Slashdot Mirror

A major step forward in online privacy, P3P, was recently made a recommendation by the W3C.

• W3C
• P3P at W3C

You DID validate your page so we're sure the problem is the browser and not your page, right?

It is hard to copy Microsoft's standards, but it is easy for Mozilla to simply follow the W3C standard. Then we will see who is defying the standards, though many AOL users may not know the difference.

Paper User Interfaces for Paper Documents
I've been working on a product for a few years that uses paper as a user interface , kind of a follow-on to the graphical user interface. I used to joke with friends that I was working on an 8.5x11 inch 400 dpi gray-scale display that costs 2.5 cents.

Document Tokens -- making paper a first class citizen on the network
You scan your documents, and they get stored in a document repository on the network (using WebDAV over HTTP or some other protocol), and it prints out a piece of paper that refers to the electronic document on the network, kind of a like a paper document or a paper URL. I named it a "Document Token". You drop it in your copier, for example, press the big green button, and it automatically recognizes it, retrieves the original, and prints it back. Or if you asked it to e-mail the scanned document instead, it will e-mail the document as an attachment or just a hyperlink.

Cover Sheets as Forms
Another thing you can do is print out a cover sheet with checkboxes on it and some document meta-data built in, so you can drop the cover sheet for your "Legal Contracts" on top of the latest contract you got, check the box for the account you're dealing with, and press the start button. It will scan, store based on the directions embedded in the paper, and associate the document meta-data with the paper.

Situated Meta-Data Capture
One of the most expensive things about scanning is associating the meta-data with the document after scanning. When you have the paper in hand, you know what the document is and where it came from. The file folder or desktop location is right there in front of you, and the physical presence of the document triggers certain kinds of memory as well. In ethnographic terms, the document is what Lucy Suchman calls situated When you try to add meta-data to a document after scanning, you (or worse, someone hired to look at it for you) is staring at a set of bits on a computer screen, completely divorced from its context, and it's expensive to discover where it came from and what it means. If you can associate this information with the paper document when it's in the paper domain, by marking it down on a paper user interface, then you save lots of time and money.

W3C Standardization
For the web to become a truly ubiquitous computing interface, it must move beyond the desktop. We're working with the W3C to standardize an XML representation of forms such that the same form purpose can be expressed in different media -- desktop, pda, mobile phone, and even paper. Take a look at the XForms last-call specification.

Product
The product is called FlowPort

Paper User Interfaces for Paper Documents
I've been working on a product for a few years that uses paper as a user interface , kind of a follow-on to the graphical user interface. I used to joke with friends that I was working on an 8.5x11 inch 400 dpi gray-scale display that costs 2.5 cents.

Document Tokens -- making paper a first class citizen on the network
You scan your documents, and they get stored in a document repository on the network (using WebDAV over HTTP or some other protocol), and it prints out a piece of paper that refers to the electronic document on the network, kind of a like a paper document or a paper URL. I named it a "Document Token". You drop it in your copier, for example, press the big green button, and it automatically recognizes it, retrieves the original, and prints it back. Or if you asked it to e-mail the scanned document instead, it will e-mail the document as an attachment or just a hyperlink.

Cover Sheets as Forms
Another thing you can do is print out a cover sheet with checkboxes on it and some document meta-data built in, so you can drop the cover sheet for your "Legal Contracts" on top of the latest contract you got, check the box for the account you're dealing with, and press the start button. It will scan, store based on the directions embedded in the paper, and associate the document meta-data with the paper.

Situated Meta-Data Capture
One of the most expensive things about scanning is associating the meta-data with the document after scanning. When you have the paper in hand, you know what the document is and where it came from. The file folder or desktop location is right there in front of you, and the physical presence of the document triggers certain kinds of memory as well. In ethnographic terms, the document is what Lucy Suchman calls situated When you try to add meta-data to a document after scanning, you (or worse, someone hired to look at it for you) is staring at a set of bits on a computer screen, completely divorced from its context, and it's expensive to discover where it came from and what it means. If you can associate this information with the paper document when it's in the paper domain, by marking it down on a paper user interface, then you save lots of time and money.

W3C Standardization
For the web to become a truly ubiquitous computing interface, it must move beyond the desktop. We're working with the W3C to standardize an XML representation of forms such that the same form purpose can be expressed in different media -- desktop, pda, mobile phone, and even paper. Take a look at the XForms last-call specification.

Product
The product is called FlowPort

Paper User Interfaces for Paper Documents
I've been working on a product for a few years that uses paper as a user interface , kind of a follow-on to the graphical user interface. I used to joke with friends that I was working on an 8.5x11 inch 400 dpi gray-scale display that costs 2.5 cents.

Document Tokens -- making paper a first class citizen on the network
You scan your documents, and they get stored in a document repository on the network (using WebDAV over HTTP or some other protocol), and it prints out a piece of paper that refers to the electronic document on the network, kind of a like a paper document or a paper URL. I named it a "Document Token". You drop it in your copier, for example, press the big green button, and it automatically recognizes it, retrieves the original, and prints it back. Or if you asked it to e-mail the scanned document instead, it will e-mail the document as an attachment or just a hyperlink.

Cover Sheets as Forms
Another thing you can do is print out a cover sheet with checkboxes on it and some document meta-data built in, so you can drop the cover sheet for your "Legal Contracts" on top of the latest contract you got, check the box for the account you're dealing with, and press the start button. It will scan, store based on the directions embedded in the paper, and associate the document meta-data with the paper.

Situated Meta-Data Capture
One of the most expensive things about scanning is associating the meta-data with the document after scanning. When you have the paper in hand, you know what the document is and where it came from. The file folder or desktop location is right there in front of you, and the physical presence of the document triggers certain kinds of memory as well. In ethnographic terms, the document is what Lucy Suchman calls situated When you try to add meta-data to a document after scanning, you (or worse, someone hired to look at it for you) is staring at a set of bits on a computer screen, completely divorced from its context, and it's expensive to discover where it came from and what it means. If you can associate this information with the paper document when it's in the paper domain, by marking it down on a paper user interface, then you save lots of time and money.

W3C Standardization
For the web to become a truly ubiquitous computing interface, it must move beyond the desktop. We're working with the W3C to standardize an XML representation of forms such that the same form purpose can be expressed in different media -- desktop, pda, mobile phone, and even paper. Take a look at the XForms last-call specification.

Product
The product is called FlowPort

Several useless headers, which serve no purpose but to humor the creators of Slashdot, have been found! These headers are nowhere to be found in the specifications of any protocols, such as HTTP.
Because each byte sent or recieved on the internet uses up bandwidth, we at the Krochner Institute (website currently down) know that this is a most vile issue among users of standard telephone modems. With 33.6k and 56k users still the majority on the internet, their small and important share of bandwidth gets sucked up by every Slashdot page they view.
Therefore, if you use a dialup telephone modem connection, it is in your best interests not to read Slashdot. Save yourselves from the agony of lost bandwidth and longer loading times now, before it is too late!

'Spam', as it is called, is a byproduct of the capitalist way of life. Businesses are forced to advertise online using the most intrusive means possible in order to scavange the crumbs of the pie of life. But what if we removed this artificial competition? Couldn't we replace with a society of mutual cooperation?

Now, I'm not saying that I hate America (in fact, I hold the founding tenets of understanding and tolerance dear to my heart), but every great civilization needs a few minor adjustments along the way. That, my comrades, is why I feel that it is time for America to embrace socialism.

Under socialism, spam would disappear! The Internet would be full of interesting and informative information, instead of the barren wasteland of corporate sanctioned propaganda it is today!

Of course, the change would be quite a shock to American culture, but is this not the nation that escaped the shackles of the tyrannical British!? Surely this cannot be so hard!?

For the sake of the children, I pray that it is not. I look forward to USA (the greatest nation on Earth) joining the rest of the developed world in the socialist paradise.

One question remains, though: which standard stylesheet should I use for XHTML documents?

Before I commence my rant, let me offer what I do know. In XML documents, stylesheets are never optional. This includes XHTML. I assume the HTML Working Group has documented a set of standard style sheets, but I lack any inclination to research the matter. Judging from the Mozilla IRS XML demo (which also works in IE), there are at least two.

Why am I so indifferent to XHTML? Because it's just not very important. Before XML came along, HTML was the only way to do rich text in a web browser. But now (well, not right now -- neither IE nor Mozilla fully implement CSS or XSL, and we need both) you can use any XML application you want. And there are some very nice ones out there. Docbook is well established and has all the features you could want. (A web-compatible stylesheet would be a pain to write, but I think there will be several available soon enough.) DITA is a very promising XML app for API documents, my own particular interest. Many, many more are currently available or under development. As XML becomes more widely accepted, there will be schemas and stylesheets to suit every interest.

XHTML has to compete with all of these. Even if I had fonder memories of the the HTML Working Group's past efforts, I'd be sceptical that it can. Where's the call for a complex one-size-fits-all XML app?

The HTML Working Group claims that XHTML has two important features. It will work with older browsers that don't support XML, and it will make it easy for HTML hackers to learn XML. But neither claim makes sense. Most older browsers, with their hacked up little features, will just choke on XHTML. And HTML people who can't deal with the paradigm shift are not going to be helped by yet another over-complex spec.

The letters in the article asked for alternative formats, which can be created with MS-Word: text, HTML, and PDF. The third can be created within MS-Word if you have Adobe's Acrobat software. (not just the reader; the distiller).

I have a DIY documentation system that is (so far) good enough for my needs. I started righting documentation in HTML but wanted to produce nice hardcopy as well. Rather than writing it twice; once in HTML, once in LaTeX, I turned my HTML docs into HTML-like XML and wrote myself some XSL transforms that produce either proper HTML or LaTeX. At some stage I'll probably do a transform to produce XSL-FO (formatting objects) which I can run through the Apache Group's FOP to produce PDFs.

I know it's reinventing the wheel but I was learning XSL at that stage and my documentation requirements are pretty lean.

Geoff.

If nothing else, this demonstrates yet again why reasonable and non-discriminatory patents have no place in standards. Hopefully, the W3C will implement a patent policy that reflects this rather than what IBM et al are pushing

1. The Resource Description Framework (RDF) integrates a variety of applications from library catalogs and world-wide directories to syndication and aggregation of news, software, and content to personal collections of music, photos, and events using XML as an interchange syntax.

3) "The XHTML is XML" thing doesn't mean much. HTML is XML is SGML. They're all based on a tag format defined in a 1986 standard. HTML 4 needed very minor hacks to make it XML compatible. In fact, the only one I can think of is the new tag completion rule.

Technically HTML is just SGML, XHTML is XML is accurate. XML is NOT SGML, while they are both tag based languages, XML was designed to be at the same level on the tree as SGML is, they are equivalent.

Besides ending single tag elements, this doesn't affect things much since tag minimization has been depreciated for years.

Just because something is deprecated doesn't mean that it still isn't extensively used. Look at the <FONT> tag, it's been deprecated since CSS came out with HTML 4 but it's still widely in use. But the point I was making was that in the future HTML will conform to XML standards and simply be a subset of XML instead of a direct subset of SGML. I was refuting the contention that XML was not going to replace HTML.

On the contrary, I don't think it is misunderstood. By "us" at least. I can't tell you how many times I've laughed at these absurd concoctions for XML: TCP protocols, file systems, database backends...it just goes on. XML is a tag language. It does things tag languages do. XML is a minor extension of SGML to escape the 1986-ness of the format.

XML isn't the end-all future, but these publications make it seem that way, and when it's not that it's Java.


I'm not arguing that it is, all I was pointing out was that: A. XML is not a programming language meant to replace C or PHP or anything else. B. XML, through XHTML, is probably going to replace HTML eventually.

Here is a great document by the W3C that goes over XML and how it relates to SGML, HTML, etc:
http://www.w3c.org/XML/1999/XML-in-10-points.

part of the problem (for an chinese perspective) is that the HTML/XML/ETc tags have to be in English otherwise the browsers won't translate right (as well as being the W3C standard.

OK, what does <A HREF=...> mean in English? Look it up: "A" - indefinite article. No help at all - you have to know it really stands for "anchor". HREF - not a word at all, you have to know it's short for "hypertext reference".

Now COBOL, on the other hand.......

part of the problem (for an chinese perspective) is that the HTML/XML/ETc tags have to be in English otherwise the browsers won't translate right (as well as being the W3C standard.

Meaning, in affect, you have to know some english to develop the webpages anyways.

>word, excel, and powerpoint are all based on object models, and every iteration adds new
>functionality - either a new object that defines a new type of text break, or a function that allows copying
>from an ADO or DAO recordset into your current application.

Man, what ever happened to separating content from presentation.

Seriously though, I thought we'd solved all this embedded code/meanings drivel and thrown it away with the old Edifact formats and stuff where we had fixed length proprietary formats for each and every piece of data we want.

Want to modify the file a little bit? Maybe add in multi-currency support? Throw away all your old files, they won't work anymore.

Better than open formats can hope to be? I gotta question that.

As it's already been said, Opera in Linux dows not show it at all. :-) Mozilla seems just fine (as there is not point of comparisson to me, I can't say). Konqy hangs (after showing "XML parser error" or something, too bad...

But you don't need to look much to test CSS. Just look at the source: W3C CSS Page. *No* browser shows it correctly... Mozilla (and Netscape after 6.1) are almost there (look at the rounded corners)... Konqy does a good job also. Opera too, but no trasnparent PNGs (at least in Linux).

The only problem with that page is that it kills the performance of older Mozilla browsers (and Netscape 6.2 also). Newer Mozilla builds have a workaround for that in Linux (I don't think they fixed in windows yet). The bug is 98252.

There's a difference between
1. Publishing Flash fluff that certain browsers can't see
2 Arbitrarily locking out competent browser software that could adequately render a page, given the chance.

Where does it stop? Everything must be compatible with Mosaic 1.0?

Who modded this up? Shame on you.

I know clever and talented web designers for whom "standards compliance" is at best a vague abstraction. They hardly ever visit the W3C site, and probably never run their pages through the validator (it hurts). There's a kind of pisoner's dilemma at work here: why should I be the first one to comply, when no one else is, not even the big guys?

The solution is the same as it is for lots of things - get to them when they're young, and help them understand and value openness and robustness. The key to making openness work is a strong community-developed standards process, which only works if you comply.

This is going to take at least a generation.

Yeah, for those who haven't tried Opera, they have a right-click toolbar option 'Validate HTML' which runs the current page through the w3c validator.

Sweet, for when you're designing pages.

i ran msn.com through the validator at w3c.org. as you can see from the result, the validator doesn't even get through (as has been said before). but it is as easy to see that not even their 'sorry your web browser does not support this site' is not w3c standards compliant!

i would post the output of the validator, but hey, the 'lameness filter' killed that idea in a heartbeat.

-sam

Normally I wouldn't think this would be a good idea, but here it is anyways.

If you run a website, give a similar message to Internet Explorer browsers only. Say, "I'm sorry. Internet Explorer doesn't support a sigle web standard. (See www.w3c.org for more information on webstandards your browser ignores.) Please upgrade to Mozilla 0.9.5 or newer.

Do this on all your websites. Reccomend that users upgrade to Mozilla, Konqueror, Opera, Netscape, Lynx, Links, wget, anything!!! This would be hella' funny! Let them know that Internet Explorer is only designed to view msn.com, and hence will not work with any other site!! Do it!

1. (Minor): a standard interface to an on-line address book,.. whatever.
2. (Major) access to their user's data (with the use's permission).

So you get access to a "service" which allows you to "serve" anybody who uses a passport. If passport becomes the worldwide standard you'd defn be getting your money's worth at $250 a pop. Let's bet that the cost won't stay there, Wait for it 1) to increase, 2) to become "per transaction" based. That's where the money really starts flowing.

However I believe that the principle behind .NET is a no-brainer good idea - people need a service like this. Clealry however it should be based top to bottom on an open standard so that anybody is able to host personal passport data (e.g. W3c P3P.

On a realistic note thought I think open ways of doing this will emerge - because many people will want a slice of this pie and people won't be held to ransom. Microsoft will obtain a big first mover advantage but also carries a lot of cost. What is critical is to check out the patent situation in the area (because you can bet your life there will be a large arsenal of them).

Roll on the OpenSource standard passport + third party providers to host that data.

Code to standard, not to browser. If it doesn't display, it's the browser's fault.

Actually, w3c itself mentions Konqueror's CSS2 support as impressive.

I propose that we create an organization called the World Wide Web Consortium.

There is already an organization by that (appropriate) name, they are at the obvious URL, doing the obvious standards-setting things regarding the world wide web.

Furthermore, since DNS != HTTP, and the Internet != The Web, the name you propose is badly misleading.

ICANN, by the way, is exactly the sort of organization you propose. Thanks, but no thanks. Been there, done that, didn't even get a T-shirt.

The W3C mission statement asserts that "By promoting interoperability and encouraging an open forum for discussion, W3C commits to leading the technical evolution of the Web." I expect the consortium recognizes that the web's technical evolution also involves the legal and political environment it develops in.

As such, is the W3C committed to leading the evolution of these non-technical aspects of the web to ensure that the web develops towards W3C goals (including universal access, interoperability, and decentralization)? Or, as the proposed RAND policy indicates, does the consortium abdicate its leadership role in the relevant social/political arena and accept the "industry" status quo, especially on something as important as the treatment of intellectual property in standards?

If you believe the W3C does have a leadership role to play beyond mere technical specifications, how does the proposed RAND policy fit with the all of the consortium's goals for the evolution of the web?

MSIE is too user friendly, write bad code, it displays in MSIE. MSIE displays what it thinks you meant. NETSCAPE displays what you wrote.

Post-Nuke 0.61 left out a closing tag on the user.php file, in Netscape its broke, I bet it works in MSIE, probably where all of those cntrl M's came from. Post-Nuke brags about HTML 4 compliance too, but I notice all of the verify icon's are gone!

Actualy a Amaya is real good for checking your HTML with W3C has it and lots of good info, browser tests and tools for writing good HTML. take a look at W3C.org.

Perhaps waiting with Mono until end 2001 would be a good thing to do here.
--

* .NET is an alternative to Java, as .NET has a Common Runtime Language, something like the JVM;
* .NET is build from the ground upwards;
* .NET is an open standard, Microsoft has put their specs at the W3C organization, when w3c co-operates, we might find the specs to be free, and no reverse engeneering will be necesary

So actually, .NET (except from Hailstorm/Microsoft Passport) is a Java killer. Especially in the middleware world .NET is going to play a big role (well, that's what they want anyway). The .NET platform is said to be platform independant, and I doubt they will achieve that because the world of Java has also many problems with this. It is said that Microsoft started their .NET development about five years ago, I guess somewhere at the time when SUN started their trial against MS, which became later the antitrust case.

To conclude: reverse engeneering is not necesary as MS wants the specs to be open (uhm, this is what I hear okay). The only question is whether we're allowed to develop Open Source software for the .NET platform.
--

Smart Tags are a way for an outside agency to modify my pages on the fly, in ways I do not approve of.

No, Smart Tags are a way for the end user to use your pages in ways you have not anticipated. Whether or not you approve of this is irrelevant - if you don't like it, don't use HTML, use something with well-defined display characteristics instead, such as PDF or Flash.

Why should I, or any author, surrender that control?

What makes you think you have that kind of control? Go read the HTML specification (any version) at the W3C, and please point out the part that requires a specific rendering for each element. Show me the part that says "a user agent must not deviate from these display requirements."

There was nothing wrong with the technology itself (something most people don't seem to realize), just the potential for abuse by Microsoft (who doesn't have a great track record).

Actually, in this case it wasn't even Microsoft that people were worried about, it was unscrupulous web page authors. To add a smart tag entry on the client, all you have to do is add an <object> tag and some special XML to the top of your page, and voila the user has a new smart tag. There's nothing to stop someone from adding a smart tag entry for, say, "The Silmarillion" that will take you to some cheap-ass porn site (or worse yet, a Terry Brooks fan club [shudder].)

This is not the only objection, btw. I personally have a problem with MS's attempt to "embrace and extend" the anchor tag, especially when XLink is an official W3C recommendation and does the same thing.

IMHO, having bandwidth intensive applications on your website not only isolates your from reaching a large portion of your user base, but it also tells me that you haven't done something correctly. Even Flash, as complicated as it can be, is a very compact data format relative to MPEG, QuickTime, or other multimedia formats. Pretty pictures tend to distract the user from what they are at the page for in the first place. This isn't to say that media intensive sites don't have a place, for they do. But only in a limited set of circumstances.

My rules for designing good websites are:

Make em standards compliant

Make em work on different browsers on different platforms. Incompatible with the first point, but there we are.

They only have content that is necessary to the purpose of the site

I assume that Dvorak's audience here is web designers. If so, he's telling us nothing we didn't aleady know. (And if you're reading Dvorak for tips on web design, then, umm, go here instead. You'll be better served.) The net is still (thank Buddha) primarily a text-based medium. Even on high speed connections it takes a significant amount of time to download multimedia content. It's just simple politeness not to require your users to download that crap unless they request it. But even if broadband does become universal, the Right Thing To Do(TM) will still be to make pages that are as lean as possible, for simple reasons of maintainability and professionalism.

If, on the other hand, you have no multimedia on your site and it takes longer than 8 secs to load on a 28.8 connection, you should probably be reconsider your design choices and/or toolset. Throw GoLive out the goddamn window & get one book on HTML & one on JavaScript, k?

(BTW: I saw Princess Mononoke for the 1st time last night. 5-stars, friends! Ck it!)

CSS Still doesn't look so hot in Mozilla - although the font weaknesses of X on Linux may be to blame. Things like font-weight don't work right as far as I can tell. Still, the overall speed and feel of 0.9 is very good.

Also, look for MD5, Content-MD5 or ETags on the www.w3c.org, their silly patent doesn't fly for a second.

The standards are already here to do it.
All it require is people like you to get off your ass and learn/use them. And places like slashdot to support these kinda things... Instead of shunning them.
Yes, maybe the browser re-direction was a little harsh. But if anyone accutaly bother to read the artical. They would have knowen that there where other ways the were suggested that were way more suttle.

So, really, there are no new standards for all these things. The standards are already there, and have been there for quite sometime. So don't try and shift the blame. It's there, you just too lazy to do anything about it. And so do the slack browser companies, although, the do seem to be getting the message.

"It would be better if websites could be more focused, so that bandwith use by individual pages could be more limited, or at least so that coding could be more focused. "

CSS2, XML/XHTML, look for them on www.w3c.org

But if everything you do is going through the equiv of "CGI", then forget Apache. HTTP is far too easy a protocol to implement (hell, its the protocol used for lots of "embedded" servers in stuff like Napster and Shoutcast). Implement your own HTTP server where you automatically can have all requests go to an engine for processing directly, and take Apache and all that configuration out of the loop. You'd effectively have two servers running -- an apache server to handle throwing images and static pages around, and a second home-grown server that directly serves up the application data. Doing this won't change that your database engine is your primary bottleneck, but it will reduce all other bottlenecks by quite a bit.

Apache is a general purpose system, and does it pretty damn fast, but for a true special-purpose system, its best to implement your own special-purpose server.

The "embedded server" for Java follows the same principle. Maybe W3C has some implementation code in C that may prove useful.

While I don't think either of them were really overtly trying to mentor me, I owe a lot of credit for what I know and what I can do to a couple of brilliant programmers that I've had the privilege to work with. Both of these fellows are very kind, pleasant people and went out of their way to help me. They also both go out of their way to write correct code, as opposed to, say, just screwing around with it until it sort of works.

I met Haim Zamir at Live Picture (now MGI Software) in 1997 where I really began my C++ effort in a serious way (I tried it in 1990 to write test tools at Apple but didn't really enjoy the experience). Have a look at Haim's Resume, particularly under "Skills" where he lists:

Well grounded in disciplines of software engineering for correctness, robustness, performance, and longevity

Another brilliant programmer is my friend Andrew Green. Andy spares no amount of effort to get his code just right - he devoted nine years to developing the ZooLib cross-platform application framework before releasing under the MIT License. (Not five years as I say on the page.)

If you think being correct, as opposed to merely working ok isn't important, imagine trying to get platform-independent reference counted smart pointers to work in a multithreaded application framework. Andy did.

For an archive of anecdotes of interesting, funny and sometimes tragic technology quality problems, please read:

• The Forum on Risks to the Public in Computers and Related Systems, with such anecdotes as:
  • The Sinking of the USS Gitarro (because of either poor training, poor UI, or both)
  • The scary MSWord residue feature - exchange Word documents during legal negotiations?
  • Also see the book Computer Related Risks by Risks moderator Peter Neumann

If you write software, another good investment (more important than your hardware investment), is buying and reading good books. As a software consultant I keep the canceled checks and receipts for my technical book purchases; in 1999 I deducted about $750 worth of technical books from my taxes and about $250 in 1998.

But there are a lot of bad software books out there; much as there was a gold rush due to the Internet, there was a smaller-scale gold rush for technical book authors over the last couple years. A really good source of straight-talking book reviews by people who have good reason to know what they're talking about is maintainted by the Association of C and C++ Users at:

• The ACCU Book Reviews Section

(Note to CowboyNeal - writing C-sharp with the pound sign set off the lameness filter, driving me damn near out of my skull. How about adding something to the preview to let us know which characters are lame, exactly?).

And good news for those of you across the pond (but bad news for me), it's a British organization and holds regular technical conferences. I believe they also send observers to the ISO standards bodies.

If you program in C++ you should read these two books by Scott Meyers and put them to practice in your code. Read each item one at a time and then go through your code from beginning to end to see how you can apply it:

• Effective C++ - ACCU Review - be sure to get the 2nd Edition
• More Effective C++ - ACCU Review

-Weffc++ (C++ only)

Warn about violations of various style guidelines from Scott Meyers' Effective C++ books. If you use this option, you should be aware that the standard library headers do not obey all of these guidelines; you can use `grep -v' to filter out those warnings.

C++ is not the problem language it's often said to be if you follow Meyers' advice, but if you prefer C you certainly can have problems there too - and note that the preferred language for Gnome is C (while KDE is an extended C++), for C programmers you should read:

• C Traps and Pitfalls - ACCU Review

• The Elements of Programming Style

Back to the topic of compiler warnings, remember reading about lint in Kernighan and Ritchey's The C Programming Language? When I started out in my first real programming job, doing Sun system administration and writing image processing software back in the late '80's, I learned to write "lint" targets in my Makefiles, and I'd type "make lint" after editing but before compiling to actual machine code. This made my code much easier to debug and quicker to develop.

Much of lint's function is now available in the warnings of GCC (but I don't think all of it), but there are some proprietary products that will do extremely rigorous statis analysis of your source code. I haven't yet used either (although I plan to) but the two I know about are:

• PC-Lint and FlexeLint
• CodeWizard - Linux Journal Review

• Insure

You can search by patent number here.

And speaking of web programming, many Slashdot readers write web applications (Linux being a "server OS" as they say). How many of you validate the HTML that's generated by the web applications you write?

Your HTML should work well in any browser and it should be well designed for easy usability. I don't mean attractive graphics. I mean it shouldn't suck. Two links on design:

• Useit
• Ask Tog

• By uploading static files from your browser - most convenient during hand composition
• By entering its URL in a form - best for dynamic pages and final tuning of static pages

Mike

As for nested tables, as long as you use the closing TABLE tag, it doesn't matter if you close TR and TD. The closing TABLE tag is required by the specs.

• CSS - Mozilla has a MUCH more thourough implementation, nearly the whole enchilada. IE has maybe 80% of CSS1 and 40% of CSS2.
  
• DOM - Mozilla support is much better; IE support falls short.
  
• HTML - Both browsers implement pretty much the whole standard.
  
• HTTP - Easy to get right; Any modern browser supports HTTP/1.1.
  
• MathML - No support in either browser.
  
• PICS - AFAIK Mozilla has no censorware support for ideological reasons.
  
• PNG - Mozilla supports full alpha transparency; IE supports it but not in combination with style sheets.
  
• SMIL - no support in either browser.
  
• SVG - no support in either browser.
  

Amaya is their reference html browser and html editor. Not to usable as a browser for day to day operation, but a fine editor.

Indeed a good question to ask before purchasing anything...

And remember that not all learners are /. readers...or are yours? And will all of them be? I say this because someone suggested IRC for example. I wouldn't want to use IRC for an average distance learner...and think of the requirements you just layed on.

Distance learning has usually been a failure, and probably will be until technology changes drastically (like really fast broadband access in all the students' homes).

There's some truth to this, but it's also a bad generalization. All teaching/learning involves an instructor, resources (texts etc.), tools for delivery (your voice, a microphone, the web etc.), and an objective. I have had correspondence courses that I deemed useless. My 1,000 student section of history 202 was pitiful while I learned a great deal out of the independent study 201 course where I read at my own pace and did everything correspondence. Teaching and learning is about leveraging the tools and resources to meet your objectives. In some cases, clear objectives lack...and no matter what tools you use, you're screwed! Oh...and then there's learner motivation...which can be killed by too-hard-to-use technology/delivery systems, boring professors, dull material, immaturity etc. Hence the reason technology alone or 'distance learning' alone shouldn't be blamed. Check this out.

Anyway...technologies...especially for Linux?

• WebCT - A course development, delivery and management server. Linux version available
• Sorenson - Desktop video conferencing...Sorry, No Linx though.
• Mimio - Whiteboards etc. Linux...Dunno
• W3C - They do web stuff

Galego

I'm pretty sure Amaya does all that and more, even though she's not the prettiest or fastest ship, she has the most (W3C standards compliant) guns in the fleet.

I woudn't hire him, because I like standards. I have a friend who is a professional webdesigner, with emphasis on "designer". So he likes every non-standard thingy he can use (a big Flash fanatic) as long as it looks perfectly as he intended it. I still have to see one of his sites work correctly on Nescape. (I'm a long time Netscape user, and I will not switch to Internet Explorer because I prefer the way Netscape keeps user profiles and bookmarks, and don't get me started on the dangerous ActiveX holes in IE)
Now, I told him that it would be better to comply to the standards and sacrifice a bit of design. His mantra is "The Clients want it this way", then I try to explain him that it is his task to explain the consequences of their decision to his clients and offer alternatives...but his mantra then is "everybody uses Internet Explorer anyway". He is a neat guy, but I don't discuss standards with him anymore: he is just too stubborn :-(
I guess a lot of webdesigners are thinking that way.

Since my wife is one of the persons on the list of people actually working on this, I may add a few words to it. Marit has a publications list online.

How does it work? Well, have a look at project anonymity and unobservability on the Internet. A MIX network is like a system of remailers, just for IP packets. There are several kinds of attacks against a MIX network ("nix the MIX") and they are categorized and discussed in that paper.

Specifically, the problem of cooperating MIX network node operators is being discussed. Have a look at the properties of ideal MIXes: It is sufficient for the MIX network to have a single trustworthy node in your path in order to protect your anonymity (section 1.2 of that paper).

Marit has a paper on anonymity terminology online, too (txt version of that paper). Have a look at it in order to get your vocabulary. Additionally, there is a web page on identity management on her server. This relates P3P and anonymity/pseudonymity.


© Copyright 2000 Kristian Köhntopp
All rights reserved.

Before you start, determine your purpose and your audience: what do you want to communicate, and with whom?

Some suggestions:

• First, meet with management to determine what they want to communicate, and with whom they believe they will be communicating. (if they don't want to meet with you, run like hell and find a different project).
• Next, meet with a group of customers. You don't mention whether you're designing for a local government agency, something statewide, something federal, a UN agency, a provincial government not in the US, or whatever; but your customer is the person who either receives services from your agency or is required to pay your agency directly, whether your agency renders services or not. Meet one-on-one and with small groups of your customers to discover what they expect from your agency, and by extension, your agency's website. Take lots of notes.
• Evaluate how managements' and customers' views differ and complement one another. Write a project scope that accounts for these, including detailed explanations for features and design elements that management has not requested. be sure to include reasonable estimates of the time and cost involved in developing the project within the scope you have envisioned.
• Receive written management approval for your project scope and budget before proceeding.

Don't start coding yet:

• Draw a document hierarchy for your site. This can be done with pencil and paper, with Visio, whatever. But establish the relationships among the areas of the website before you make coding decisions.
• Sketch or mockup with a graphics tool the general look of your home page, index pages, content pages, form pages, etc.
• Receive written management approval for your hierarchy and visual design before proceeding.

Now it's time to choose your platform.

• Choose your platform wisely. Whether the site's going to be built from static HTML, upon an open source platform like Linux, Apache, PHP and MySQL, with a commercial product like NT, IIS, ASP, and SQL7, or in some combination, be sure your choice will meet the established scope and objectives -- and stay within budget.
• Don't choose a product because "that's what Department CYA is using." Every project is different.

Think you're ready to write some code? Not yet:

• Read Designing Web Usability by Jakob Nielsen. Feel free to disagree with some of his conclusions.
• Read Web by Design: The Complete Guide by Molly Holzschlag. Feel free to disagree with some of her conclusions.

Okay. Now you can write code:

• Write vendor-neutral, standards-compliant HTML.
• Separate presentation from content.
• Follow the rules you've learned from Molly and Jakob.

Good Luck!

I really wish they didn't name XML during the hypestorm of HTML. I mean, was XML really designed to be an eXtensible Markup Language? XML is almost never used to markup anything; it seems more of a structured data transfer language. I don't care if the book has a red cover and some dorky looking "guru" on the cover, XML is not just "a better HTML".
</soapbox>

There's a chapter or two written by Charles Allen about WIDL in the XML Handbook (Goldfarb, et al).

But it's a technology that is dated now -- webMethods has moved on to B2B, and anyone who is jumping up and down about screen scraping in 2000 is just a little bit behind the times.

--brian

If anyone is a bit unsure of what a DTD is, you may be interested to see how Slashdot (and the Slash code in general) use XML and DTDs.

Slashdot (again, Slash if it's setup to) produces all headlines in a convienient, machine-readable format. It can be found at www.slashdot.org/slashdot.xml .

At the same time, the DTD for this file (called 'Backslash' and can be found at www.slashdot.org/backslash.dtd) essentially describes to an XML parser what is and what is not allowed in the file. It essential defines what constitutes a "valid" document; it is valid meaning that when compared against the DTD, it conforms to the defintion.

"Well-formed" is another XML term which means it at least is formatted correctly accordingly to the XML definition (for example, single tag elements end in a backslash.)

If you're interested in learning about XML and this DTD stuff, as well as all the latest proposals that are meant to replace DTDs (such as XML Schema's), check out the official W3C site at www.w3.org/XML/.