Why limit the width?? You do realize that 200-500 pixels is _tiny_ on any hi-res monitor, right? An it makes it very hard to read since every three words are on a separate line...
M13 and M14 sucked, yes. And the browser has become amazingly better since then. I use it as my primary browser now, and I'm quite happy with it.
Re:Nested tables is NOT the problem w/ NS
on
Mozilla .6 Released
·
· Score: 1
Um. Rewriting the rendering core from scratch was the first thing the Mozilla project did. I have not seen Mozilla crash on any of the table-heavy pages that kill Netscape 4.x
The problem is that the current SSL is a binary-only kludge. It is being modified to rid it of licensing issues (now that the patent issues are gone) and integrated into the Mozilla source tree and build environment. Then SSL will work fine for a multiuser install.
It's not just a matter of address bus... If you have a bunch of programs and you want to do virtual memory and you want each program to see the full address space.... well, you need 64bit addressing in your virtual memory system. It helps when that's just an int you can stick in a register....
Go to the Debug menu, select the "Install PSM" option, scroll to the bottom of the resulting page and click on the button corresponding to your OS. You'll have fully functioning SSL support.
If you are using something other than Linux or Windows, you'll have to wait a few weeks until PSM is integrated into the Mozilla source tree. It builds on Mac now, so the build systems are being merged and Mozilla nightlies will come with PSM by default.
The copyright symbol is likely due to a known Mozilla bug in which the default charset will sometimes get set to armenian and Moz will send a period as %A9 in a form submission. In the ISO-8859-1 charset, that's the copyright symbol.
Mozilla does use GTK for some things (fonts and scrollbars, mostly).
But one can also compile Mozilla to use QT instead, and a Xlib-only version is almost functional. So I would not depend on Mozilla sticking with GTK in the future.
Right tool for the right job. Formatting a half-readable mathematics expression in HTML is impossible. Formatting one in MathML is possible... and it takes about 10 times as much code as the corresponding LaTeX expression and looks ugly on the output to boot.
So don't use LaTeX unless you need the features it provides...
Having seen both, I have to tell you that MathML is painful to use for equation-heavy text. The typesetting of equations in LaTeX/TeX closely corresponds to the way you would pronounce the equations for the most part, while with MathML you end up with some very clunky constructions.
Example: $3+4i$ is a complex number in TeX. In MathML, 3 tags with moderately long (4-char, iirc) names are needed to typeset it (one to start the complex number, one to separate the real an complex parts, one to end the complex number).
If you are just interested in web publishing of your work, by all means use MathML, but if you want to produce printed output as well, you will likely be better off with LaTeX. Note also that generating LaTeX from MathML and vice-versa is one of the goals of the MathML project, so you may want to look at both and use the one that "feels" more comfortable.
Please don't confuse TeX and LaTeX. The former deals with display elements, while the latter focuses on logical markup (and can conceivably use a backend other than TeX).
> 3. the window positioning. new windows don't get
> put into the right places in Linux, and in
> Windows a new window is never maximized.
The former may be a problem with your windowmanager -- I've never seen that problem.
There is a bug filed on the latter. And it's being actively worked on.
Which helps those of us who are dealing with a multi-platform environment oh so much.
I tend to spend most of computer time using Irix, Solaris, and Linux. While one can claim that IE runs on solaris, the IE port to solaris is a joke. There are no Irix or Linux ports.
If microsoft would port its oh-so-wonderful browser to a system on which I could actually use it, I would actually bother to see how it is. Until they do, that browser is useless to me.
Theming was basically a byproduct of something else entirely. Since Mozilla includes an XML parser and layout engine, it seemed to make sense to write the interface in XML (since that's a lot less painful than doing it in C++). As a side effect, the interface is not compiled into the app and can be changed at will.
Not the CPU. The entire computer.
Since the RAM and hard drive are finite, there is a finite number of states the entire system can be in, unlike a Turing machine, in which the reading head has finitely many states (like the CPU) but the infinite memory allows for an infinite number of states.
Actually, he is and has. Perl has been ported to just about everything out there. And portable perl scripts are easy to write. Then again, non-portable perl scripts are easy to write too. Which is all part of the perl philosophy.
As for the unix-specific funtions, what kind of CGI scripts do you write? I've been doing a lot of CGI programming over the last 2-3 years and 99% of the time all the CGI does is take the form input, process it a bit, and stick it in an SQL database (or take data from an SQL database and display it, as the case may be). All this requires is using the DBI module, which is perfectly portable.
A lot of people seem to be missing the point of FrameMaker. It is not a word processor. It is an application for creating structured documents. While this may seem like hair-splitting, the entire focus of the application is different from, say, Word.
I have seen people try to write something like a journal article or a thesis in Word or WordPerfect. Almost uniformly, I have seen them give up and switch to FrameMaker or TeX/LaTeX, which are both much more suited for such endeavors.
That's all nice, but FrameMaker is not a word processor. None of the programs you mention are any good at structured documents, and that's not their primary focus, so I doubt they ever will be.
Slashdot Mirror
Why limit the width?? You do realize that 200-500 pixels is _tiny_ on any hi-res monitor, right? An it makes it very hard to read since every three words are on a separate line...
M13 and M14 sucked, yes. And the browser has become amazingly better since then. I use it as my primary browser now, and I'm quite happy with it.
Um. Rewriting the rendering core from scratch was the first thing the Mozilla project did. I have not seen Mozilla crash on any of the table-heavy pages that kill Netscape 4.x
The problem is that the current SSL is a binary-only kludge. It is being modified to rid it of licensing issues (now that the patent issues are gone) and integrated into the Mozilla source tree and build environment. Then SSL will work fine for a multiuser install.
It's not just a matter of address bus... If you have a bunch of programs and you want to do virtual memory and you want each program to see the full address space.... well, you need 64bit addressing in your virtual memory system. It helps when that's just an int you can stick in a register....
Might have something to do with having enough RAM to not have the thing swapping all the time.
If you are using something other than Linux or Windows, you'll have to wait a few weeks until PSM is integrated into the Mozilla source tree. It builds on Mac now, so the build systems are being merged and Mozilla nightlies will come with PSM by default.
Take your pick. LISP. ADA. Smalltalk.
The copyright symbol is likely due to a known Mozilla bug in which the default charset will sometimes get set to armenian and Moz will send a period as %A9 in a form submission. In the ISO-8859-1 charset, that's the copyright symbol.
But one can also compile Mozilla to use QT instead, and a Xlib-only version is almost functional. So I would not depend on Mozilla sticking with GTK in the future.
You are wrong. I am in fact one of the mathematicians you refer to who needs LaTeX for its formula support.
So don't use LaTeX unless you need the features it provides...
Example: $3+4i$ is a complex number in TeX. In MathML, 3 tags with moderately long (4-char, iirc) names are needed to typeset it (one to start the complex number, one to separate the real an complex parts, one to end the complex number).
If you are just interested in web publishing of your work, by all means use MathML, but if you want to produce printed output as well, you will likely be better off with LaTeX. Note also that generating LaTeX from MathML and vice-versa is one of the goals of the MathML project, so you may want to look at both and use the one that "feels" more comfortable.
Please don't confuse TeX and LaTeX. The former deals with display elements, while the latter focuses on logical markup (and can conceivably use a backend other than TeX).
Except LaTeX allows macro definitions and has a syntax that is not nearly as wordy as MathML.
Switch to what, by the way?
There is a bug filed on the latter. And it's being actively worked on.
I tend to spend most of computer time using Irix, Solaris, and Linux. While one can claim that IE runs on solaris, the IE port to solaris is a joke. There are no Irix or Linux ports.
If microsoft would port its oh-so-wonderful browser to a system on which I could actually use it, I would actually bother to see how it is. Until they do, that browser is useless to me.
Theming was basically a byproduct of something else entirely. Since Mozilla includes an XML parser and layout engine, it seemed to make sense to write the interface in XML (since that's a lot less painful than doing it in C++). As a side effect, the interface is not compiled into the app and can be changed at will.
I must ask. Have you used a recent Mozilla nightly? -- Mozilla user who is never going back to NS 4
Not the CPU. The entire computer. Since the RAM and hard drive are finite, there is a finite number of states the entire system can be in, unlike a Turing machine, in which the reading head has finitely many states (like the CPU) but the infinite memory allows for an infinite number of states.
As for the unix-specific funtions, what kind of CGI scripts do you write? I've been doing a lot of CGI programming over the last 2-3 years and 99% of the time all the CGI does is take the form input, process it a bit, and stick it in an SQL database (or take data from an SQL database and display it, as the case may be). All this requires is using the DBI module, which is perfectly portable.
FrameMaker is not a word processor...
I have seen people try to write something like a journal article or a thesis in Word or WordPerfect. Almost uniformly, I have seen them give up and switch to FrameMaker or TeX/LaTeX, which are both much more suited for such endeavors.
That's all nice, but FrameMaker is not a word processor. None of the programs you mention are any good at structured documents, and that's not their primary focus, so I doubt they ever will be.