Also makes me wonder about the syncing. It's going to be pretty annoying if the witty one liners "pull my finger, pull my finger" fail to match the action in Teenagers From Outerspace.
A little cynical, but rightly so. Here's a question: which is better?
A: mobi.yahoo.com
B: yahoo.mobi
Frankly I see little difference, but B is going to cost yahoo $140 (if I understand the article correctly), so I bet the registrars like B.
The link between.mobi and conformance to some mobile browsing standards is not very convincing. There are many better methods to do this than using a TLD. How about metadata? HTTP negotiation? Profiles? Overloading the meaning of a DNS entry is not a good idea.
Re:Xmltv of tv and radio programmes
on
On The BBC 2.0
·
· Score: 5, Informative
The BBC provides extensive listings for all channels, covering one week, in the tv-anytime xml format. It's updated every morning.
Well strictly speaking icalendar (rfc 2445) is the standard, but (as with vcalendar) it's a bit of a mouthful. iCal (to me) is Apple's software, but ical is the standard.
I really hope the future isn't 'html 5', given the presentation at XTech last year. It overloads the class attribute something awful, and adds foolish numbers of new elements. After watching hixie show a couple of pages full of new elements the browser wars of yesteryear came forcefully to mind.
The xhtml 2 presentation, by contrast, was clear, well justified, and parsimonious.
You do realize that the situation in Europe would be identical to that of the US if gasoline/petrol was priced similarly, right?
I don't see how that follows at all. Is your argument that people use public transport because of the cost? In my experience (UK) it's usually cheaper to drive, especially if the car has more than one person in it. I take the bus to work each day, and that's much more expensive than the car.
So why don't I drive to work? Well being sat in a traffic jam isn't my idea of fun. Given the choice I'll take sitting down with the paper. Most European cities weren't designed for cars (especially at current volumes), so maybe that's why we use public transport more.
... the stuff inside the windows is probably rendered by OS X, but could be done by Freetype or a band of trained dwarves for all I know.
The stuff in the windows what I see on linux, so presumably freetype2. I suspect the OP is talking about the title on the window, which isn't the usual OS X or freetype. I assume this is an artifact of the way the port has been done -- low level window creation and handling.
Does no one remember the camera sync episode? Somebody hadn't charged the batteries, so Jobs threw it towards/at (delete as appropriate) an underling, with a scowl.
So looking at the specs in the review I see mpeg4 sp video, but in an avi container and no aac audio. Which is misleading, to say the least.
I was bitten by this recently when I bought and 'mpeg 4' dvd player, which was nothing of the sort. Would it play mpeg 4 files? Nope.
I'm surprised that mpeg and iso seem to be offering little guidance on this. Is isn't helping them when players badged 'mpeg4' don't seem to be able to play the format.
"SFU is not shipped with Windows because SFU currently contains open-source software, such as the GNU C compiler, which cannot be distributed with commercial software."
There's already an excellant open-source codec out there in xvid.
For which you may, alas, have to pay a licence fee to MPEG-LA (depending on you usage). I agree that xvid is excellent, but it comes with strings. Theora does not -- probably (nobody can be sure given the current state of the patent system in certain locales).
I am no w3c expert by any means, but that's an interesting statement and strong point.
Too right it is. I don't recognise that characterisation of the W3C at all. True, they are concerned with the web as a whole, not just browsers, but it difficult to explain announcements like annotea moves to mozilla if the W3C is hostile to browsers.
Browser companies take part in W3C working groups, and provide valuable input. W3C even develops its own browser. And, a minor point I confess, W3C presentations normally use HTML in a browser.
What I see this group doing is providing the basis for W3C work. Working groups tend to be less successful if there isn't preceding work to serve as a basis. The W3C are attempting to remedy this (incubation groups iirc) but in the meantime I think this is interesting project.
Yes, I don't really understand Opera's objection to XForms. Any browser with XML, DOM, Javascript and HTML form support contain the basic capabilities for XForms.
One legitimate complaint is that XForms isn't backwards compatible; however as I've just completed some work using XForms and I'm currently dealing with the mess of javascript and html that complex forms currently require... well, screw backwards compatibility it this case.
Slashdot Mirror
Not a pleasant position to be in :-(
Microsoft are more pleasant to interact with, in my experience.
Very good idea.
Also makes me wonder about the syncing. It's going to be pretty annoying if the witty one liners "pull my finger, pull my finger" fail to match the action in Teenagers From Outerspace.
A little cynical, but rightly so. Here's a question: which is better?
.mobi and conformance to some mobile browsing standards is not very convincing. There are many better methods to do this than using a TLD. How about metadata? HTTP negotiation? Profiles? Overloading the meaning of a DNS entry is not a good idea.
A: mobi.yahoo.com
B: yahoo.mobi
Frankly I see little difference, but B is going to cost yahoo $140 (if I understand the article correctly), so I bet the registrars like B.
The link between
The BBC provides extensive listings for all channels, covering one week, in the tv-anytime xml format. It's updated every morning.
7 Day Listings
iCal is a calendaring file standard.
Well strictly speaking icalendar (rfc 2445) is the standard, but (as with vcalendar) it's a bit of a mouthful. iCal (to me) is Apple's software, but ical is the standard.
I really hope the future isn't 'html 5', given the presentation at XTech last year. It overloads the class attribute something awful, and adds foolish numbers of new elements. After watching hixie show a couple of pages full of new elements the browser wars of yesteryear came forcefully to mind.
The xhtml 2 presentation, by contrast, was clear, well justified, and parsimonious.
XForms - XHTML Forms
No, just XML Forms (iirc). XForms can have other presentation languages, for example SVG.
You do realize that the situation in Europe would be identical to that of the US if gasoline/petrol was priced similarly, right?
I don't see how that follows at all. Is your argument that people use public transport because of the cost? In my experience (UK) it's usually cheaper to drive, especially if the car has more than one person in it. I take the bus to work each day, and that's much more expensive than the car.
So why don't I drive to work? Well being sat in a traffic jam isn't my idea of fun. Given the choice I'll take sitting down with the paper. Most European cities weren't designed for cars (especially at current volumes), so maybe that's why we use public transport more.
... the stuff inside the windows is probably rendered by OS X, but could be done by Freetype or a band of trained dwarves for all I know.
The stuff in the windows what I see on linux, so presumably freetype2. I suspect the OP is talking about the title on the window, which isn't the usual OS X or freetype. I assume this is an artifact of the way the port has been done -- low level window creation and handling.
Except it's under Apple's APSL, which isn't DFSG free.
That seems strange, since the FSF say APSL v2 is a free licence. Is the debian judgement about v1, perhaps? Just curious.
Does no one remember the camera sync episode? Somebody hadn't charged the batteries, so Jobs threw it towards/at (delete as appropriate) an underling, with a scowl.
Gates has no style, but is safer to be around.
Operator: "Hello, this is 911, how may I help you?"
:-)
Unlikely -- we'd dial 999. Take that smart guy
IIRC Lookout uses Lucene (or, more accurately) the .net port), so I guess this is a victory for free software,
:-)
It's also worth looking at Beagle, a similar project for Gnome using lucene.
Congratulations to the Lucene developers. Taking over the desktop
I was going to quote that, damn you :-)
Strictly speaking the first part only can be credited to von Braun. Mort Sahl added the second bit.
So looking at the specs in the review I see mpeg4 sp video, but in an avi container and no aac audio. Which is misleading, to say the least.
:-)
I was bitten by this recently when I bought and 'mpeg 4' dvd player, which was nothing of the sort. Would it play mpeg 4 files? Nope.
I'm surprised that mpeg and iso seem to be offering little guidance on this. Is isn't helping them when players badged 'mpeg4' don't seem to be able to play the format.
(sorry - pet peeve
...can be found here.
Yes, as a backpacker I won't have much access to power sockets on my travels.
How about the Belkin battery pack?
Given that the issue was that there were two things called 'rendezvous' the statement:
:-)
Rendezvous' new name will be OpenTalk
doesn't really help
The LSB requires that amd64 have the 64 bit libs in /lib64 and the 32 bit ones in /lib
So is there no support for fat binaries in linux (ELF)? I guess that does make things messy. I wonder how apple will do this...
"SFU is not shipped with Windows because SFU currently contains open-source software, such as the GNU C compiler, which cannot be distributed with commercial software."
cue sound of one hand slapping forehead...
There's already an excellant open-source codec out there in xvid.
For which you may, alas, have to pay a licence fee to MPEG-LA (depending on you usage). I agree that xvid is excellent, but it comes with strings. Theora does not -- probably (nobody can be sure given the current state of the patent system in certain locales).
We still use pennies in the UK.
I am no w3c expert by any means, but that's an interesting statement and strong point.
Too right it is. I don't recognise that characterisation of the W3C at all. True, they are concerned with the web as a whole, not just browsers, but it difficult to explain announcements like annotea moves to mozilla if the W3C is hostile to browsers.
Browser companies take part in W3C working groups, and provide valuable input. W3C even develops its own browser. And, a minor point I confess, W3C presentations normally use HTML in a browser.
What I see this group doing is providing the basis for W3C work. Working groups tend to be less successful if there isn't preceding work to serve as a basis. The W3C are attempting to remedy this (incubation groups iirc) but in the meantime I think this is interesting project.
Yes, I don't really understand Opera's objection to XForms. Any browser with XML, DOM, Javascript and HTML form support contain the basic capabilities for XForms.
... well, screw backwards compatibility it this case.
One legitimate complaint is that XForms isn't backwards compatible; however as I've just completed some work using XForms and I'm currently dealing with the mess of javascript and html that complex forms currently require
It's an occupation of Mars now? I thought the were just tourists.