RTFA...the substance actually breaks down the NOx molecules, converting them into a relatively harmless form:
The polysiloxane base is porous enough to allow NOx to diffuse though it and adhere to the titanium dioxide particles. The particles absorb ultraviolet radiation in sunlight and use this energy to convert NOx to nitric acid.
The acid is then either washed away in rain, or neutralised by the alkaline calcium carbonate particles, producing harmless quantities of carbon dioxide, water and calcium nitrate, which will also wash away.
No...quoting from their site: "The Navy Office of Information is headed by the Chief of Information (CHINFO), a Rear Admiral, who is the direct representative of the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations for Navy-wide public affairs matters."
1.) XML is not readable by any audience other than computer professionals.
Dialects of XML (including XHTML) are just as readable as older style HTML.
2.) Since XML is for computer professionals then then it begs the question: does it fit that audience? I argue it is too cumbersome and verbose and therefore an eventual dead-end. Why do I need to see 655-7970 everytime? Just give me the schema and a tab delimited file of records that fit the schema?
Tab delimited files are horrible at representing hierarchical relationships, and XML is much more human readable (which is a benefit to developers) than multiple tab-delimited files.
If the idea is to give greater flexibility for document presentation, you'll want a PDF format or a fully compliant SGML implementation
That is just one of many uses that xml is put to. XML, by definition, is an extensible markup language. Some XML dialects are used for presentation, but not all, or even most.
Why don't we replace XML with Postscript?
I'm hoping this is a troll. Have you tried representing semantic information with hierarchical relationships in postscript? Certainly you can, but it's not necessarily easier in postscript than in any other programming language such a C, Perl, or LISP. In contrast, it is intuitively obvious in XML.
Depending on your delivery platform, however, the "costs" of XML do not have to be at runtime. This spec will allow you to create a UI independent method of representing a form-based interaction. The transformation to the actual delivery format (e.g. html or swf) can happen offline, so there doesn't need to be any run-time costs. In addition, the XForms XML representation of a form is likely to more compact then the HTML equivalent. Therefore the wire costs are less then current form based(web) applications. Net efficiency gain from today instead of a loss.
I actually don't see a substantial drawback to doing the HTML transformation in one XSL pass and the data population in a second one. In fact, it would seem that this is a good conceptual split so that you can have one conversion (to unpopulated html) that is data-source independent, and is probably generalized for all of your forms, and another one that is smaller, customized to individual forms, and specific to a given source. XSL chaining shouldn't be computationally prohibitive, but if it is, the first transformation could be cached (on a per-browser type basis) to remove the run-time cpu costs.
The more I think about it, the more I like the split, even in terms of utilizing it from XSL.
I don't know about an apt-getable source, but this spot: http://www.ph1.uni-koeln.de/ftpspace/users/ ossk/de bian/woody-packages/ include xmame 0.69.1 for woody which is quite recent.
Most things in unstable are quite fresh. X is a particular challenge because of the many platforms that debian works on, and that debian becomes (by default) a testbed for X on these platforms. An annoucement about 4.3 availability is here: http://people.debian.org/~branden/xsf/
I've been running 4.3 on sid for over a month using unofficial packages.
Mplayer is another rare issue. A combination of mostly licensing problems has prevented inclusion. Mplayer is not free to the extent that debian required. That said, of course you can get it using: deb http://marillat.free.fr/ version main replacing version with stable, testing, or unstable depending on what you're running.
You were too lazy to check it on any of the hundres of free web-sites that provide stock quotes? OMG. "Not privy to" implies that you were not able to have the information. Not true.
You would still be an idiot not to sell it for the going price of $18 if you wanted to sell at all. The previous price is now irrelevant. If Oracle wants to be serious about this attempt, they are going to need to significantly raise their bid.
In very simple terms, a hostile takeover is when the management of a company rejects a takeover offer, and instead the offer is presented to the individual shareholders. If enough shareholders sell, then the takeover is effectively complete because the acquiring company has enough votes to install their own management. There are various ways of defending against hostile takeovers (do a google search on "poison pill"), but if the offer is high enough, they can be overcome.
I'm assuming you misspelled zealot, and I'm also assuming you're an idiot. Why would you sell it to Oracle (for $16/share) when you could sell it on the open market for more (almost $18/share right now)?
It seems obvious that this offer was designed to intimidate PeopleSoft, disrupt the JD Edwards acquisition, and cast doubt on the future of PeopleSoft's products so that customer's would be less likely to buy.
"We envision a world where vibrant wellness is the norm, consciousness transforms beyond fear, and people live in creative abundance in harmony with the earth." http://www.wilddivine.com/modules.php?nam e=Content &pa=showpage&pid=21
1) DO use XML for configuration files for your configuration files if your configuration options aren't easily encompassed by a simple name,value pair model. 2) DO use XML for data interchange wherever the producer is not necessarily the consumer. 3) DON'T try to perform "calculations" on large XML data sets. (this seems to be the pitfall that Tim Bray is falling into). 3) DO convert large datasets to a relational structure if that is a more natural form for manipulating them. (SQL is a QUERY language, XML is not). 4) DON'T dismiss the benefits DTD/Schema validation too readily. 5) DON'T assume that somebody editing XML data has to understand or even be aware of the XML model/underpinnings. Give them a *view* of the data appropriate to the task. 6) DON'T be complacent about the SAX vs. DOM (and never the twain shall meet) dilemma. Check out Ruby's REXML and Perl's XML::Twig and be happy. http://www.germane-software.com/software/r exml_sta ble/ http://www.xmltwig.com/xmltwig/ 7) DON'T misunderstand XSL. If you don't understand why it's a declarative language, don't try to use it for arbitrary information manipulation. 8) DON'T dismiss too readily the value of named closing tags for validation/editing sanity(you know who you are, you s-exp people).
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.xwt.org/mips2java/
Takes compiled mips binaries and converts them to functional java classes.
Well...titanium dioxide is widely used in paints already...it certainly beats lead, though it can be considered a mild health hazard:
titanium dioxide
Calcium carbonate, even in large quantities in dust form is not considered more hazardous:
calcium carbonate
-Tupshin
-Tupshin
No...quoting from their site:
"The Navy Office of Information is headed by the Chief of Information (CHINFO), a Rear Admiral, who is the direct representative of the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations for Navy-wide public affairs matters."
LVM2 works on top of device mapper which is part of the stock 2.6-test kernels. Enable CONFIG_BLK_DEV_DM when building the kernel.
-Tushi
Dialects of XML (including XHTML) are just as readable as older style HTML.
Tab delimited files are horrible at representing hierarchical relationships, and XML is much more human readable (which is a benefit to developers) than multiple tab-delimited files.
That is just one of many uses that xml is put to. XML, by definition, is an extensible markup language. Some XML dialects are used for presentation, but not all, or even most.
I'm hoping this is a troll. Have you tried representing semantic information with hierarchical relationships in postscript? Certainly you can, but it's not necessarily easier in postscript than in any other programming language such a C, Perl, or LISP. In contrast, it is intuitively obvious in XML.
-Tupshin
Just because XSLT is a declarative language doesn't make it incomprehensible. Just different.
Making a clean break from HTML was the best thing they could have done. It was a broken dead-end.
-Tupshin
Depending on your delivery platform, however, the "costs" of XML do not have to be at runtime. This spec will allow you to create a UI independent method of representing a form-based interaction. The transformation to the actual delivery format (e.g. html or swf) can happen offline, so there doesn't need to be any run-time costs. In addition, the XForms XML representation of a form is likely to more compact then the HTML equivalent. Therefore the wire costs are less then current form based(web) applications. Net efficiency gain from today instead of a loss.
-Tupshin
I actually don't see a substantial drawback to doing the HTML transformation in one XSL pass and the data population in a second one. In fact, it would seem that this is a good conceptual split so that you can have one conversion (to unpopulated html) that is data-source independent, and is probably generalized for all of your forms, and another one that is smaller, customized to individual forms, and specific to a given source. XSL chaining shouldn't be computationally prohibitive, but if it is, the first transformation could be cached (on a per-browser type basis) to remove the run-time cpu costs.
The more I think about it, the more I like the split, even in terms of utilizing it from XSL.
-Tupshin
Those comments are actually completely consistent with Larry's views and with his previous posts about this issue.
-Tupshin
I don't know about an apt-getable source, but this spot:/ ossk/de bian/woody-packages/
http://www.ph1.uni-koeln.de/ftpspace/users
include xmame 0.69.1 for woody which is quite recent.
-Tupshin
Most things in unstable are quite fresh. X is a particular challenge because of the many platforms that debian works on, and that debian becomes (by default) a testbed for X on these platforms. An annoucement about 4.3 availability is here:
http://people.debian.org/~branden/xsf/
I've been running 4.3 on sid for over a month using unofficial packages.
Mplayer is another rare issue. A combination of mostly licensing problems has prevented inclusion. Mplayer is not free to the extent that debian required. That said, of course you can get it using:
deb http://marillat.free.fr/ version main
replacing version with stable, testing, or unstable depending on what you're running.
-Tupshin
What's that old saying??? Oh yeah. "Suffer not a fool to live."
-Tupshin
You were too lazy to check it on any of the hundres of free web-sites that provide stock quotes? OMG.
"Not privy to" implies that you were not able to have the information. Not true.
You would still be an idiot not to sell it for the going price of $18 if you wanted to sell at all. The previous price is now irrelevant. If Oracle wants to be serious about this attempt, they are going to need to significantly raise their bid.
In very simple terms, a hostile takeover is when the management of a company rejects a takeover offer, and instead the offer is presented to the individual shareholders. If enough shareholders sell, then the takeover is effectively complete because the acquiring company has enough votes to install their own management. There are various ways of defending against hostile takeovers (do a google search on "poison pill"), but if the offer is high enough, they can be overcome.
I'm assuming you misspelled zealot, and I'm also assuming you're an idiot. Why would you sell it to Oracle (for $16/share) when you could sell it on the open market for more (almost $18/share right now)?
It seems obvious that this offer was designed to intimidate PeopleSoft, disrupt the JD Edwards acquisition, and cast doubt on the future of PeopleSoft's products so that customer's would be less likely to buy.
Ummmm...read the article. Three days, eight hours each. They sound very non-geeky ;-)
-Tupshin
"We envision a world where vibrant wellness is the norm, consciousness transforms beyond fear, and people live in creative abundance in harmony with the earth."m e=Content &pa=showpage&pid=21
http://www.wilddivine.com/modules.php?na
OMG...make it stop
is simultaneous support for Xinerama and DRI.
Only 170 hours to go(1K/S download, 15K/S upload). Actually it will be quite cool...We're just on the wrong end of the adoption curve at the moment
1) DO use XML for configuration files for your configuration files if your configuration options aren't easily encompassed by a simple name,value pair model.r exml_sta ble/
2) DO use XML for data interchange wherever the producer is not necessarily the consumer.
3) DON'T try to perform "calculations" on large XML data sets. (this seems to be the pitfall that Tim Bray is falling into).
3) DO convert large datasets to a relational structure if that is a more natural form for manipulating them. (SQL is a QUERY language, XML is not).
4) DON'T dismiss the benefits DTD/Schema validation too readily.
5) DON'T assume that somebody editing XML data has to understand or even be aware of the XML model/underpinnings. Give them a *view* of the data appropriate to the task.
6) DON'T be complacent about the SAX vs. DOM (and never the twain shall meet) dilemma. Check out Ruby's REXML and Perl's XML::Twig and be happy.
http://www.germane-software.com/software/
http://www.xmltwig.com/xmltwig/
7) DON'T misunderstand XSL. If you don't understand why it's a declarative language, don't try to use it for arbitrary information manipulation.
8) DON'T dismiss too readily the value of named closing tags for validation/editing sanity(you know who you are, you s-exp people).
That already happened. It was the 2.4.0 release announcement. Wooo..hoo...thank goodness it's improved since then.
lynx only has to cache the text of the entire web, so it doesn't have to swap as much ;-)
I was extremely happy using mod_backhand to load balance an apache+tomcat setup in a commercial environment.