The user never knows if a page is conforming to specs (even the ones who care, wouldn't always recognize bad code). It would be nice to have a plugin to rate each page you visit. How many IE specific features are used, how many javascript errors, what version of the html spec are they using and did they follow it correctly.
Browsers are so forgiving lately, no one knows if a page is complying to standards. It would be nice to be able to SHAME them into using standards.
The entire point of this thread is that DTDs have no namespace smarts. Its simply a flaw with DTDs.
I agree that companies should be able to create their own XML formats... that's what it's all about. My comment was that There should be a limited number of ways to validate those formats. There's a simple reason for this: extendability. Once a set of XML tags has be restricted by DTD, it cannot be extended using schema (at least without repeating ALL the validations). DTDs (because of the namespace issues mentioned earlier) can only be extended by other DTDs in special situations. If everyone and their brother created a new validation format, these extendability issues would get even worse.
IMHO, the W3C should start working on DTD version 2 right now. We need namespace support in a validation format that's simple enough for everyone to use.
Re:The possibilites are endless.
on
Virtual Simerica
·
· Score: 3, Informative
In this case, it sounds like it might even be supported. According to the article, they seem to recognize a dicatorship as a valid form of government.
I posted that a bit quickly, let me clarify: implementation of verification isn't as much an issue as turning it into an excepted standard. I don't think people should be able to just make up their own standards. I think in this case, W3C should have put a bit more thought into DTD. I heard people were still in disagreement over namespace support in DTDs when it was released (not a good way to start a standard).
What I *really* want is just DTD with a smidge of namespace smarts and the ability to combine DTD's for one document. Anyone want to give it a shot?
I think this is what everyone wants. The problem is, aside from Microsoft, no one can just make up a standard that contradicts the W3C and expect it to be accepted.
This does bring up a good point though. How are we supposed to get our issues out there? The EFF just fights the court cases. Occasionally, someone shows up for an interview on Tech TV, but for the most part, they rely on word of mouth.
Shouldn't there be a little more of a public awareness campaign for these issues (maybe something a little less grass-roots than the Farscape thing)?
He's probably talke about the fact that season 5 almost didn't get made... or that the second series only lasted a season... or the third never made it off the ground.
The paragraph you quote is over simplifying what MS is doing. Word will read ANY xml format and it's schema. The user then can alter the text (with xml validation showing up as text highlighting). When you save, you have the option of a plain XML format (just the xml that conforms to the schema) or a Word version of the xml (sorry I don't know the MS terms). The Word version of the document contains the original XML format as well as MS proprietary XML. All the MS tags are in their own namespace, so the XML is still valid.
It's really a very cool idea. Your Word templates can reference Schema elements; so non programmers can create the template. Anyone who knows how to use Word will be able to make a form that interfaces with existing XML formats.
How is this insightfull??? Go ahead, read the document. It just says she was in a lot of pain and the lawyers at McDonalds still wouldn't admit it was their fault.... because it wasn't. What did she expect? Cold coffee? Did she want someone to say "watch it, the coffee is hot!". Of course it is! Its legal crap like this that makes the world so complicated.
It just formalizes the lazy practices of programmers.
One of the failures of XP, IMHO, is that it requires too much discipline from the programmers. I've only met a few that I think are capable of working in XP. XP is not for lazy people. RUP is for lazy people - "don't think, just fill out this stack of forms".
I personally don't think XP is any more useful than any other methodology. I just wanted to point out what I think is a common misconception.
Learn some solid OOP and modern languages like Java, C#, C++. It takes years of experience to write well designed OO code.
Very true. One thing I've noticed, you can hear phrases like "Favor composition over inheritence" over and over, but until you see a project begin to fail due to bad design, you will never understand WHY these rules are important. This is one area where experince does count. And a very good area for someone looking out over the next 10 years rather than the next 3 months.
A guy at work was talking a few months ago about someone he knows at a flea market who 'can get you whatever CD you want, just make your request' for a few dollars. On CDR media, of course.
The mainstream view of 'pirates' is Not that they are fair-use freedom fighters. This is a point that people inside the 'hacker' subculture need to accept, and get over ranting about.
I'm not speaking as a fair-use freedom fighter. I'm speaking as someone who doesn't want to be compared to rapists and murderers just because I installed RealPlayer on two computers with only one license.
I suspect they're engaged on some wacko conspiracy: "Do as much as we can to lose money and then blame it on customers. And then, once we've reached bottom, we'll... um... well, we haven't figured that part out yet. Our goal is to simply piss off consumers, hit bottom, and then blame folks."
I think everyone (including the RIAA) sees the writing on the wall. Their current business model is dead. It is strange, however, that instead of bleeding it dry, they choose to end themselves quickly. It seems they got caught in quicksand and (despite all the customers yelling "don't move!") they decide they can squirm out of it.
Why is it that PC terms like 'Crippled CDs' catch on, but people still refer to those who infringe copyrights as 'Pirates' -- even in the press and in the courts?
I'm just a stupid European, but can't you guys just vote him off or something? If not, why not? Just curious...
It wouldn't do any good. Say we wanted to vote him out so bad that we would vote for his opponent even though his opponent was an idiot too... or say his opponent died in a horrible accident. We still vote for his opponent. Berman looses the election. What happens in a democracy? The people win. America is a Republic, however. The loosing candidate in this case is appointed to an even more powerful office (Attorney General for example).
Apparently you didn't understand what I was writing.
EBay can deny service to anyone for any reason. This is a good thing.
Piracy and serial killing are both bad things.
The government SHOULD allow EBay to deny service to pirates and serial killers.
My only gripe: EBay is legally REQUIRED in many cases to stop servicing pirates and serial killers. If I buy a pirated cd from someone using EBay's service, for some stupid reason, the government thinks this is EBay's fault. It's really not much different than Napster. By blaming the service provider (even when the service would normally provide perfectly legal services), the government is implicitly FORCING EBay to stop business with people who break the laws.
Since EBay can't possibly do detailed checks on every one of it's sellers, they simply ban people in bulk. It's cheaper to loose a few customers than spend money looking into each product in detail.
Most of these laws are less than five years old (hence my reference to "Modern Law").
I don't claim Apple to be the gods of UI, but don't you think the mistake was putting the scroll bar on the right? Being right handed would only matter if we had to use our hand to scroll. The mouse pointer doesn't get in the way when you're scrolling, and the text IS already on the left. Why not put the scroll bar over there next to it?
Vigilante Corporations
on
Ebay vs. Musician
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
More and more modern law is allowing (and sometimes encouraging) any corporation to be come a vigilante. In this case, it's obvious that Ebay has the right to deny service to any customer they please. What's disturbing is that the government is encouraging companies to adopt policies that turn that right of denial of service into the noose used to hang the guilty (as well as the 'likely guilty'). We can blame the RIAA all we want, but ultimately, the government (through action or inaction) is allowing these types of things to happen every day now.
I'm tired of the "jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none" hardware that's coming out these days. I personally find no need to have a web browser built into my phone (or for that matter, I have no use for a phone that CAN have a web browser built in).
If you need to get on the 'net that badly, you need a life.
Why have a radio in your car? Can't you wait until you get home to listen to the news/ballgame/music? What about mobil phones in general. 10 years ago, anyone with a mobil phone was just being excessive. Now children have them. Not that we NEED any of these things, but they are useful. They do make our lives more convenient.
For the first year I had it, I really loved my Tivo. Lately though, I've realized the service just isn't growing like it could. My AudioStation, for example, originally shipped as a simple network MP3 player. Now it has a web interface, a programmers API and the ability to play many other formats. Tivo has the ability to do the same things, but instead, it's upgrades only add a few features that you really have to look for. Even with the new hardware (series 2) you get a couple of usb ports and a little more drive space.
What about HDTV support?
What about multiple TVs (If I buy another Tivo, I have to move to the room that recorded the show to watch it)?
What about interfacing with my cable box so I don't have to build an 'IR Tent'?
What about dual tuners on the more expensive models?
They could do so much with this technology... but they don't. I think if you ask around, most people who love Tivo aren't really in love with the brand as much as the PVR technology in general. If someone else comes up with the features, users will move on.
Having voted for a dead man, simply to see Ashcroft loose his Senate seat, I get a special feeling to see so many people (at least on paper) seem to be against Ashcroft. (I'm still waiting for Preditor v. Ashcroft and Aliens v. Ashcroft)
In retrospect, however, I wish he had won his re-election bid for Senate. He's doing much more harm now than he ever did as a Senator.
A minor point release with some bug fixes (apparently too minor to even mention in the description). Neither Bill Gates or someone from the RIAA have taken away more of our rights today?
Should this make me feel better...
on
Mule Gives Birth
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
The user never knows if a page is conforming to specs (even the ones who care, wouldn't always recognize bad code). It would be nice to have a plugin to rate each page you visit. How many IE specific features are used, how many javascript errors, what version of the html spec are they using and did they follow it correctly.
Browsers are so forgiving lately, no one knows if a page is complying to standards. It would be nice to be able to SHAME them into using standards.
Just an idea.
The entire point of this thread is that DTDs have no namespace smarts. Its simply a flaw with DTDs.
I agree that companies should be able to create their own XML formats... that's what it's all about. My comment was that There should be a limited number of ways to validate those formats. There's a simple reason for this: extendability. Once a set of XML tags has be restricted by DTD, it cannot be extended using schema (at least without repeating ALL the validations). DTDs (because of the namespace issues mentioned earlier) can only be extended by other DTDs in special situations. If everyone and their brother created a new validation format, these extendability issues would get even worse.
IMHO, the W3C should start working on DTD version 2 right now. We need namespace support in a validation format that's simple enough for everyone to use.
In this case, it sounds like it might even be supported. According to the article, they seem to recognize a dicatorship as a valid form of government.
I posted that a bit quickly, let me clarify: implementation of verification isn't as much an issue as turning it into an excepted standard. I don't think people should be able to just make up their own standards. I think in this case, W3C should have put a bit more thought into DTD. I heard people were still in disagreement over namespace support in DTDs when it was released (not a good way to start a standard).
What I *really* want is just DTD with a smidge of namespace smarts and the ability to combine DTD's for one document. Anyone want to give it a shot?
I think this is what everyone wants. The problem is, aside from Microsoft, no one can just make up a standard that contradicts the W3C and expect it to be accepted.This does bring up a good point though. How are we supposed to get our issues out there? The EFF just fights the court cases. Occasionally, someone shows up for an interview on Tech TV, but for the most part, they rely on word of mouth.
Shouldn't there be a little more of a public awareness campaign for these issues (maybe something a little less grass-roots than the Farscape thing)?
WTF are you talking about?
He's probably talke about the fact that season 5 almost didn't get made... or that the second series only lasted a season... or the third never made it off the ground.The paragraph you quote is over simplifying what MS is doing. Word will read ANY xml format and it's schema. The user then can alter the text (with xml validation showing up as text highlighting). When you save, you have the option of a plain XML format (just the xml that conforms to the schema) or a Word version of the xml (sorry I don't know the MS terms). The Word version of the document contains the original XML format as well as MS proprietary XML. All the MS tags are in their own namespace, so the XML is still valid.
It's really a very cool idea. Your Word templates can reference Schema elements; so non programmers can create the template. Anyone who knows how to use Word will be able to make a form that interfaces with existing XML formats.
Ironic, that it's perfectly legal to publish the Pam & Tommy Lee video.
How is this insightfull??? Go ahead, read the document. It just says she was in a lot of pain and the lawyers at McDonalds still wouldn't admit it was their fault.... because it wasn't. What did she expect? Cold coffee? Did she want someone to say "watch it, the coffee is hot!". Of course it is! Its legal crap like this that makes the world so complicated.
Who here thinks games consoles are profitable?!? The money is made from the games.
It just formalizes the lazy practices of programmers.
One of the failures of XP, IMHO, is that it requires too much discipline from the programmers. I've only met a few that I think are capable of working in XP. XP is not for lazy people. RUP is for lazy people - "don't think, just fill out this stack of forms".
I personally don't think XP is any more useful than any other methodology. I just wanted to point out what I think is a common misconception.Learn some solid OOP and modern languages like Java, C#, C++. It takes years of experience to write well designed OO code.
Very true. One thing I've noticed, you can hear phrases like "Favor composition over inheritence" over and over, but until you see a project begin to fail due to bad design, you will never understand WHY these rules are important. This is one area where experince does count. And a very good area for someone looking out over the next 10 years rather than the next 3 months.
A guy at work was talking a few months ago about someone he knows at a flea market who 'can get you whatever CD you want, just make your request' for a few dollars. On CDR media, of course.
The mainstream view of 'pirates' is Not that they are fair-use freedom fighters. This is a point that people inside the 'hacker' subculture need to accept, and get over ranting about.
I'm not speaking as a fair-use freedom fighter. I'm speaking as someone who doesn't want to be compared to rapists and murderers just because I installed RealPlayer on two computers with only one license.I suspect they're engaged on some wacko conspiracy: "Do as much as we can to lose money and then blame it on customers. And then, once we've reached bottom, we'll ... um ... well, we haven't figured that part out yet. Our goal is to simply piss off consumers, hit bottom, and then blame folks."
I think everyone (including the RIAA) sees the writing on the wall. Their current business model is dead. It is strange, however, that instead of bleeding it dry, they choose to end themselves quickly. It seems they got caught in quicksand and (despite all the customers yelling "don't move!") they decide they can squirm out of it.
Why is it that PC terms like 'Crippled CDs' catch on, but people still refer to those who infringe copyrights as 'Pirates' -- even in the press and in the courts?
It wouldn't do any good. Say we wanted to vote him out so bad that we would vote for his opponent even though his opponent was an idiot too... or say his opponent died in a horrible accident. We still vote for his opponent. Berman looses the election. What happens in a democracy? The people win. America is a Republic, however. The loosing candidate in this case is appointed to an even more powerful office (Attorney General for example).
Apparently you didn't understand what I was writing.
EBay can deny service to anyone for any reason. This is a good thing.
Piracy and serial killing are both bad things.
The government SHOULD allow EBay to deny service to pirates and serial killers.
My only gripe: EBay is legally REQUIRED in many cases to stop servicing pirates and serial killers. If I buy a pirated cd from someone using EBay's service, for some stupid reason, the government thinks this is EBay's fault. It's really not much different than Napster. By blaming the service provider (even when the service would normally provide perfectly legal services), the government is implicitly FORCING EBay to stop business with people who break the laws.
Since EBay can't possibly do detailed checks on every one of it's sellers, they simply ban people in bulk. It's cheaper to loose a few customers than spend money looking into each product in detail.
Most of these laws are less than five years old (hence my reference to "Modern Law").
I don't claim Apple to be the gods of UI, but don't you think the mistake was putting the scroll bar on the right? Being right handed would only matter if we had to use our hand to scroll. The mouse pointer doesn't get in the way when you're scrolling, and the text IS already on the left. Why not put the scroll bar over there next to it?
More and more modern law is allowing (and sometimes encouraging) any corporation to be come a vigilante. In this case, it's obvious that Ebay has the right to deny service to any customer they please. What's disturbing is that the government is encouraging companies to adopt policies that turn that right of denial of service into the noose used to hang the guilty (as well as the 'likely guilty'). We can blame the RIAA all we want, but ultimately, the government (through action or inaction) is allowing these types of things to happen every day now.
I'm tired of the "jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none" hardware that's coming out these days. I personally find no need to have a web browser built into my phone (or for that matter, I have no use for a phone that CAN have a web browser built in).
If you need to get on the 'net that badly, you need a life.
Why have a radio in your car? Can't you wait until you get home to listen to the news/ballgame/music? What about mobil phones in general. 10 years ago, anyone with a mobil phone was just being excessive. Now children have them. Not that we NEED any of these things, but they are useful. They do make our lives more convenient.For the first year I had it, I really loved my Tivo. Lately though, I've realized the service just isn't growing like it could. My AudioStation, for example, originally shipped as a simple network MP3 player. Now it has a web interface, a programmers API and the ability to play many other formats. Tivo has the ability to do the same things, but instead, it's upgrades only add a few features that you really have to look for. Even with the new hardware (series 2) you get a couple of usb ports and a little more drive space.
- What about HDTV support?
- What about multiple TVs (If I buy another Tivo, I have to move to the room that recorded the show to watch it)?
- What about interfacing with my cable box so I don't have to build an 'IR Tent'?
- What about dual tuners on the more expensive models?
They could do so much with this technology... but they don't. I think if you ask around, most people who love Tivo aren't really in love with the brand as much as the PVR technology in general. If someone else comes up with the features, users will move on.Having voted for a dead man, simply to see Ashcroft loose his Senate seat, I get a special feeling to see so many people (at least on paper) seem to be against Ashcroft. (I'm still waiting for Preditor v. Ashcroft and Aliens v. Ashcroft)
In retrospect, however, I wish he had won his re-election bid for Senate. He's doing much more harm now than he ever did as a Senator.
A minor point release with some bug fixes (apparently too minor to even mention in the description). Neither Bill Gates or someone from the RIAA have taken away more of our rights today?
about my former school's mascot?