This does allow for capture of the "pirates". All you need to do is uniquely code the dots and then you'll know what theater it came from, or at least what reel it was from. This is the first step in catching people who are pirating movies.
First off, every reason to use HTML 4.0 is a reason to use XHTML, unless that reason happens to be "it's not XHTML!".
Secondly, using XHTML allows you all the niceties of XML. This is great when you decide to update your site so it works in say cell-phone browsers, rather than just a PC browser. This alone is a great reason to use XHTML. As more and more data sources become xml aware, being able to easily connect them becomes important. XHTML allows you to do this in a simpler way than using HTML and an easily incomplete parser you wrote in Perl.
Thirdly, (this is kind of a stretch) I'm going to assume that HTML won't be updated in any meaningful way ever again. If and when new and (more importantly) useful additions become available (like HTML 4.0's fieldset and colgroup tags) they won't be available to an HTML page. This again assumes that HTML is done (which is reasonable, as XHTML is the replacement for it), that XHTML is incomplete (which it is), and that a great feature may come about in the future that you want to use.
Finally, I think you should use XHTML because I said so;)
HTML 4.01 doesn't make you expressly close your tags, which causes XML processors to choke and die. I'd rather write it in a usable format once than have to Tidy-parse every time I want to update my search engine. Plus XSLT really is cool. I've got (somewhere) a stylesheet I wrote that will validate form data for me and then I can apply other xslt stylesheets to make the output, further seperating the output from the script that does the magic. Great way to update the look of a page without messing up (accidentally, of course) the code I wrote months ago.
Well, this is veering off-topic, but the MIME-type isn't used for the most part is that the user agents that are in the market don't know how to handle the application/xhtml+xml type. I don't see this as any real reason to not use xhtml, you've just got to be careful to make it well formed. Ian's argument stands for crappy html too, and more than a few people I've run into don't want to use HTML for anything as the HTML they've run into doesn't make much sense. Some tags are open, some times you close one tag before another (a poor-formed mix of a block element and invisible form is what I'm thinking of here
)
In the end, crappy use of any standard will make people not want to use that standard. Just because it's functionally impossible to fully utilize the XHTML standard doesn't mean we shouldn't use it.
If you're into the whole "roll your own" kind of thing, check out XSLT. You can probably find a stylesheet that converts RSS to HTML or with a day's worth of effort, you could write your own.
Ok, the fog screen costs 100 grand, and a mime has one? How the hell did he afford that? Finland must be the place to annoy the hell out of people for profit.
Yeah, cuz they couldn't just live off of the royalties of new machines being sold with new copies of windows installed--that's all it takes for consumers to purchase their product.
I think the brushed metal idea is morphing to be user-centric apps vs. document centric apps. I say this from the Stevenote about Panther being more user oriented with the finder, and it's the only possible explanation for what they're doing other than "we think brushed metal looks cool".
A bigger UI sin from apple is not consistently using it's own widgets--there are how many search boxes now and how many burn buttons?
Or, maybe not all of the advances to UI tech is visual? There's much more to interfaces than what you see. The rules behind where you put things amd being able to exploit the objectiveness of widgets to create new ones are two of the most advanced ideas of ui technology in my opinion. Also, i18n, l10n, and section 508 concepts are making their way into interface design more and more, that's not necessarily a visual upgrade.
I think the problem with most people is that "advances in user interface" means only prettier looking buttons and such, when that should be one of the last things on the list for user interface design.
Threats are not necessarily protected by free speech. What ERS is saying probably wouldn't be considered "fighting words", so it's pretty reasonable to say this is protected under free speech. Once he starts saying that we need to break the windows of SCO's corporate hq, he probably won't be able to hide behind 1st amendment rights.
Any idea if that thing plays okay with the wavebird? The wb has a radio receiver that sticks up and looks to me as if it would block the dvd-drive door.
Both mean that you've made it. However, with the Wheaties box, you get kids thinking, "One day, I might be as good as Marshall Faulk." With Madden, you get people playing AS the sports hero. It kinda kills the inspiration, but I think it's a better honor of the athlete (cover stars are almost always awesome in the game).
Well, since it is the Navy, they probably just wanted to use an established product, rather than a new one that has untold amounts of bugs in it's rev 1 release (just cuz it's hardware doesn't make it perfect).
Slashdot Mirror
It's not a bad thing to have around when you want to wow somebody...
This does allow for capture of the "pirates". All you need to do is uniquely code the dots and then you'll know what theater it came from, or at least what reel it was from. This is the first step in catching people who are pirating movies.
XHTML is great for a bunch of reasons.
;)
First off, every reason to use HTML 4.0 is a reason to use XHTML, unless that reason happens to be "it's not XHTML!".
Secondly, using XHTML allows you all the niceties of XML. This is great when you decide to update your site so it works in say cell-phone browsers, rather than just a PC browser. This alone is a great reason to use XHTML. As more and more data sources become xml aware, being able to easily connect them becomes important. XHTML allows you to do this in a simpler way than using HTML and an easily incomplete parser you wrote in Perl.
Thirdly, (this is kind of a stretch) I'm going to assume that HTML won't be updated in any meaningful way ever again. If and when new and (more importantly) useful additions become available (like HTML 4.0's fieldset and colgroup tags) they won't be available to an HTML page. This again assumes that HTML is done (which is reasonable, as XHTML is the replacement for it), that XHTML is incomplete (which it is), and that a great feature may come about in the future that you want to use.
Finally, I think you should use XHTML because I said so
- say that I use XHTML
- make it easier to parse my pages
HTML 4.01 doesn't make you expressly close your tags, which causes XML processors to choke and die. I'd rather write it in a usable format once than have to Tidy-parse every time I want to update my search engine. Plus XSLT really is cool. I've got (somewhere) a stylesheet I wrote that will validate form data for me and then I can apply other xslt stylesheets to make the output, further seperating the output from the script that does the magic. Great way to update the look of a page without messing up (accidentally, of course) the code I wrote months ago.Well, this is veering off-topic, but the MIME-type isn't used for the most part is that the user agents that are in the market don't know how to handle the application/xhtml+xml type. I don't see this as any real reason to not use xhtml, you've just got to be careful to make it well formed. Ian's argument stands for crappy html too, and more than a few people I've run into don't want to use HTML for anything as the HTML they've run into doesn't make much sense. Some tags are open, some times you close one tag before another (a poor-formed mix of a block element and invisible form is what I'm thinking of here )
In the end, crappy use of any standard will make people not want to use that standard. Just because it's functionally impossible to fully utilize the XHTML standard doesn't mean we shouldn't use it.
If you're into the whole "roll your own" kind of thing, check out XSLT. You can probably find a stylesheet that converts RSS to HTML or with a day's worth of effort, you could write your own.
"Embrace and Extend" becomes "Embrace and hey, wait, this seems to work ok"?
It was tremendous. I loved the gestures and such. It was a great program.
What? It was supposed to be a game?
Never mind.
Just patent the idea and sue them for it when they try it.
I'm sorry, but only Netscape 4 deserves the designation of being compiled by flying butt monkeys.
That and pretty much anything I've written. Sad but true.
you also get a mask, to protect your anonymity ;)
Just kidding!
Keep that crap away from me, bub.
Ok, the fog screen costs 100 grand, and a mime has one? How the hell did he afford that? Finland must be the place to annoy the hell out of people for profit.
this wasn't posted by CmdrTaco...
Probably due to in small part to the G5 not being public at the time.
Community College? I'd look into taking a typing course at your local cc (assuming you've got one).
Yeah, cuz they couldn't just live off of the royalties of new machines being sold with new copies of windows installed--that's all it takes for consumers to purchase their product.
I think the brushed metal idea is morphing to be user-centric apps vs. document centric apps. I say this from the Stevenote about Panther being more user oriented with the finder, and it's the only possible explanation for what they're doing other than "we think brushed metal looks cool".
A bigger UI sin from apple is not consistently using it's own widgets--there are how many search boxes now and how many burn buttons?
Or, maybe not all of the advances to UI tech is visual? There's much more to interfaces than what you see. The rules behind where you put things amd being able to exploit the objectiveness of widgets to create new ones are two of the most advanced ideas of ui technology in my opinion. Also, i18n, l10n, and section 508 concepts are making their way into interface design more and more, that's not necessarily a visual upgrade.
I think the problem with most people is that "advances in user interface" means only prettier looking buttons and such, when that should be one of the last things on the list for user interface design.
Threats are not necessarily protected by free speech. What ERS is saying probably wouldn't be considered "fighting words", so it's pretty reasonable to say this is protected under free speech. Once he starts saying that we need to break the windows of SCO's corporate hq, he probably won't be able to hide behind 1st amendment rights.
I was afraid that Olimar crashed again. It's good to hear that he landed his ship safely this time :)
a bad one.
Any idea if that thing plays okay with the wavebird? The wb has a radio receiver that sticks up and looks to me as if it would block the dvd-drive door.
Both mean that you've made it. However, with the Wheaties box, you get kids thinking, "One day, I might be as good as Marshall Faulk." With Madden, you get people playing AS the sports hero. It kinda kills the inspiration, but I think it's a better honor of the athlete (cover stars are almost always awesome in the game).
Well, since it is the Navy, they probably just wanted to use an established product, rather than a new one that has untold amounts of bugs in it's rev 1 release (just cuz it's hardware doesn't make it perfect).