If two documents are both in XML, or both have Semantic Web ontology data, you may or may not be able to combine them menaingfully - they may be based on different DTDs/schemas/ontologies, and you're hosed.
Create an ontology that maps and relates the similar concepts and vocabulary - works like a translator. That is surely the basics of handling synonyms and related ideas.
Sure it won't handle the rare exceptions you will certainly dream up, but then it doesn't need to. The 80/20 rule is certainly sufficient to provide a very useful and functionally rich tool.
Could you point me to a definitive reference that suggests that Semantic Web and its associated tools won't work on Windows 95 - I'd sure like to know, since I'm not having any problem with it.
Browsers would have to be updated to not only accept the new languages but also work with the older languages that long-time web programers refuse to give up.
Browsers would only need to implement a decent and compliant XML parser to be able to use Semantic Web technologies. The need for bloated error-correction regular expression based HTML "parsing" wouldn't be needed, thus streamlining the browser and the expense involved in maintaining and extending it.
This would also release developers from browser-dependant authoring and kludging, freeing them up to creating adequately structured content instead of gee-gaw magpie-concious effects.
As for web-programmers that want to hold on to the illusion of the hey-day of the nineties browser-wars (doggedly pursuing the fragmentation that became HTML3.2), let them rot there - there's hardly any useful information coming from that sector anyway. They are always welcomed to join us in the twenty-first century when they understand the benefits and opportunities of the freedom to share information in an accessible manner - the choice is theirs.
didn't meta tags on web pages teach us anything in the past?
Sure. The abuse of meta-tags showed the weakness of non-structured content, and using a meta tag to kludge in some keyword structure.
The Semantic Web, being about structured content foremost, doesn't create this weakness, so it would be much harder to fake content and its value, making it cheaper and easier to create decent content instead.
What do you to if the "geek/programmer" is of the softer gender. Ya know, it goes both ways. How is a smart redheaded girl going to find a decent guy that is not intimidated by the softer sex?
Well, most things come with a very well documented applications interface. So read up on the right method calls, paying special attention to the return messages and values. After a while a couple can be progressing to something more natural - like instantiating new objects.
That is only if Mono can keep up with Microsoft's changes.
Largely irrelevant. Mono is an implementation of the standard as published by ecma. As long as the implementation of mono adheres to the ecma specification, mono doesn't "have" to keep up with Microsoft.
The principle is simple. Write using mono, and it will run in both (or otherwise Microsoft will take a huge PR beating by not complying with the standard they ensured to create). Write using Microsoft's.net implementation, and take the chance of being locked in.
Mono will never ever match the Microsoft implementation (that is ecma standard + microsoft patent bits). Its legally impossible in the current patent climate. The more Microsoft relies on this "patent-protection", the further away from cross-platform.net becomes.
Mono doesn't suffer if.net is seen as non-portable, since mono implementations on both Linux and Windows (plus the myriad of other OS's currently being worked on) are cross-platform enough anyway. Microsoft, however will suffer with a locked in implementation, since they haven't got their own "other-OS" based implementation (apart from BSD implementation along with Corel).
The entire concept of choice is that there are alternatives. Because.net may work on Linux and Windows does not mean it will kill Java - it will certainly be an alternative, but nowhere near as superior as required to kill Java.
Personally, I would love to see someone like IBM back Mono.
IBM and Sun have invested heavily in Java, and it would probably not be in IBM's interests to divide its interests between Java and.net - especially considering the milestones achieved on their Java platform.
You'd need someone that wasn't so intensely focused on Java - someone like Borland. They are working on a.net version of Delphi, so a similar mono-based Kylix could be on the cards.
How much does SA spend on foreign made vehicles? Does that mean it's worth developing their own car manufacturing industry?
Foreign-made vehicles in South Africa are merely luxury items for those people with more money than sense. South Africa's car manufacturing industry is World Class. Notable achievements:
* All right-hand drive BMW's are made in South Africa. Germany produces only left-hand drives now. BMW South Africa scored better quality ratings than their German counterparts for 2002. Both have extremely high quality levels * Volkswagen South Africa won the sole contract to supply China with 300,000 vehicles a few years ago.
There's scarce few major success story from any developers coding Open Source software alone - but yet there are many successful proprietary developers.
Open Source developers can switch from one application to the next. They are only limited to the languages they know.
Proprietary developers cannot do that because the source isn't available to them. Where Open Source development is a community, proprietary developement can only survive by not being a community.
I'm a South African, and the masses over here does not have the level of skills they have in India or China.
And why don't they have the level of skills? Is it possible one of the main reasons behind this is the financial cost involved? Surely the saving made by not buying proprietory software and going for Open Source alternatives allows a larger portion of the population to get involved in obtaining these skills because of the reduced costs.
Its the financial cost factor that's the barrier. Removing it or reducing it allows entry by more people. Certainly not all people, but more than before. Its progress.
The rest can hardly afford a computer.
So the people that previously couldn't afford a computer and its software but can afford just a computer -- isn't that an improvement? If you want to change an entire country, start with one person.
You know why Microsoft's software is expensive? Then we have factories making CDs,
Now this is a laugh when you think about it - if a government orders 10,000 copies of windows, what's the point of sending 10,000 copies of the same CD.
Here Open Source makes so much sense. Download one copy, or order one copy on CD and install it on as many computers as you would like. Logical and simple.
Up until the Christmas Day 1994 break-in on Shimomura's computers the general feeling was that Syn-Ack attack would never be seen "in the wild" and was just a theoretical possibility. The Xmas attack proved the legal enforcement community wrong. This highlights that there's a game of leap-frog going on.
Even though in your book you've exposed the human element as the weakest part of security, do you think that the typical technological leapfrogging above could continue for the forseeable future, or will one side convincingly win this battle of intelligence and skill?
Assuming you are aware or have read Shimomura's recollection of events, did you find their techniques to track you down original (for 1994) ?
I think the best example of how this is handled is Wikipedia
Wikis thrive and are successful because of the peer-review nature of the content. Every page of a wiki is generally editable by anyone. I've contributed one or two articles to Wikipedia, and found the community especially friendly and generous. Wiki content tends to be text-based.
But if a "wiki-like" front end is written that can store and retrieve in an XML format (Bruce mentions the XML format used by OpenOffice), then it will be a useful updating / annotation window, whilst always having the "live" XML document open to readers.
Wikis have version control as a standard feature, so undoing bad changes is possible.
I experimented some time ago with a wiki (hacking Usemod wiki) that could produce DocBook output - apart from the lack of wiki-isms to adequately express DocBook Type structures, it is technically a feasible option.
But we have OpenOffice, which can turn.doc files into its own XML format
I don't know what OpenOffice XML format is, but hopefully its something like DocBook (or richer).
What would be great is having books in a consistent XML format (not just HTML or XHTML). That way its possible to build a customisable portal containing the snippets out of a book that are most relevant to a particular user (Almost like cutting part of a page out of a book - none of this bookmarking an entire chapter, just the relevant paragraph). A combination of XML format, XPointer and a Portal framework can produce something a bit more flexible.
Dumping an entire book into a freely available electronic format is very useful. But having the availability to request a paragraph or two out of a chapter is another advantageous lever.
I would be great if they named the browser after the really cool ship in "Battle of the Planets" (old eighties sci-fi cartoon series). The ship was called Phoenix.
Re:Way to make the internet more useful
on
As the Spam Turns
·
· Score: 2
But it will inconvenience a great deal of people who have absolutely no say in these matters.
Customers have a say on these matters. They pay money to receive a service. If the ISP won't provide that service, then the customer has bought tainted goods. There are remedies and processes in place to deal with this, as stipulated in the contract you would have agreed on upon sign-up.
No. Email has _never_ been completely reliable. There is nothing in the RFCs that guarantee delivery of every email.
Spam on the other hand, makes email _more_ unreliable because of the unwanted volume of it. Spam blocking is a means of reducing that volume.
The goal of most spam blockers is to eliminate commercial use of the Internet.
No. Consensual commercial email usage is preferred. Unsolicited and unwanted email in volume is what we seek to eliminate.
We got unblocked yesterday.
Funny how you need your services blocked before you actually take responsibility for your mail server. Now had you been a competant and responsible administrator, you probably wouldn't have been on a block list in the first place.
Spam isn't just an email phenomonon, it's just an unregulated form of unsolicated mass advertisment.
No. The presence of an inbox does _not_ give you the right to populate it with your garbage. You are basically saying that you are allowed to park your car in my garage because garages are for cars. No its my garage, and I say who can park there -- not you.
Which part of the concept of private property eludes your comprehension?
Slashdot Mirror
Create an ontology that maps and relates the similar concepts and vocabulary - works like a translator. That is surely the basics of handling synonyms and related ideas.
Sure it won't handle the rare exceptions you will certainly dream up, but then it doesn't need to. The 80/20 rule is certainly sufficient to provide a very useful and functionally rich tool.
Could you point me to a definitive reference that suggests that Semantic Web and its associated tools won't work on Windows 95 - I'd sure like to know, since I'm not having any problem with it.
Browsers would only need to implement a decent and compliant XML parser to be able to use Semantic Web technologies. The need for bloated error-correction regular expression based HTML "parsing" wouldn't be needed, thus streamlining the browser and the expense involved in maintaining and extending it.
This would also release developers from browser-dependant authoring and kludging, freeing them up to creating adequately structured content instead of gee-gaw magpie-concious effects.
As for web-programmers that want to hold on to the illusion of the hey-day of the nineties browser-wars (doggedly pursuing the fragmentation that became HTML3.2), let them rot there - there's hardly any useful information coming from that sector anyway. They are always welcomed to join us in the twenty-first century when they understand the benefits and opportunities of the freedom to share information in an accessible manner - the choice is theirs.
Sure. The abuse of meta-tags showed the weakness of non-structured content, and using a meta tag to kludge in some keyword structure.
The Semantic Web, being about structured content foremost, doesn't create this weakness, so it would be much harder to fake content and its value, making it cheaper and easier to create decent content instead.
Well, most things come with a very well documented applications interface. So read up on the right method calls, paying special attention to the return messages and values. After a while a couple can be progressing to something more natural - like instantiating new objects.
Start off by reading the relevant RFC.
The principle is simple. Write using mono, and it will run in both (or otherwise Microsoft will take a huge PR beating by not complying with the standard they ensured to create). Write using Microsoft's
Mono will never ever match the Microsoft implementation (that is ecma standard + microsoft patent bits). Its legally impossible in the current patent climate. The more Microsoft relies on this "patent-protection", the further away from cross-platform
Mono doesn't suffer if
Did C++ kill C? Did Java kill C++?
The entire concept of choice is that there are alternatives. Because
You'd need someone that wasn't so intensely focused on Java - someone like Borland. They are working on a
Substitute the two computers with one piece of string - that simplifies the problem.
Foreign-made vehicles in South Africa are merely luxury items for those people with more money than sense. South Africa's car manufacturing industry is World Class. Notable achievements:
* All right-hand drive BMW's are made in South Africa. Germany produces only left-hand drives now. BMW South Africa scored better quality ratings than their German counterparts for 2002. Both have extremely high quality levels
* Volkswagen South Africa won the sole contract to supply China with 300,000 vehicles a few years ago.
Open Source developers can switch from one application to the next. They are only limited to the languages they know.
Proprietary developers cannot do that because the source isn't available to them. Where Open Source development is a community, proprietary developement can only survive by not being a community.
Expect a software audit. Oh, wait that's not original...
Oh wait - monopolies don't need originality....
Enron. WorldCom.
Surely it shouldn't need to take a moderately third world country like South Africa to point out this rather obvious benefit to a supposed superpower?
And why don't they have the level of skills? Is it possible one of the main reasons behind this is the financial cost involved? Surely the saving made by not buying proprietory software and going for Open Source alternatives allows a larger portion of the population to get involved in obtaining these skills because of the reduced costs.
Its the financial cost factor that's the barrier. Removing it or reducing it allows entry by more people. Certainly not all people, but more than before. Its progress.
So the people that previously couldn't afford a computer and its software but can afford just a computer -- isn't that an improvement? If you want to change an entire country, start with one person.
Now this is a laugh when you think about it - if a government orders 10,000 copies of windows, what's the point of sending 10,000 copies of the same CD.
Here Open Source makes so much sense. Download one copy, or order one copy on CD and install it on as many computers as you would like. Logical and simple.
Up until the Christmas Day 1994 break-in on Shimomura's computers the general feeling was that Syn-Ack attack would never be seen "in the wild" and was just a theoretical possibility. The Xmas attack proved the legal enforcement community wrong. This highlights that there's a game of leap-frog going on.
Even though in your book you've exposed the human element as the weakest part of security, do you think that the typical technological leapfrogging above could continue for the forseeable future, or will one side convincingly win this battle of intelligence and skill?
Assuming you are aware or have read Shimomura's recollection of events, did you find their techniques to track you down original (for 1994) ?
Wikis thrive and are successful because of the peer-review nature of the content. Every page of a wiki is generally editable by anyone. I've contributed one or two articles to Wikipedia, and found the community especially friendly and generous. Wiki content tends to be text-based.
But if a "wiki-like" front end is written that can store and retrieve in an XML format (Bruce mentions the XML format used by OpenOffice), then it will be a useful updating / annotation window, whilst always having the "live" XML document open to readers.
Wikis have version control as a standard feature, so undoing bad changes is possible.
I experimented some time ago with a wiki (hacking Usemod wiki) that could produce DocBook output - apart from the lack of wiki-isms to adequately express DocBook Type structures, it is technically a feasible option.
I don't know what OpenOffice XML format is, but hopefully its something like DocBook (or richer).
What would be great is having books in a consistent XML format (not just HTML or XHTML). That way its possible to build a customisable portal containing the snippets out of a book that are most relevant to a particular user (Almost like cutting part of a page out of a book - none of this bookmarking an entire chapter, just the relevant paragraph). A combination of XML format, XPointer and a Portal framework can produce something a bit more flexible.
Dumping an entire book into a freely available electronic format is very useful. But having the availability to request a paragraph or two out of a chapter is another advantageous lever.
I would be great if they named the browser after the really cool ship in "Battle of the Planets" (old eighties sci-fi cartoon series). The ship was called Phoenix.
Customers have a say on these matters. They pay money to receive a service. If the ISP won't provide that service, then the customer has bought tainted goods. There are remedies and processes in place to deal with this, as stipulated in the contract you would have agreed on upon sign-up.
Send them back the confirmed opt-in email you received from them, plus a confirmation that they indeed want to unsubscribe.
No. Email has _never_ been completely reliable. There is nothing in the RFCs that guarantee delivery of every email.
Spam on the other hand, makes email _more_ unreliable because of the unwanted volume of it. Spam blocking is a means of reducing that volume.
No. Consensual commercial email usage is preferred. Unsolicited and unwanted email in volume is what we seek to eliminate.
Funny how you need your services blocked before you actually take responsibility for your mail server. Now had you been a competant and responsible administrator, you probably wouldn't have been on a block list in the first place.
No. The presence of an inbox does _not_ give you the right to populate it with your garbage. You are basically saying that you are allowed to park your car in my garage because garages are for cars. No its my garage, and I say who can park there -- not you.
Which part of the concept of private property eludes your comprehension?