He said "you are pretty much stuck with C++" not that it was only C++.
The reason this interview seems friendlier is because now you can actually hear exactly what he says instead of getting it interpreted for you by a journalist. You just interpreted it yourself and voila "pretty much" disappeared.
Media is a powerful tool. Unfortunately it is in the hands of journalists.
Netscape Composer is not a word processor. It is a tool to create broken HTML.
HTML is not a suitable format for a word processor. It is meant for hypertext and too limited for a word processor. Additionally, until user agents support CSS2 or maybe XSL (where ever it is heading) word processors exporting to HTML _will_ produce broken HTML. Just like Netscape Composer.
I thought AbiWord used an application of XML as native file format?
Maybe one day we will have a word processor that seperates structure from appearence. A word processor that makes it natural to think about structure and content rather than appearence when creating the information. Oh well.
On the contrary ORBit wasn't built with speed as an objective. That was a pleasant side effect.
In one of his talks in Denmark Miguel said that Elliott Lee's benchmarking of the different Free ORBs showed ORBit to be the fastest. Allegedly by a wide margin.
Uh, who do you think are sitting in these working groups? Netscape and Microsoft.
If we have been able to implement postscript interpreters for years CSSn shouldn't be any problem. The problem has been that the implementors rather spent time making up their own proprieraty 'solutions'. They could have been implementing CSSn support, but chose not to.
FYI, W3C do actually implement these concepts they are recommending. See Amaya/Thot and Jigsaw for example.
microsoft.com, compaq.com, cnn.com, go.com (abc, disney, etc), and numerous others make use of CSS.
Look at http://www.w3.org/Style "Why two style sheet languages". XSL isn't supposed to be applied to HTML.
HTML sucks in general. CSS sucks because of redundancy. BUT it is the only thing we got and best thing is to improve the bad parts. Getting support for CSSn will make people use it. Just see what happened when Netscape introduced frames and font. Both are crap and still people use them.
Creative pages? Nothing creative with misusing a tool.
All these so called "web designers" try to accomplish is to map their previous experiences of newspapers and such to the WWW. The WWW is not a newspaper. It is a different media with a different way to do things.
If you want full control over the visual appearence of a page you should use postscript or PDF. What you are doing now is no better than MS creating their own version of Java or trying to change the meaning of "open source".
Hmm, lets see. HTML+ (http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/HTMLPlus/htmlplus_1.html ) was circulating in 1993. Netscape was founded (http://home.netscape.com/company/about/background er.html#milestones) in April 1994. HTML+ contained tables.
Hakon W. Lie's style sheet proposal (http://www.w3.org/People/howcome/p/cascade.html) that influenced CSS greatly came in Oct 1994. At the same time Netscape released Navigator 1.0. Version 2 came about a year later and still no sign of style sheet support in it. Say hi to FONT, BLINK et al though.
In contrast Viola (http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/www/clients/viola/) supported tables in May 1994 (looking at the screenshots at Sunet) and had rudimentary style sheet support. Heck, just look at the screenshots and consider where we are 5 years later.
I was trying to point out the flaw in considering a certain kind of information uninteresting to people with disabilities.
I won't force anyone to use HTML in a correct way, but a government should do what is best for all its citizens. It is a good thing they are enforcing this on their own sites.
I don't want govt to legislate this however. I will do my best to make things hard for those that do misuse HTML though.
I can write a compiler for C that changes the semantics of "+" to mean substraction. Obviosly this also means what I have created isn't C anymore either.
If you want to tell the user agent how to visually render your pages it should be through style sheets. Using tables are a bad hack that is undermining the benefits of HTML.
CSS1, CSS2, and CSS-positioning takes care of that. Of course CSS came at the same time Netscape decided to implement all their kewl extensions instead of doing the right thing.
Btw, I have no problems with tables or images - when they are used correctly.
Artists that express themselves in sound or visually should do just that. Those forms of expression are mostly inaccessible.
HTML on the other hand was created to address these problems. People that misuse HTML is flipping the bird to all people with disabilities who had a great chance to a better life with HTML.
I want to be a fly on the wall when one of these artists/web designers explain for their blind son/daughter that they can't access daddy's/mommy's work because daddy/mommy has been 'creative'.
The whole point of HTML is to have a format that is accessible. If people really don't give a damn about this they should use postscript or PDF. They get full control of the appearence on the client end and they don't pollute HTML with crap.
Lets say you are interested in the development of the Linux kernel. Every day you go to http://www.flashykernelnews.com to read the latest about the kernel developments. Unfortunately one day you get run over by a car and you lose your sight. Are you now not interested in the Linux kernel developments? Because now http://www.flashykernelnews.com is not accessible to you anymore.
'They make a product that is of no interest to a disable person like you'.
When used correctly HTML is accessible without any additional cost. Producing multiple versions (tape, braille, whatever) have additional costs. BUT of course all govt material should be accessible to all its citizens. Any other way would make people that can't access the govt material second rate citizens. If they are they shouldn't pay one dime to this govt that treating them like that.
A software's Freeness is a valid merit in my book. If you want to buy proprieraty software you are free to do so, but don't whine when people compete.
I have no moral obligation to pamper commercial (proprieraty or not) companies. They are providing these products to make money and should expect competition (both proprieraty and free).
No, there is no security issue with "Open Source". L.A.M.E. is a first class moron and should be ignored.
Read what Bruce Schneier has to say about obscurity vs security and then apply that on what L.A.M.E. is saying and you will see L.A.M.E for what he is - a moron.
'I agree only with your first point, that C++ may be "overcomplicated". It has way too many little "fine points" and rules. It takes years to start truly nailing down and "mastering" C++, whereas C can be learnt in days, and "mastered" in a matter of months.'
This is why I call C++ bloated. Too many "features". When was the last time you used things like "mutable" or "explicit"?
Of course at the end it all comes down to how well versed the programmer is with C++ and how good of a designer he/she is. The problem is just that when working with others everyone else get affected by lack of proficiency with C++ features. This is a far greater problem working with C++ than C because of the "features" in C++. Even more so in a largely distributed project like most Free software projects are.
They only require you to be on topic, RTFM and ask questions in English. If you expect them to spend time on your problems you better spend enough time to satisfy the above.
Slashdot Mirror
He said "you are pretty much stuck with C++" not that it was only C++.
/mill
The reason this interview seems friendlier is because now you can actually hear exactly what he says instead of getting it interpreted for you by a journalist. You just interpreted it yourself and voila "pretty much" disappeared.
Media is a powerful tool. Unfortunately it is in the hands of journalists.
Netscape Composer is not a word processor. It is a tool to create broken HTML.
/mill
HTML is not a suitable format for a word processor. It is meant for hypertext and too limited for a word processor. Additionally, until user agents support CSS2 or maybe XSL (where ever it is heading) word processors exporting to HTML _will_ produce broken HTML. Just like Netscape Composer.
I thought AbiWord used an application of XML as native file format?
Maybe one day we will have a word processor that seperates structure from appearence. A word processor that makes it natural to think about structure and content rather than appearence when creating the information. Oh well.
On the contrary ORBit wasn't built with speed as an objective. That was a pleasant side effect.
/mill
In one of his talks in Denmark Miguel said that Elliott Lee's benchmarking of the different Free ORBs showed ORBit to be the fastest. Allegedly by a wide margin.
Great. Lets remove the most important reason Linux became a success - it being free.
/mill
If the Alan Coxs and the Dave Millers hadn't had access to the source and the freedom to modify it Linux would have become nothing.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin
I only wonder who he labelled "punk kids".
/mill
Smooth of him to list that point and then not addressing it properly. Politician in the makings?
http://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel /9905.0/0000.html
/mill
mingo's stab at "refuting" it..
As for the previous post I fail to see the value of it. Posting quotes from the article is a waste of bandwidth if one doesn't add something more.
I also wonder how you can call something pathetic and laughable when you don't even know it exists.
People have been busy implementing frames, font, layers, marquee, blink, and all kinds of k3wl stuff. Not to mention active desktops and channels.
/mill
Uh, who do you think are sitting in these working groups? Netscape and Microsoft.
/mill
If we have been able to implement postscript interpreters for years CSSn shouldn't be any problem. The problem has been that the implementors rather spent time making up their own proprieraty 'solutions'. They could have been implementing CSSn support, but chose not to.
FYI, W3C do actually implement these concepts they are recommending. See Amaya/Thot and Jigsaw for example.
microsoft.com, compaq.com, cnn.com, go.com (abc, disney, etc), and numerous others make use of CSS.
/mill
Look at http://www.w3.org/Style "Why two style sheet languages". XSL isn't supposed to be applied to HTML.
HTML sucks in general. CSS sucks because of redundancy. BUT it is the only thing we got and best thing is to improve the bad parts. Getting support for CSSn will make people use it. Just see what happened when Netscape introduced frames and font. Both are crap and still people use them.
Qt 2.0 will be QPLed. Still arguable if QPL is compatible with GPL though.
/mill
Creative pages? Nothing creative with misusing a tool.
/mill
All these so called "web designers" try to accomplish is to map their previous experiences of newspapers and such to the WWW. The WWW is not a newspaper. It is a different media with a different way to do things.
If you want full control over the visual appearence of a page you should use postscript or PDF. What you are doing now is no better than MS creating their own version of Java or trying to change the meaning of "open source".
Hmm, lets see. HTML+ (http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/HTMLPlus/htmlplus_1.html ) was circulating in 1993. Netscape was founded (http://home.netscape.com/company/about/background er.html#milestones) in April 1994. HTML+ contained tables.
/mill
Hakon W. Lie's style sheet proposal (http://www.w3.org/People/howcome/p/cascade.html) that influenced CSS greatly came in Oct 1994. At the same time Netscape released Navigator 1.0. Version 2 came about a year later and still no sign of style sheet support in it. Say hi to FONT, BLINK et al though.
In contrast Viola (http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/www/clients/viola/) supported tables in May 1994 (looking at the screenshots at Sunet) and had rudimentary style sheet support. Heck, just look at the screenshots and consider where we are 5 years later.
Umm, if morons like you would use HTML correctly we wouldn't have to put a anti-moron filter in the browsers.
/mill
A table is for marking up tabular data not for you to mimick a newspaper.
http://www.cast.org/bobby
/mill
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL has lots of information on accessibility in general.
I was trying to point out the flaw in considering a certain kind of information uninteresting to people with disabilities.
/mill
I won't force anyone to use HTML in a correct way, but a government should do what is best for all its citizens. It is a good thing they are enforcing this on their own sites.
I don't want govt to legislate this however. I will do my best to make things hard for those that do misuse HTML though.
I can write a compiler for C that changes the semantics of "+" to mean substraction. Obviosly this also means what I have created isn't C anymore either.
/mill
If you want to tell the user agent how to visually render your pages it should be through style sheets. Using tables are a bad hack that is undermining the benefits of HTML.
CSS1, CSS2, and CSS-positioning takes care of that. Of course CSS came at the same time Netscape decided to implement all their kewl extensions instead of doing the right thing.
/mill
Btw, I have no problems with tables or images - when they are used correctly.
Artists that express themselves in sound or visually should do just that. Those forms of expression are mostly inaccessible.
HTML on the other hand was created to address these problems. People that misuse HTML is flipping the bird to all people with disabilities who had a great chance to a better life with HTML.
I want to be a fly on the wall when one of these artists/web designers explain for their blind son/daughter that they can't access daddy's/mommy's work because daddy/mommy has been 'creative'.
The whole point of HTML is to have a format that is accessible. If people really don't give a damn about this they should use postscript or PDF. They get full control of the appearence on the client end and they don't pollute HTML with crap.
/mill
Lets say you are interested in the development of the Linux kernel. Every day you go to http://www.flashykernelnews.com to read the latest about the kernel developments. Unfortunately one day you get run over by a car and you lose your sight. Are you now not interested in the Linux kernel developments? Because now http://www.flashykernelnews.com is not accessible to you anymore.
'They make a product that is of no interest to a disable person like you'.
When used correctly HTML is accessible without any additional cost. Producing multiple versions (tape, braille, whatever) have additional costs. BUT of course all govt material should be accessible to all its citizens. Any other way would make people that can't access the govt material second rate citizens. If they are they shouldn't pay one dime to this govt that treating them like that.
Any page that makes use of tables for layout purposes isn't friendly. That's about 99% of the WWW.
/mill
One needs to understand the semantics as well as the syntax of HTML. Tables aren't for layout - period.
A software's Freeness is a valid merit in my book. If you want to buy proprieraty software you are free to do so, but don't whine when people compete.
/mill
I have no moral obligation to pamper commercial (proprieraty or not) companies. They are providing these products to make money and should expect competition (both proprieraty and free).
No, there is no security issue with "Open Source". L.A.M.E. is a first class moron and should be ignored.
/mill
Read what Bruce Schneier has to say about obscurity vs security and then apply that on what L.A.M.E. is saying and you will see L.A.M.E for what he is - a moron.
'I agree only with your first point, that C++ may be "overcomplicated". It has way too many little "fine points" and rules. It takes years to start truly nailing down and "mastering" C++, whereas C can be learnt in days, and "mastered" in a matter of months.'
/mill
This is why I call C++ bloated. Too many "features". When was the last time you used things like "mutable" or "explicit"?
Of course at the end it all comes down to how well versed the programmer is with C++ and how good of a designer he/she is. The problem is just that when working with others everyone else get affected by lack of proficiency with C++ features. This is a far greater problem working with C++ than C because of the "features" in C++. Even more so in a largely distributed project like most Free software projects are.
They only require you to be on topic, RTFM and ask questions in English. If you expect them to spend time on your problems you better spend enough time to satisfy the above.
/mill
Umm, wasn't that his wife Tipper Gore?
/mill
Humm, I use ee on my Debian 1.3 system. Guess I am just special.
/mill