XHTML (as opposed to IE just bailing and dumping the XML tree)
This is incorrect. See, for example, http://compsoc.net/. That's pure, not transitional, XHTML 1.1, which validates perfectly. All versions of IE that I've tried -- 5, 5.5 and 6 -- display the page properly (barring bugs in their CSS engines), not just the XML tree.
Don't get me wrong; personally, I use Galeon (based on Mozilla) as my browser of choice. But IE is a lot more capable than you give it credit for.
There are a few nasty kludges in the CSS to work around browser bugs -- some in IE, mostly in Netscape 4.x. Compared to the latter, all versions of IE I've pointed at the page have excellent CSS support.
Note: TA != TA: Kingdoms. Completely different games, and Kingdoms was pretty bad.
Actually, I liked Kingdoms. After playing lots of TA, coming to Kingdoms was a bit of a shock -- in many ways, the interface feels like a backwards step, and some of the rules seem a little strange. But, after a week or two of play, it really grew on me. IMHO, it's better balanced than TA was (at least the patched versions are; the Veruna were way too powerful in earlier versions), and the wider range of units makes for more entertaining play.
The web page contained a script for removing CSS from web pages. It was the work of 30 seconds to discover this. OUCS have plenty of people capable of 'tar zxvf'ing it to find out. However, instead of checking, they yanked the page in a knee-jerk reaction. That was a stupid and irresponsible.
Fair enough, if there was even a possibility of a case against the page it probably should have been pulled "just in case". But there wasn't - they just didn't bother to check.
Anyway, OUCS get no sympathy from me - they're about to block outgoing smtp so we have to use "smart" hosts to send mail. I hope they get slashdotted for that one!;)
News sites shouldn't celebrate April fools day
on
Slashdot:Mark 2
·
· Score: 1
Think about what would happen if CNN suddenly announced
Think about what would happen when Slashdot became CNN...
ESR never represented me. He didn't express my views. He wasn't elected in a democratic process. He saw what he thought was a need, and he filled it.
For that, he deserves praise. That is the spirit of Free software.
However, I believe in "hard line" Free software. Not Open Source. Not collecting scraps from Netscape's and Apple's tables.
ESR doesn't represent my views. The Free Software Foundation represents my views. RMS represents my views.
FWIW, that doesn't mean I'm in favour of flaming ESR. He did what he thought was best, and I take my hat off to him for that. But I'm not going to fall into line behind someone I disagree with.
Free/Open GNU/Linux has lots of good spokespeople!
on
ESR Wants to Retire
·
· Score: 1
Free software would have probably still broken through without him at some point, but would it have done it as fast or as thoroughly as it has.
And therein lies my problem with ESR.
I realise a lot of people disagree with me on this one, but to me it's the Free that counts. Not Open Source. Not a few scraps of source from Apple, but Free.
It will get there in the end. Free software had been making slow but steady progress for well more than a decade before ESR burst onto the scene. And now, things have moved fast. We've got all sorts of commercial development on Linux. We've got some companies even giving us scraps of source to play with.
I still believe that complete freedom will triumph. But has ESR helped in that? I don't think so.
Note that that's not a complaint about ESR personally - he wants "software that doesn't suck". He's gone a long way in that direction. But he seems to assume that his message is the "hacker's message", and that anyone who disagrees is an immature troublemaker. He's wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Try http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=54297
This is incorrect. See, for example, http://compsoc.net/. That's pure, not transitional, XHTML 1.1, which validates perfectly. All versions of IE that I've tried -- 5, 5.5 and 6 -- display the page properly (barring bugs in their CSS engines), not just the XML tree.
Don't get me wrong; personally, I use Galeon (based on Mozilla) as my browser of choice. But IE is a lot more capable than you give it credit for.
Recent versions of IE are quite happy to display XHTML 1.1. See, for example, http://compsoc.net/, which the W3C agrees is valid XHTML and, indeed, valid CSS.
There are a few nasty kludges in the CSS to work around browser bugs -- some in IE, mostly in Netscape 4.x. Compared to the latter, all versions of IE I've pointed at the page have excellent CSS support.
Actually, I liked Kingdoms. After playing lots of TA, coming to Kingdoms was a bit of a shock -- in many ways, the interface feels like a backwards step, and some of the rules seem a little strange. But, after a week or two of play, it really grew on me. IMHO, it's better balanced than TA was (at least the patched versions are; the Veruna were way too powerful in earlier versions), and the wider range of units makes for more entertaining play.
Sorry flend, I can't agree they acted correctly.
The web page contained a script for removing CSS from web pages. It was the work of 30 seconds to discover this. OUCS have plenty of people capable of 'tar zxvf'ing it to find out. However, instead of checking, they yanked the page in a knee-jerk reaction. That was a stupid and irresponsible.
Fair enough, if there was even a possibility of a case against the page it probably should have been pulled "just in case". But there wasn't - they just didn't bother to check.
Anyway, OUCS get no sympathy from me - they're about to block outgoing smtp so we have to use "smart" hosts to send mail. I hope they get slashdotted for that one! ;)
Think about what would happen when Slashdot became CNN...
RedHat becomes Microsoft...
Transmeta becomes Intel...
And I won't come back.
If you want CNN, the address is www.cnn.com. HTH!
I think you miss the point somewhat.
ESR never represented me. He didn't express my views. He wasn't elected in a democratic process. He saw what he thought was a need, and he filled it.
For that, he deserves praise. That is the spirit of Free software.
However, I believe in "hard line" Free software. Not Open Source. Not collecting scraps from Netscape's and Apple's tables.
ESR doesn't represent my views. The Free Software Foundation represents my views. RMS represents my views.
FWIW, that doesn't mean I'm in favour of flaming ESR. He did what he thought was best, and I take my hat off to him for that. But I'm not going to fall into line behind someone I disagree with.
And therein lies my problem with ESR.
I realise a lot of people disagree with me on this one, but to me it's the Free that counts. Not Open Source. Not a few scraps of source from Apple, but Free.
It will get there in the end. Free software had been making slow but steady progress for well more than a decade before ESR burst onto the scene. And now, things have moved fast. We've got all sorts of commercial development on Linux. We've got some companies even giving us scraps of source to play with.
I still believe that complete freedom will triumph. But has ESR helped in that? I don't think so.
Note that that's not a complaint about ESR personally - he wants "software that doesn't suck". He's gone a long way in that direction. But he seems to assume that his message is the "hacker's message", and that anyone who disagrees is an immature troublemaker. He's wrong.