<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>










<rss version="2.0" xmlns:jf="http://www.jivesoftware.com/xmlns/jiveforums/rss">
    <channel>
        <title>Math Forum</title>
        <link>http://mathforum.org/kb</link>
        <description>List of forum topics</description>
        <language>en</language>


        <item>
            <title>Re: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=5851360&amp;tstart=0#5851360</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[<font color="#660066">&gt; I agree with much of this as a approach to learning<br>&gt; geometry!<br>&gt; <br>&gt; A very old source (1840's0 which]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>Aug 11, 2007 1:27:14 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>Aug 11, 2007 1:27:14 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>urner@alumni.princeton.edu</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>Re: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=5850475&amp;tstart=0#5850475</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[I agree with much of this as a approach to learning geometry!<br><br>A very old source (1840's0 which started with some 3-D explorations,  <br>well]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>Aug 10, 2007 6:09:16 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>Aug 10, 2007 6:09:16 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>whiteley@mathstat.yorku.ca</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>1</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>Re: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=5850231&amp;tstart=0#5850231</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[As a curriculum reviewer myself, I'd go through each of<br>these and see what, if anything, is included of 1900s<br>post-Euclidean geometry, in]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>Aug 10, 2007 2:02:44 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>Aug 10, 2007 2:02:44 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>urner@alumni.princeton.edu</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>2</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>RE: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=5742034&amp;tstart=0#5742034</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[I have used the Rhoad Milauskas Whipple book for years and years in high<br>school. It is light on the logic part, although it has lots of proofs.]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>May 24, 2007 10:30:16 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>May 24, 2007 10:30:16 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>j-benson2@comcast.net</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>Re: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=5737760&amp;tstart=0#5737760</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[i looked in vain for the promised review of these books.  I am a longtime fan of harold jacobs' book, first edition, which my 8 year old enjoyed, and]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>May 21, 2007 7:02:34 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>May 21, 2007 7:02:34 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>mathwonk</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>1</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>Re: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=1081049&amp;tstart=0#1081049</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[Alan<br>	Thanks for the detailed response.  Yes your class sounds much<br>better than the image of 'proof in Euclidean Geometry' would<br>suggest, at]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>Jul 23, 2001 12:30:18 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>Jul 23, 2001 12:30:18 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>whiteley@mathstat.yorku.ca</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>Re: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=1081046&amp;tstart=0#1081046</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[Ah, it seems like I have created a little stir, due to my sloppiness<br>with words! Hopefully this will clarify some things, but maybe not!!<br><font]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>Jul 23, 2001 8:48:43 AM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>Jul 23, 2001 8:48:43 AM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>alansagan@hotmail.com</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>Re: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=1081045&amp;tstart=0#1081045</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[Thank you for your comments. I hope others read them and think about them.<br>They are right on target.<br><br>John Threlkeld<br>Graland Country Day]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>Jul 22, 2001 9:48:02 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>Jul 22, 2001 9:48:02 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>jthrelke@graland.org</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>1</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>Re: List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=1081044&amp;tstart=0#1081044</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[I just wanted to day how saddened I am by the proposed constraints<br>within which a geometry book should be 'good'.  <br><br>Formal proof IS a piece]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>Jul 22, 2001 9:11:41 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>Jul 22, 2001 9:11:41 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>whiteley@mathstat.yorku.ca</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>2</jf:replyCount>
        </item>

        <item>
            <title>List of 'good' geometry textbooks</title>
        
            <link>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=1081043&amp;tstart=0#1081043</link>

        

            <description><![CDATA[Thanks for all your input. Below is a list of geometry textbooks that<br>have been recommended as 'good'. These recommendations were based on<br>the]]></description>

        

            <jf:creationDate>Jul 22, 2001 5:25:17 PM</jf:creationDate>
            <jf:modificationDate>Jul 22, 2001 5:25:17 PM</jf:modificationDate>
            <jf:author>alansagan@hotmail.com</jf:author>
            <jf:replyCount>9</jf:replyCount>
        </item>


    </channel>
</rss>

