Browsers check the doctype and will render differently based on that. Not rendering in quirks mode, a browser will render a page faster. And faster is important. And XHTML1.0/1 valid documents specifically tell the browser not to render in quirks mode. Is that point valid enough for you?
Yes, I do this for a living. I've taken html 4.0 pages to xhtml1.0 scrict on the company intranet and gone from 5 seconds to 0.3 seconds. Same data. Of course, I optimized everything, not just the html, but you get the point. If I wanted to go to 0.2, I would streamline data object marshalling. The page in question went from 1.5MB to 100Kb.
I store my source data on databases. MySQL, MSSQL, Oracle.
Also, when I use the xmlhttp + client-side xml-rpc, it helps to have a valid xml document, with good ID tags and clear sections I can drop and add to without reloading the page. (I get sub 0.2 seconds response on a lot of those)
Finally, what do you do if the client (lynx, google) does not support client-side xslt processing? Mmm?
One more thing while mentioning google. xhtml1.0/1 pages that validate seem to get much better ranking. Example: I wrote a story in 2001, and made it xhtml1.0 a year later. Now, google puts it up first, out of 400,000 results for "federal trooper". I don't advertise the page, and nobody links to it. You tell me. I did not even optimise it for google, and I was suprised it was first. YMMV etc.
You are producing a valid xml document for the browser. I define that as "work with" the document.
XSLT is only workable on the server. Fine, use it on the server, store your data as semantic xml, but the output of the XSLT should still be XHTML 1.0 strict (or 1.1):)
If a software company can't generate valid xml, give then the boot. BTW, making a website is the same as making software.
Make sure they make the design completely modular to allow you to use different images, colors, and fonts scrictly by changing the css file(s). See CssZenGarden.com, (especially like http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/149/149.css&page =0, but that's me)
And if they use tables for layout, kick them out too. You are not hiring a company in 2001 to do a 2001 website. You are hiring a 2005 company to to a 2006 website. Don't let them tell you they have to build for IE. The current IE will be history this time next year.
Finally, you can pay average money, and get an average website, or you can pay extraordinary money and get an extraordinary website (example: maps.google.com). You pay little, you get a little website. There's no magic there.
Ask happycog.com for the job, or who they would recommend.
Again finally: If you're going to hassle them about color, font, and page layout, your project is already doomed. The reason why your company does NOT have an amazing website is because your company CAN'T make one. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can get our of the way of professionals web designers who make amazing websites in their spare time.
Arrgghh!!! I was, hum, misinformed... My cube farm is less interesting again... Please accept my apologies. It's the type released by swingline after the movie popularized it. Also, the logo is on the top, not on the side as was in the film.
Speaking of the red swingline stapler, yes, the one from the movie, it's 2 cubes over on one of my teammates' desk.
Not all of my co-workers are cheep.
As far as the list: The #1 and #2 are: Breech-loading repeat action rifle, and the bayonet. With these, you can make any damn list you like: List of countries we've invaded, list of tribes we've wiped out, list of kings we've deposed, list of languages English has displaced.
but wait? would A beowulf cluster of grid compuetrs still be a grid computer? And in that case would you not make a beowulf cluster of those? Mmmm... I need some Advil...
I agree with you. I've worked in banking, real-estate lending, and now healthcare. I tell you thought that there should be nothing on the workstations. All sensitive information (and it's all sensitive, except maybe the PDF of approved company holidays) should be on servers, and that should behind internal firewalls.
If you let users have sensitive information on their desktops, well, they can just install that DVD burner (you don't weld those netvistas shut) and just go to town.
High granularity in security systems is what my department is all about. Windows PC can't be secured. So no info on the PC. So no need for firewall, since nothing to take.
Firewalls should not be software installed on every single machine.
Firewalls should be dedicated hardware devices that monitor traffic connection in and out of the local network. The local network does not mean your company. Your company may have six local networks, each protected by firewalls. These hardware firewalls need to be 24/7/365, able to block in and out ports, do packet optimisation (for VOIP and Realtime systems), maintain logs, and be administerable by competent network engineers.
I like to put anormous stacks of paperwork all over my desk. Also, I pid very detail, hard to read data diagrams on the walls. Looks mean as hell. Of course, a nice collection of pens of many colors can provide enjoyment. Don't use the neon ligut under your overhang cabinets. Bring a small lamp.
Finally remember this: Don't have anything at your cube you can't live without.
So you are saying that this is good, because of security through obscurity, or even better, obscurity throught bulky equipment.
You've obviously never dealt with geeks. If it can be done, it will be done. If it can't be done, we'll tell you when we've tried.
You notice that there are very few "Unbreakable systems" out there, strictly because people have realized that there is enough man-power and talent in the worldwide geek pool to intelligently try nearly all possible permutations.
How do you think innovation in RF and computing came to be? From the corporate Board Room? Please... It was all hackers. All.
>And the signal that's sending back would likely use the PCS cell phone spectrum, where the transmissions are already encrypted.
but it would call home, to the ip of the correctional facility or such other agency. No need to see what's inside the message to know the kind of device making the call.
>Thirdly, laws could be written so that privacy of the monitor holders would be ensured even in public environments, but that's a whole nother can of worms (access to public airwaves) that I really don't want to get into here.
On intranets, I tell you that companies need html coders too and the good ones code non-ie html. Management can say whatever they want, it's a staffing issue: they won't be able to attract good intranet xhtml devs if their code looks like IE5.01 2000 vintage.
That and the fact that firefox will run on Novell Suse Linux. And companies like Novell.
You know, people are realizing that patents are a liability these days.
If I am a big corp and I have a patent on X (let's say)
And startup "Wewantfunding" goes looking for money to implement their plan to dominate the world, the VC will say: sorry, no money for you, your idea is already patented by BigMegaCorp.
But it 40 hackers around the world are building FOSS, integrating some of the ideas of the patent into a radically new piece of software, then BigMegaCorp is screwed, because no matter how much money they spend (waste) on fighting this they can't recover it (since the 40 hackers are not a company--and they're poor(not even 1M between them all)). Plus BigMegaCorp will look like the bad guy and people won't buy their products (can you say Adobe (skylarov)), and they can't develop anything that uses their patent to compete, because the FOSS is most likely better and definitely cheaper, and they can't get rid of the patent because they mark it on the books as an asset.
So now, BigMegaCorp calls HugeCustomer and says: Hey we have this new product that you'll love, it's patented, so send us $1M! HugeCustomer replies: "Hum, sorry, our admins just found this great little tool off the net that runs on linux and does everything your app does and then some."
Finally, the patents are a drain, because they weren't cheap to get, and the idea was either to develop and sell a product on using the patented tech, license them to third-parties that need those functions, or sue the daylights out of any startup foolish enough to release a product based on the patents.
FOSS makes all these arguments moot, and now companies are asking themselves why they should file for patents if they can't profit from them in the future.
In Iraq, a "patriot" is a guy that gets shot by US troops after he and his friends try to throw out a foreign army occupying their land.
In Bush's America, a "patriot" is a republican that votes republican.
220 years ago in America, a "patriot" was a guy who got shot by the King's troops after he and his friends tried to throw out a foreign army occupying their land.
Slashdot Mirror
Stick to what you have.
Implement this feature only when you have a problem with php->xhtml+css.
Also, there are things that break in the browser, like the back button, etc.
Also, it's harder to make changes to the interface unless you really modularize well, but that takes effort to implement.
Furthermore, recall that lynx and search engines don't use javascript.
Browsers check the doctype and will render differently based on that. Not rendering in quirks mode, a browser will render a page faster. And faster is important. And XHTML1.0/1 valid documents specifically tell the browser not to render in quirks mode. Is that point valid enough for you?
Yes, I do this for a living. I've taken html 4.0 pages to xhtml1.0 scrict on the company intranet and gone from 5 seconds to 0.3 seconds. Same data. Of course, I optimized everything, not just the html, but you get the point. If I wanted to go to 0.2, I would streamline data object marshalling. The page in question went from 1.5MB to 100Kb.
I store my source data on databases. MySQL, MSSQL, Oracle.
Also, when I use the xmlhttp + client-side xml-rpc, it helps to have a valid xml document, with good ID tags and clear sections I can drop and add to without reloading the page. (I get sub 0.2 seconds response on a lot of those)
Finally, what do you do if the client (lynx, google) does not support client-side xslt processing? Mmm?
One more thing while mentioning google. xhtml1.0/1 pages that validate seem to get much better ranking. Example: I wrote a story in 2001, and made it xhtml1.0 a year later. Now, google puts it up first, out of 400,000 results for "federal trooper". I don't advertise the page, and nobody links to it. You tell me. I did not even optimise it for google, and I was suprised it was first. YMMV etc.
The browser is the xml parser.
:)
You are producing a valid xml document for the browser. I define that as "work with" the document.
XSLT is only workable on the server. Fine, use it on the server, store your data as semantic xml, but the output of the XSLT should still be XHTML 1.0 strict (or 1.1)
Transitional?
e =0, but that's me)
Transitional my buttox.
XHTML1.0 strict is an XML document.
If a software company can't generate valid xml, give then the boot.
BTW, making a website is the same as making software.
Make sure they make the design completely modular to allow you to use different images, colors, and fonts scrictly by changing the css file(s). See CssZenGarden.com, (especially like http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/149/149.css&pag
And if they use tables for layout, kick them out too. You are not hiring a company in 2001 to do a 2001 website. You are hiring a 2005 company to to a 2006 website. Don't let them tell you they have to build for IE. The current IE will be history this time next year.
Finally, you can pay average money, and get an average website, or you can pay extraordinary money and get an extraordinary website (example: maps.google.com). You pay little, you get a little website. There's no magic there.
Ask happycog.com for the job, or who they would recommend.
Again finally: If you're going to hassle them about color, font, and page layout, your project is already doomed. The reason why your company does NOT have an amazing website is because your company CAN'T make one. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can get our of the way of professionals web designers who make amazing websites in their spare time.
Finally: there is no more finally.
Well, me too, can't complain... My phone works... Oh boy, does it ever, especially the incessant ringing part :|
Arrgghh!!! I was, hum, misinformed... My cube farm is less interesting again... Please accept my apologies.
It's the type released by swingline after the movie popularized it. Also, the logo is on the top, not on the side as was in the film.
Speaking of the red swingline stapler, yes, the one from the movie, it's 2 cubes over on one of my teammates' desk.
Not all of my co-workers are cheep.
As far as the list: The #1 and #2 are: Breech-loading repeat action rifle, and the bayonet. With these, you can make any damn list you like: List of countries we've invaded, list of tribes we've wiped out, list of kings we've deposed, list of languages English has displaced.
Isn't technology grand?
Yes, if the user is the one. But I can go to my co-worker's machine and do the dvd thing with knoppix. can't when the info is on a server.
but wait? would A beowulf cluster of grid compuetrs still be a grid computer? And in that case would you not make a beowulf cluster of those? Mmmm... I need some Advil...
I agree with you. I've worked in banking, real-estate lending, and now healthcare.
I tell you thought that there should be nothing on the workstations. All sensitive information (and it's all sensitive, except maybe the PDF of approved company holidays) should be on servers, and that should behind internal firewalls.
If you let users have sensitive information on their desktops, well, they can just install that DVD burner (you don't weld those netvistas shut) and just go to town.
High granularity in security systems is what my department is all about. Windows PC can't be secured. So no info on the PC. So no need for firewall, since nothing to take.
Great post.
Firewalls should not be software installed on every single machine.
Firewalls should be dedicated hardware devices that monitor traffic connection in and out of the local network. The local network does not mean your company. Your company may have six local networks, each protected by firewalls. These hardware firewalls need to be 24/7/365, able to block in and out ports, do packet optimisation (for VOIP and Realtime systems), maintain logs, and be administerable by competent network engineers.
Anything less and you're waiting to be fubared.
As far as Win SP2, I haven't and won't.
I like to put anormous stacks of paperwork all over my desk. Also, I pid very detail, hard to read data diagrams on the walls. Looks mean as hell.
Of course, a nice collection of pens of many colors can provide enjoyment. Don't use the neon ligut under your overhang cabinets. Bring a small lamp.
Finally remember this: Don't have anything at your cube you can't live without.
So you are saying that this is good, because of security through obscurity, or even better, obscurity throught bulky equipment.
You've obviously never dealt with geeks. If it can be done, it will be done. If it can't be done, we'll tell you when we've tried.
You notice that there are very few "Unbreakable systems" out there, strictly because people have realized that there is enough man-power and talent in the worldwide geek pool to intelligently try nearly all possible permutations.
How do you think innovation in RF and computing came to be? From the corporate Board Room? Please... It was all hackers. All.
>Triangulation requires heavier gear than that.
and in 5 years?
>And the signal that's sending back would likely use the PCS cell phone spectrum, where the transmissions are already encrypted.
but it would call home, to the ip of the correctional facility or such other agency. No need to see what's inside the message to know the kind of device making the call.
>Thirdly, laws could be written so that privacy of the monitor holders would be ensured even in public environments, but that's a whole nother can of worms (access to public airwaves) that I really don't want to get into here.
same here.
At Starbucks, two kids with a laptop.
Jim:
"Hey Frank, check this out, I just got a signal tracker ping!"
Frank:
"Woah, cool, check it out..."
Jim: tap tap tap
"Look at this man, it's a felon tracker from the Department of Corrections probation department."
Frank:
"Freaky!!!"
Jim:
"Based on signal strength, it's, oh, 12 feet from us... "
Frank:
"Dang! it must be that guy over there putting sugar in his latte."
Jim, louder than before:
"Hey, that guy's a felon on probation"
Stares from all corners of the store meet the man's, and bedlam ensues.
No thanks! Anyone remembers the Scarlet Letter? Is this the kind of America our forefathers died creating and defending?
You ever tried to squeeze $25,000 in cash out of a college student? Those turnips are dry.
;)
I realise you jested
On intranets, I tell you that companies need html coders too and the good ones code non-ie html. Management can say whatever they want, it's a staffing issue: they won't be able to attract good intranet xhtml devs if their code looks like IE5.01 2000 vintage.
That and the fact that firefox will run on Novell Suse Linux. And companies like Novell.
You know, people are realizing that patents are a liability these days.
If I am a big corp and I have a patent on X (let's say)
And startup "Wewantfunding" goes looking for money to implement their plan to dominate the world, the VC will say: sorry, no money for you, your idea is already patented by BigMegaCorp.
But it 40 hackers around the world are building FOSS, integrating some of the ideas of the patent into a radically new piece of software, then BigMegaCorp is screwed, because no matter how much money they spend (waste) on fighting this they can't recover it (since the 40 hackers are not a company--and they're poor(not even 1M between them all)). Plus BigMegaCorp will look like the bad guy and people won't buy their products (can you say Adobe (skylarov)), and they can't develop anything that uses their patent to compete, because the FOSS is most likely better and definitely cheaper, and they can't get rid of the patent because they mark it on the books as an asset.
So now, BigMegaCorp calls HugeCustomer and says: Hey we have this new product that you'll love, it's patented, so send us $1M!
HugeCustomer replies: "Hum, sorry, our admins just found this great little tool off the net that runs on linux and does everything your app does and then some."
Finally, the patents are a drain, because they weren't cheap to get, and the idea was either to develop and sell a product on using the patented tech, license them to third-parties that need those functions, or sue the daylights out of any startup foolish enough to release a product based on the patents.
FOSS makes all these arguments moot, and now companies are asking themselves why they should file for patents if they can't profit from them in the future.
So yeah, FOSS is kicking ass.
Hum, that would be mortar rounds. If the Iraqui resistance was lobbing actual mortars into american compounds, that would indeed be a good thing.
In Iraq, a "patriot" is a guy that gets shot by US troops after he and his friends try to throw out a foreign army occupying their land.
In Bush's America, a "patriot" is a republican that votes republican.
220 years ago in America, a "patriot" was a guy who got shot by the King's troops after he and his friends tried to throw out a foreign army occupying their land.
Oh wait...
That's right. Microsoft is evil, and we don't want any of it. IE Tabs or not.
well,extra actually, T-mobile is part of Deutsch Telekom AG. and they operate the gsm network in the us. I think they lease use on the infrastructure.
Yeah,
:)
Well, you should know, we play lots of games in the office.
Oh, you meant computer games?
hehe
Thanks
Yes, good books on doing GUI applications with python.