thoroughly considered by the Consortium, and have been emphatically Disapproved. This is certainly sufficient reason to eschew their use, but it is appropriate to discuss *why* the Consortium reached this decision. Take the example sentence,

Sentence 1: I have a cat.

it is a simple matter to apply sarcasm brackets to the sentence as a whole

Sentence 2: {I have a cat.}

thus negating the meaning of Sentence 1 in a sarcastic manner. This should not come as a surprise to anyone, since it involves Sarcasm Bracket usage at the most basic level. The denotative meaning of Sentence 2 (S2 for short) is the same as

Sentence 3: I do not have a cat.

but with the added connotation of sarcasm.

The exact meaning of "connotation of sarcasm" and "in a sarcastic manner" has been avoided until now, since the reader must have at least some intuitive sense of what is meant by this. The "connotation of sarcasm" refers to exactly that additional meaning which S2 has and S3 lacks. Although superficially they have the same meaning, Sentence 2 could be better interpreted as "Not only do I not have a cat, but the very notion is absurd!" This extra sense of irony is exactly what is achieved by typing S2 rather than simply S3.

The problem arises if one were to REencapsulate S2 within an additional pair of Sarcasm Brackets. (WARNING: Do not attempt to recreate the following example sentence outside a level 7 or higher rhetoric containment field, nor without explicit exceptional Approval from the Consortium to do so. Failure to take both of these precautions has been known to result in connotation disruption over a radius of up to 152 paragraphs. Sentence 4 appears here with the Consortium's permission, for example purposes only. Read at your own risk.)

Sentence 4: {{I have a cat.}}

Before the Consortium had reached a verdict on the topic of Nested Sarcasm Brackets, two independent teams of rhetoricists originally decided to study S4 in an attempt to determine its meaning. The first team concluded that S4 is equivalent in all respects to the following sentence.

Sentence 5: {I do not have a cat.}

This seems a logical conclusion to draw, especially if one interprets S4 like a mathematical expression. Inside the outer Brackets we have exactly S2, which is interpreted denotatively as S3. However, the Sarcasm Brackets also carry the connotation of "This sentence is not only false, but absurdly false." This connotation is ignored for the moment, and the result of the meaning negation (S3) is substituted in S4 for everything inside the outer brackets. We now have S5. The sarcastic connotation which was dismissed earlier is made up for by the remaining pair of brackets included in S5. This is known as the Negation Hypothesis of Sarcasm Bracket nesting. Under this hypothesis, nested Sarcasm Brackets are a perfectly legal construction which nonetheless have limited purpose since, for the most part, they simply end up cancelling each other out.

On the other hand, the second research team came to the conclusion that Sentence 4 is very nearly equivalent to S2, but it is even MORE sarcastic. This is *also* a logical conclusion to draw, reasoning that if one pair of Sarcasm Brackets adds a sarcastic sense to the meaning, then another pair should add even more. Under the Addition Hypothesis of Sarcasm Bracket nesting, as it is known, Sarcasm Brackets can be legally nested to arbitrary depths, depending on just how much sarcasm is desired.

Both theories have been met with vicious criticism by their opponents. This is due to the fact that the two theories actually yield diametrically opposed interpretations for S4. One of the main criticisms of the Negation Hypothesis is the manner in which the actual sarcasm resulting from the inner brackets is simply dismissed, never to be accounted for. Shouldn't this be sarcastified by the outer brackets as well? Or should it indeed be added to the sarcasm produced by the outer brackets, as the Addition Hypothesis seems to suggest?

Critics also claim that supporters of the Negation Hypothesis (NH) ignore the fact that Sarcasm Brackets have distinct symbols for the start and end brackets (unlike Emphasis and Quote Brackets). In a sentence encapsulated by Sarcasm Brackets, if a second left Sarcasm Bracket is encountered before a right, NH maintains that the text after this second bracket would not have its meaning reversed (actually reversed twice, which would result in no change according to NH). However, shouldn't the task of terminating the scope of the negation of Sarcasm Brackets be strictly limited to *right* Sarcasm Brackets? AH followers think so. Were Sarcasm Brackets delimited on both sides by, say, the pipe character '|', then NH would be more credible, they say. But the difference of start and end symbols allows a reader to count exactly how many levels of sarcasm the typist intended.

In fact, this very point led the same Addition Hypothesis team to pursue a unified theory of Quantum Sarcasm, in order to standardize exactly what would be meant under AH by, say, four levels of Sarcasm Brackets. Unfortunately, their lab was destroyed and all rhetoricists killed when an experiment went horribly awry. Details are still unknown, but the accident appears to have involved an attempted measurement of the sarcasm emitted by a sentence containing Sarcasm Brackets nested twenty-one deep. The violent explosion breached a level 12 rhetoric containment field and flooded the surrounding municipalities with massive levels of punctuation.

Out of respect to the research team and their families, critics of AH are generally much less vocal, but Addition Hypothesis is just as (un)popular as Negation Hypothesis. The problem opponents most often point out is that AH apparently ignores the fact that Sarcasm Brackets by definition posess the fundamental property of meaning reversal. In AH, out of a set of nested Sarcasm Brackets, one and only one pair will exhibit this property.

Due to the severe disparity in meaning between the interpretations derived by these hypotheses, the Consortium has refused to Approve of either, since the risk of ambiguity is too great. (For example, imagine the misinterpretation that would ensue if a NH supporter typed S4 to an AH supporter!) The Consortium has Disapproved of all use of nested Sarcasm Brackets until further notice. (It has not, however, explicitly Disapproved of either nesting hypothesis (yet), which is good news for any nesting fans.)

A small school of thought, called Compromisationalism, has proposed that only ODD numbers of Sarcasm Brackets should ever be used, since AH and NH more or less agree on the meaning of sentences bracketed in this fashion. In other words, Sarcasm Brackets can be nested 3 or 5 deep, but never 2 or 4. An interesting thought to be sure, since it takes advantage of the fact that a sentence three-deep in Sarcasm Brackets, under Addition Hypothesis, would have its meaning reversed (and its sarcasm tripled), and under Negation Hypothesis, would have its meaning triply-reversed which would be equivalent to a single reversal. However, this proposal was immediately and explicitly Disapproved by the Consortium Itself, on the grounds of being "an inconsistent, inelegant work-around which altogether avoids addressing the true issue at hand." So, the few remaining Compromisationalists have been completely dismissed by all mainstream bracketeers.

VIII. PUNCTUATION

Often the end of a sentence is also the end of a region of bracketed text. When this occurs, the period, question mark, or exclamation point at the end of the sentence is bracketed if and only if the entire sentence falls within the scope of these brackets. (Action Brackets are ordinarily exempt from this rule. See the section on Action Brackets for a specific discussion of their proper punctuation.) In fact, the parenthesized text in this very paragraph serves as an example of proper period inclusion.

Example: I just saw my favorite Star Trek movie (First Contact).

In this case the brackets do not encapsulate the entire sentence, thus the period properly appears outside the brackets.

IX. NESTING AND ASSOCIATIVITY

Now that the five bracket types have each been discussed separately, the next logical question is: How can the brackets be used together? Most bracket combinations are perfectly legal, but a few bracket types are unnestable. Furthermore, many bracket combinations are not associative. Bracket associativity refers to whether or not the meaning of a sentence which contains two pairs of brackets which completely overlap (that is, both encapsulate exactly the same text, no more, no less), is at all altered if the outer brackets and the inner brackets are swapped. For instance,

Example 1: Ralp said "{I have a cat.}"

Example 2: Ralp said {"I have a cat."}

examples 1 and 2 obviously do NOT mean the same thing. (However, example 2 actually entails example 1, but this is a topic for Formal Sarcasm Theory, and beyond the scope of this text.) On the other hand,

Example 3: ({But Ralp really does have a cat!})

Example 4: {(But Ralp really does have a cat!)}

examples 3 and 4 *are* equivalent in meaning, therefore Parenthesis Brackets and Sarcasm Brackets are said to be associative. (By convention, example 3 is used more often, but there is no reason for this.) Be sure to note that the order of the start brackets is opposite the order of the end brackets! Constructions such as

Bad Example: ({But Ralp really does have a cat!)}

are not legal. If one bracket is within the scope of another set of brackets, so must be the single bracket's mate. This is not so much a problem in the bad example above, since the intended meaning is obvious, but extreme ambiguity can arise with things such as:

Worse Example: Ralp {said "I have} a cat."

Typists producing garbage like this should be shot on sight.

The following table indicates acceptable nesting policies between all combinations of bracket types. The outer bracket is listed to the left, and the inner bracket is listed on top. A ' # ' indicates that the brackets are associative, and can be used within one another. A ' + ' indicates the inner bracket can legally be used within the outer, but they are not associative. The legal use applies to incomplete as well as complete overlap. A ' X ' indicating that the inner bracket type cannot appear within the outer bracket type. Also, a few bracket combinations are followed by numbers in this table. This means that additional information of that particular combination follows.

Note 0: NEVER nest Sarcasm Brackets. This cannot be stressed strongly enough.

Note 1: Action-Bracketed text can appear within Quote Brackets, but it loses its inherent sense of an immediate event.

Example 1: Ralp typed "[head implodes]".

Example 2: Nested Sarcasm Brackets!? [head implodes!!]

Obviously, Example 1 does not invoke the imploding head that Example 2 does. Action Brackets are said to become "inert" within Quote Brackets, and can be regarded as nonbracket characters.

Note 2: When nesting Quote Brackets, be sure to use single quotes for the inner brackets.

Note 3: If Emphasis Brackets and either Parenthesis, Sarcasm, or Action Brackets completely overlap, then it is strongly recommended to place the Emphasis Brackets inside of the others.

X. HAND-BRACKETING

A very interesting Approved standard is that of Hand-Bracketing, which is probably already well-known in the practice of "air quotes". In fact, all five bracket types can be invoked during normal speech via a clever gesture using both hands. Hand-Bracket gestures should be started at the same time as the speech they are meant to encapsulate. The indicated brackets are understood to apply to the phrase or sentence being spoken. In all Hand-Bracket gestures, the movements of the left hand should mirror those of the right as closely as possible.

• (Double) Quote Brackets: Start with the index and middle fingers of both hands pointed up, in the shape of a narrow 'V'. Quickly flex all four fingers downward twice, while keeping the rest of both hands stationary. Usage: very common.
• Single Quote Brackets: Like Double Quote Brackets, but only the index fingers are used, and they are flexed downward only once. Usage: rare.
• Emphasis Brackets: Fingers are curled in a fist, except for index finger, which points out at about 45 degrees up from horizontal, and thumb, which points out and 45 degrees down. Index finger and thumb are brought together quickly in a pinching motion. Usage: uncommon. Used only to emphasize single words.
• Parenthesis Brackets: Fingers are curved so that both hands resemble arcs when viewed from the sides. Palms are pointed down and slightly inward; a good guideline is to face your right palm toward your left foot, and vice versa. In a scooping motion, rotate hands so that palms face upward. Be sure to keep fingers curved. Usage: somewhat common.
• Action Brackets: With extended forefingers, trace out a pair of square Action Brackets in the air. Usage: rare.
• Sarcasm Brackets: With extended forefingers, trace out a pair of downward squiggly lines. The closer these lines resemble Sarcasm Brackets, the better. Usage: very rare. In most cases, a sarcastic tone of voice is preferred for conveying sarcasm in speech. Sarcasm Brackets were intended specifically to compensate for the fact that there has previously been no other way to instill a sarcastic tone in typed text.

XI. PROPOSED EXTENSIONS

The Proposed Extensions section is a short list of suggested additions to the Bracket Notation standard which are currently Unapproved as of this writing, unless otherwise noted. Please note that "Unapproved" does *not* mean "Disapproved", rather, it means that the Consortium has either not decided upon, or not announced its official position on the topic. Be patient; the Ralpian Consortium is a very busy Supreme Force. Since the Consortium may Disapprove of any of these extensions at a later date, it is highly recommended that the most recently published edition of this document be referenced prior to their usage to check for announced Disapproval. Use as-is at your own risk.

The Consortium has not Approved any use for angled brackets, also known as HTML brackets, or less-than/greater-than signs. These can still be used, to a limited extent as general-purpose "Miscellaneous Brackets". The following was typed to me by a Consortiumist.

Example: I have come to the conclusion that over 50% of computer keyboards are lacking a <SHIFT> key because hardly ANYONE uses capital letters!

(Quotation Brackets could probably also have been used here.)

This Humble Disciple used Angled Brackets around the members of a set which I was listing, since the standard practice in mathematical notation is to use curly brackets around sets. However, I did not want these to be confused with Sarcasm Brackets, so opted for angled brackets.

You are reasonably safe using angled brackets in a generic fashion, as long as you do so sparingly and do not use them to impart any intrinsic added meaning to the encapsulated text. While not explicitly Approved, this practice is at least tolerated by the Consortium, until it finds a better use for angled brackets.

Second-Order Sarcasm Calculus is a topic of much research in Formal Sarcasm Theory. It is the notational system which shows the most promise of any method for resolving the conflict of nested Sarcasm Brackets. Second-Order Sarcasm Calculus (SOSC) specifically refers to the application of bracket modifiers to Sarcasm Brackets. SOSC is actually a subset of a broader notational system known as Second-Order Bracket Notation, which allows the application of a variety of bracket modifiers to any brackets which encapsulate text.

These bracket modifiers alter the meaning of the brackets to which they are applied in various ways. The most common bracket modifiers include Parenthesis Brackets, Emphasis Brackets, question marks, and Sarcasm Brackets. While posessing the same names, symbols, and fundamental meanings as the brackets discussed earlier in this document, these bracket modifiers are different than the first-order (that is, ordinary) brackets to which they are related. Bracket modifiers are applied uniformly to the start and end brackets, resulting in sentence constructions such as the following examples.

Example: *{*I have a cat.*}*

Meaning: I CERTAINLY don't have a cat! Hell no.

The Emphasis Brackets in this example do not apply directly to the sentence itself, but serve to emphasize the sarcasm. There may appear to be some ambiguity here as to which Emphasis Bracket is mated with which, but recall that Emphasis Brackets are not nestable, therefore a beginning Emphasis Bracket is always mated with the most immediate following bracket. Further, it is clear that these are second-order bracket modifiers and not first-order brackets since each pair encapsulates only an unmated bracket, and no actual text.

Example: {?I have a cat.}?

Meaning: I don't have a cat. Well, I don't think I do anyway. I might.

The question mark modifiers indicate uncertainty in the application of sarcasm. They are not brackets; they appear only after the sarcasm brackets. Similarly, some SOSCists favor {! …sentence… }! as an alternative to second-order emphasis brackets. And now, for a truly bizarre SOSC construction:

Example: {{}This sentence is false.{}}

Meaning: This sentence is obviously false!

The Sarcasm Brackets which encapsulate the sentence are themselves sarcastified! This is not to be confused with the following sentence.

Example: ~{~This sentence is false.~}~

Meaning: This sentence really is false. Seriously.

The tildes, as used here, are known as explicit deconstructors in SOSC. Their purpose stems from the basic assumption that unbracketed text cannot be guaranteed to convey sarcasm, regardless of how obviously sarcastic the text is. (This is in fact the second Fundamental Premise of Formal Sarcasm Theory, and the very reason that Sarcasm Brackets are needed at all.) The inverse of this is also true: unbracketed text cannot be guaranteed NOT to convey sarcasm. To avoid misinterpretation, explicit deconstructors can be used to modify a pair of Sarcasm Brackets, thus specifically negating the possibility of intended sarcasm.

Second-Order Sarcasm Calculus sentence contructions allow for a very wide range of expression in a concise and efficient manner. However, the system has a steeper-than-average learning curve; some subtle SOSC constructions can be misinterpreted by even by those experienced with its use, and any SOSC sentence can be *extremely* confusing to a reader who has never been introduced to the topic before. It can make for a difficult method of communication due to the complexity of both its application and interpretation. Avoid using Second-Order Bracket Notation without further study. (The *last* thing we need is a bunch of typists out there misusing brackets, hence this document!) Even then, use at risk of misinterpretation.

XBN (Extensible Bracket Notation)

One of the most popular proposed applications of angled brackets, XBN allows for a practically unlimited number of bracket-like text encapsulators known as tags. This aspect of XBN is based on the Standardized General Markup Language. Sarcasm, for example, can be indicated with tradition Sarcasm Brackets, or by encapsulating it between a <sarcasm> tag and a corresponding </sarcasm> tag. Attributes can be added to tags like so.

Example: <sarcasm strength=3>I have a cat.</sarcasm>

The beauty of XBN lies in its ability to modify text in any conceivable way.

Example: <voice type="Raleigh">What is the deal?</voice>

However, XBN is extremely bulky to both read and write, as you can see. It can be slickened slightly by using the abbreviated tags <s> and <em> for sarcasm and emphasis respectively. Actions are performed with a single <act> tag and its "do" property, as in

Example: <act do="head explodes">

However, most Consortiumists agree that tagly markedup text is for the most part, best left to HTML browsers. It has been suggested that an instant messaging program be programmed to recognize XBN tags and display the text in a user-configurable fashion, e.g. bold text for Emphasis Brackets, traditional Sarcasm Brackets for sarcasm, blue actions, and unrecognized tags (almost any tag is legal in XBN) in pink italics which popsup the actual tag on mouseover. This is certainly an intriguing proposal, but seems to have all the characteristics of AOLization. The very purpose of Bracket Notation is to enrich plain typed text as a more expressive medium, and not to require any special type of software to decipher it. Besides, I'm sure it wouldn't be long before XBN developed table and frame tags, with support for animated gifs. [shudder]

Meanwhile, the Consortium has already shown some signs of Disapproval for XBN by noting that "Extensible" does not, in fact, start with the letter 'X'.

Bracket Notation ©1996-2002 Ralpian Consortium. All rights Approved.

2   Notation for Documentation 🔗 ℹ

This chapter introduces essential terminology and notation that is used throughout Racket documentation.

2.1   Notation for Module Documentation 🔗 ℹ

Since Racket programs are organized into module s, documentation reflects that organization with an annotation at the beginning of a section or subsection that describes the bindings that a particular module provides.

For example, the section that describes the functionality provided by racket/list starts

  ( require racket/list )  package: base

Instead of require , some modules are introduced with #lang :

  #lang   racket/base  package: base

Using #lang means that the module is normally used as the language of a whole module— that is, by a module that starts #lang followed by the language— instead of imported with require . Unless otherwise specified, however, a module name documented with #lang can also be used with require to obtain the language’s bindings.

The module annotation also shows the package that the module belongs to on the right-hand side. For more details about packages, see Package Management in Racket .

Sometimes, a module specification appears at the beginning of a document or at the start of a section that contains many subsections. The document’s section or section’s subsections are meant to “inherit” the module declaration of the enclosing document or section. Thus, bindings documented in The Racket Reference are available from racket and racket/base unless otherwise specified in a section or subsection.

2.2   Notation for Syntactic Form Documentation 🔗 ℹ

Notation in The Racket Guide introduces this notation for syntactic forms.

Syntactic forms are specified with a grammar. Typically, the grammar starts with an open parenthesis followed by the syntactic form’s name, as in the grammar for if :

syntax ( if   test-expr   then-expr   else-expr )

Since every form is expressed in terms of syntax objects , parentheses in a grammar specification indicate a syntax object wrapping a list, and the leading if is an identifier that starts the list whose binding is the if binding of the module being documented— in this case, racket/base . Square brackets in the grammar indicate a syntax-object list in the same way as parentheses, but in places square brackets are normally used by convention in a program’s source.

Italic identifiers in the grammar are metavariables that correspond to other grammar productions. Certain metavariable names have implicit grammar productions:

A metavariable that ends in id stands for an identifier .

A metavariable that ends in keyword stands for a syntax-object keyword .

A metavariable that ends with expr stands for any form, and the form will be parsed as an expression.

A metavariable that ends with body stands for any form ; the form will be parsed as either a local definition or an expression. A body can parse as a definition only if it is not preceded by any expression, and the last body must be an expression; see also Internal Definitions .

A metavariable that ends with datum stands for any form , and the form is normally uninterpreted (e.g., quote d).

A metavariable that ends with number or boolean stands for any syntax-object (i.e., literal) number or boolean , respectively.

In a grammar, form ... stands for any number of forms (possibly zero) matching form , while form ...+ stands for one or more forms matching form .

Metavariables without an implicit grammar are defined by productions alongside the syntactic form’s overall grammar. For example, in

syntax ( lambda   formals   body   ...+ )

the formals metavariable stands for either an identifier , zero or more identifiers in a syntax-object list, or a syntax object corresponding to a chain of one or more pairs where the chain ends in an identifier instead of an empty list.

Some syntactic forms have multiple top-level grammars, in which case the documentation of the syntactic forms shows multiple grammars. For example,

syntax ( init-rest   id )

indicates that init-rest can either be alone in its syntax-object list or followed by a single identifier .

Finally, a grammar specification that includes expr metavariables may be augmented with run-time contract s on some of the metavariables, which indicate a predicate that the result of the expression must satisfy at run time. For example,

syntax ( parameterize   ( [ parameter-expr   value-expr ]   ... )    body   ...+ )

indicates that the result of each parameter-expr must be a value v for which ( parameter? v ) returns true.

2.3   Notation for Function Documentation 🔗 ℹ

Procedures and other values are described using a notation based on contract s. In essence, these contracts describe the interfaces of the documented library using Racket predicates and expressions.

For example, the following is the header of the definition of a typical procedure:

procedure ( char->integer   char )   →   exact-integer?

The function being defined, char->integer , is typeset as if it were being applied. The metavariables that come after the function name stand in for arguments. The white text in the corner identifies the kind of value that is being documented.

Each metavariable is described with a contract. In the preceding example, the metavariable char has the contract char? . This contract specifies that any argument char that answers true to the char? predicate is valid. The documented function may or may not actually check this property, but the contract signals the intent of the implementer.

The contract on the right of the arrow, exact-integer? in this case, specifies the expected result that is produced by the function.

Contract specifications can be more expressive than just names of predicates. Consider the following header for argmax :

procedure ( argmax   proc   lst )   →   any

The contract ( -> any/c real? ) denotes a function contract specifying that proc ’s argument can be any single value and the result should be a real number. The contract ( and/c pair? list? ) for lst specifies that lst should pass both pair? and list? (i.e., that it is a non-empty list).

Both -> and and/c are examples of contract combinator s. Contract combinators such as or/c , cons/c , listof , and others are used throughout the documentation. Clicking on the hyperlinked combinator name will provide more information on its meaning.

A Racket function may be documented as having one or more optional arguments. The read function is an example of such a function:

procedure ( read   [ in ] )   →   any

The brackets surrounding the in argument in the application syntax indicates that it is an optional argument.

The header for read specifies a contract for the parameter in as usual. To the right of the contract, it also specifies a default value ( current-input-port ) that is used if read is called with no arguments.

Functions may also be documented as accepting mandatory or optional keyword-based arguments. For example, the sort function has two optional, keyword-based arguments:

procedure ( sort   lst             less-than?             [ #:key   extract-key             #:cache-keys?   cache-keys? ] )   →   list?

The brackets around the extract-key and cache-keys? arguments indicate that they are optional as before. The contract section of the header shows the default values that are provided for these keyword arguments.

2.4   Notation for Structure Type Documentation 🔗 ℹ

A structure type is also documented using contract notation:

struct ( struct color ( red green blue alpha ) )

The structure type is typeset as it were declared in the source code of a program using the struct form. Each field of the structure is documented with a corresponding contract that specifies the values that are accepted for that field.

In the example above, the structure type color has four fields: red , green , blue , and alpha . The constructor for the structure type accepts field values that satisfy ( and/c natural-number/c ( <=/c 255 ) ) , i.e., non-negative exact integers up to 255.

Additional keywords may appear after the field names in the documentation for a structure type:

struct ( struct   data-source   ( connector args extensions )

Here, the #:mutable keyword indicates that the fields of instances of the data-source structure type can be mutated with their respective setter functions.

2.5   Notation for Parameter Documentation 🔗 ℹ

A parameter is documented the same way as a function:

parameter ( current-command-line-arguments )   →   ( vectorof   string? )

Since parameters can be referenced or set, there are two entries in the header above. Calling current-command-line-arguments with no arguments accesses the parameter’s value, which must be a vector whose elements pass both string? and immutable? . Calling current-command-line-arguments with a single argument sets the parameter’s value, where the value must be a vector whose elements pass string? (and a guard on the parameter coerces the strings to immutable form, if necessary).

2.6   Notation for Other Documentation 🔗 ℹ

Some libraries provide bindings to constant values. These values are documented with a separate header:

value object%   :   class?

The racket/class library provides the object% value, which is the root of the class hierarchy in Racket. Its documentation header just indicates that it is a value that satisfies the predicate class? .

Advertisement

How to watch, latest bracket projections as lsu softball learns postseason fate in ncaa tournament selection show, share this article, how to watch.

• Date : Sunday, May 12
• Time : 6 p.m. CT
• Live Stream : fuboTV ( watch here )

Contact/Follow us  @LSUTigersWire  on Twitter, and like our page on  Facebook  to follow ongoing coverage of Louisiana State news, notes, and opinions.

Follow Tyler to continue the conversation on Twitter: @TylerNettuno

Follow all your favorite Louisiana teams at LSU Tigers Wire and Saints Wire!

Most Popular

Where lsu baseball sits in sec standings entering the final week of the regular season, photos of jayden daniels from commanders rookie minicamp, photos of malik nabers' 1st appearance with new york giants at rookie minicamp, 5 stats that defined paul skenes' mlb debut with pirates, tre morgan gets called up to high-a with tampa bay rays organization, lsu offers 3-star running back from seffner, florida, jayden daniels explains how culture at lsu prepared him for the nfl.

Please enter an email address.

Thanks for signing up.

Please check your email for a confirmation.

Something went wrong.

NCAA softball selection show: Time, TV channel for Texas' Women's College World Series bracket reveal

Texas Longhorns softball looks to continue its historic season in the 2024 NCAA Softball Tournament , starting with the path it will receive on Sunday to the Women's College World Series in Oklahoma City.

Coming off of a 5-1 loss to Oklahoma in the Big 12 Softball Tournament championship game, the Longhorns will learn their official seeding for the big dance on Sunday at 6 p.m. CT during the 2024 NCAA Softball Tournament Selection Show.

MORE: Watch the 2024 NCAA Softball Tournament with Fubo (Free Trial)

Led by Reese Atwood and Ashton Maloney at the plate and Teagan Kavan inside the circle, Texas has become one of the top teams in the nation this season. The Longhorns — who have the No. 1 hitting offense in the country with a .383 batting average — have earned their first No. 1 overall ranking in national polls since 2016.

Now Texas will look to create another first: winning the Women's College World Series , after coming up short in 2022 to Oklahoma in he WCWS championship series.

Here's what you need to know to watch the NCAA Softball Tournament Selection Show on Sunday:

What channel is the NCAA softball selection show today?

• TV channel: ESPN2
• Streaming options: ESPN app | Fubo (free trial)

ESPN2 will broadcast the 2024 NCAA Softball Tournament selection show. You can also stream the selection show via the ESPN app or Fubo, which carries the ESPN family of networks and offers a free trial to select users.

Beth Mowins (host), former U.S. Women's National Team members Jessica Mendoza (analyst) and Michele Smith (analyst) , former Big 12 Pitcher of the Year Amanda Scarborough (analyst) and Holly Rowe (reporter) will comprise the crew for the selection show on ESPN2.

When is the NCAA softball selection show?

• Date: Sunday, May 12
• Time: 6 p.m. CT

The selection show for the 2024 NCAA Softball Tournament will take place on Sunday at 6 p.m. CT on ESPN2.

NCAA Softball Tournament schedule 2024

• Selection Show: Sunday, May 12
• Regionals: Thursday, May 16 through Sunday, May 19
• Super Regionals: Thursday, May 23 through Saturday, May 25 or Friday, May 24 through Sunday, May 26 
• Women's College World Series (in Oklahoma City): Thursday, May 30 through Thursday, June 6 or Friday, June 7

The regional rounds of the NCAA softball tournament — which will be held at the top 16 seeds — will begin on Thursday, May 16 and run through Sunday, May 19. The best-of-three super regional series will then take place either Thursday, May 23 through Saturday, May 25 or Friday, May 24 through Sunday, May 26.

Winners of the eight super regionals will then advance to the Women's College World Series in Oklahoma City, which will begin on Thursday, May 30. It will run through the best of three championship series across Wednesday, June 5 through Friday, June 7 (if necessary).

When is the Women's College World Series?

• Start date: Thursday, May 30
• End date: Thursday, June 6 or Friday, June 7

The 2024 Women's College World Series will take place at the newly named Devon Park in Oklahoma City beginning on Thursday, May 30. The Women's College World Series will then run through either Thursday, June 6 or Friday, June 7 depending on if a Game 3 needs to be played in the championship series.

REQUIRED READING: Reese Atwood earns player of the year award as Texas dominates Big 12 softball awards

Past Women's College World Series champions

Oklahoma took home its third consecutive Women's College World Series title last season. It was the sixth title in the last 11 years for the Sooners, and seventh all time in program history.

Here's a full list of past Women's College World Series champions in the last 10 years:

• 2023 : Oklahoma
• 2022 : Oklahoma
• 2021 : Oklahoma
• 2020 : Canceled due to COVID-19 pandemic
• 2019 : UCLA
• 2018 : Florida State
• 2017 : Oklahoma
• 2016 : Oklahoma
• 2015 : Florida
• 2014 : Florida
• 2013 : Oklahoma

Click here to view the full of Women's College World Series champions dating back to 1982, when softball became an NCAA-sponsored sport.

We occasionally recommend interesting products and services. If you make a purchase by clicking one of the links, we may earn an affiliate fee. USA TODAY Network newsrooms operate independently, and this doesn’t influence our coverage.

OU softball earns No. 2 seed in NCAA Tournament, will host Cleveland State in regional

NORMAN — For the first time since 2018, OU softball is not the No. 1 overall seed in the NCAA Tournament .

The Sooners are the No. 2 seed, it was announced Sunday, as Texas beat out the Sooners for the top overall seed despite Saturday’s 5-1 OU win over the Longhorns to win the Big 12 Tournament title.

The Sooners (49-6) will take on Cleveland State at Love’s Field, at 7 p.m. Friday to open the tournament.

Boston and Oregon are also in the Norman Regional.

Since losing a second consecutive game against Oklahoma State on May 4, OU has won four consecutive games by a combined score of 36-6.

More: How OU softball's Alyssa Brito is encouraging girls to remain involved in sports

That included an 8-2 win over the Cowgirls in the regular-season finale and then a sweep through the Big 12 Tournament, including Saturday’s 5-1 win over the Longhorns, which snapped Texas’ 18-game winning streak.

“I know people have been kind of doubting us or, ‘What’s wrong with them,’ I’m like, ‘Well, we’ve only lost six games,’” Sooners coach Patty Gasso said. “I guess that’s too many for some people. But there are women that are sitting up on this podium up here right now, and our team came together and worked out some things behind closed doors that a lot of teams don’t do. And that’s why we’re here.”

It wasn’t quite enough to get the top overall seed, though, as the Longhorns held onto the spot.

Gasso didn’t seem concerned about whether or not her team would be the top overall seed.

“I think it’s already written right now,” Gasso said Saturday night. “I don’t know. We played really well and so hopefully people saw it and if it gets us No. 1, great. It really doesn’t matter right now. I mean, if we’re in the top three or four, I think we’re happy with that.”

The Sooners started the season with an NCAA-record winning streak, and stretched it to 71 games with an 18-0 start before falling to Louisiana on March 3 at Love’s Field.

More: Can anyone stop OU softball early in NCAA Tournament? Meet Norman Regional opponents

OU then dropped two of three at Texas in early April for their first Big 12 series loss since 2011.

The Sooners lost 9-4 to BYU on April 12, their first Big 12 home loss since 2017.

They then dropped their first two games to OSU before closing the regular season with the win to begin their most recent turnaround.

OU hasn’t lost a regional game since 2019 and has made seven consecutive Women’s College World Series appearances and won the last three titles. The Sooners have won 13 consecutive regionals.

Florida State is the No. 15 overall seed, potentially setting up a Super Regional matchup in Norman between the programs that have met in the WCWS Championship Series twice in the last three seasons.

More: NCAA Softball Tournament committee 'constantly' had Texas over OU as No. 1 seed

Norman Regional schedule

Double elimination from Friday-Sunday (May 17-19) at Love's Field in Norman:

Friday's games

• Game 1: Oregon vs. Boston University, 4:30 p.m. CT (ESPN+)
• Game 2: No. 2 Oklahoma vs. Cleveland State, 7 p.m. CT (ESPNU)

Saturday's games

• Game 3: Winner of Game 1 vs. Winner of Game 2, 2 p.m. CT
• Game 4: Loser of Game 1 vs. Loser of Game 2, 4:30 p.m. CT
• Game 5: Loser of Game 3 vs. Winner of Game 4, 7 p.m. CT

Sunday's games

• Game 6: Winner of Game 3 vs. Winner of Game 5, TBD
• *-Game 7: Winner of Game 6 vs. Loser of Game 6, TBD

*-if necessary

Ole Miss softball No. 3 seed in 2024 NCAA Tournament regional. Here's a look at bracket

OXFORD — Six wins in nine games down the stretch proved sufficient to push Ole Miss softball into the NCAA tournament, where it will take on Baylor in the Lafayette Regional to begin play.

The Rebels (31-25) will battle either host Louisiana, the national No. 13 seed, or Princeton in the second game of the regional, which uses a double-elimination format.

It's the eighth consecutive regional appearance for the Rebels, who will be looking to get back to the super-regional round for the first time since 2019. They were one of the last four teams in the field.

The bid comes despite a last-place finish in the SEC regular-season standings for coach Jamie Trachsel's team. At 7-17, Ole Miss finished a game behind Kentucky and South Carolina, but topped the Wildcats in the first round of the SEC tournament before falling to Mizzou.

The Rebels dropped 13 conference games in a row in March and April, but rebounded with a pair of vital series wins, including one at then-No. 8 Arkansas.

Lexie Brady and Aynslie Furbush lead the Rebels with 13 and 12 home runs, respectively. Do-it-all sophomore Jalia Lassiter also ranks among Ole Miss' offensive standouts.

On the mound, Grace Sparks has been the Rebels' best performer, with a 1.97 ERA. Brianna Lopez (3.01 ERA) and Makenna Kliethermes (2.80 ERA) lead the team in innings pitched.

Lafayette Regional Schedule

• Game 1: Louisiana vs. Princeton, 4:30 p.m. CT, ESPN+
• Game 2: Ole Miss vs. Baylor, 7 p.m., ESPN2
• Game 3: G1 winner vs. G2 winner, TBA, TBA
• Game 4: G1 loser vs. G2 loser, TBA, TBA
• Game 5: G3 loser vs. G4 winner, TBA, TBA
• Game 6: G3 winner vs. G5 winner, TBA, TBA
• Game 7: If necessary

FOOTBALL: Did Lane Kiffin's transfer portal approach work? Unpacking Ole Miss football's spring results

David Eckert covers Ole Miss for the Clarion Ledger. Email him at [email protected] or reach him on Twitter @davideckert98.

Get the latest news and insight on SEC football by subscribing to the  SEC Unfiltered newsletter,  delivered straight to your inbox .