Not that they have the transformations for OO.org XML to HTML, but a framework does exist that would make this procedure trivial at most.
Have a look at the Apache Cocoon project.
I think that you are overcomplicating the issue here.
If it were as concrete an issue as you propose, then I have a feeling that the Egyption Religious Rulers should also take issue with the other philosophically oriented productions that Hollywood has released for public consumption.
Some examples of such films are "Contact," for its obvious religious implications that God-proper does not exist (based on Carl P^HSagan's work, nonetheless), "What Dreams May Come," for its touting of Buddhist-like reincarnation.
Now hear me out... what I am not asserting is that these films are in any form suggestive as to the nation of Israel's claim to the Gaza Strip. But rather, that The Matrix is no more Zionist in nature and philosophy than Robin Williams role in What Dreams May Come promotes Buddhism.
Your statement "Matrix is widely regarded as an allegorical story, pitched in modern technological terms, regarding the lost races of Zion and the Jewish struggle for freedom." is totally and completely unfounded, and I am surpised that someone of your intellect would even suggest such tripe.
Now I think that it would be wise, even as you suggest, to consider the history and culture of Egypt, *yourself*.
The term Zion is no more Jewish than it is Islamic. If I am not mistaken, I believe that Islam was founded on the principles of Judaism, inextricably linked historically with the Zabur, and especially the Tawrat.
This means that the use of the term Zion ('tsee-yohn') should evoke sentiments of comfort and refuge, as this was the original appellation that Allah, Himself, gave his holy dwelling place.
Refuge... now, that sounds a lot more like what the utilisation of the term Zion in the Matrix constitues.
It is only extremists that will read more into the meaning than that which was intended; geek and Muslim alike.
Here is a little twist for you... What role do these Islamic extremists feel the ship Nebuchadnezzar plays in all this? Historically, Nebuchadnezzar was a pagan Babylonian king who overtook Jerusalem, carrying away captive a great multitude of the Jews. Seems to me that they should eat this concept right up.
One thing that I would like to mention that Konq does that Explorer doesn't is the "Copy to" functionality. This little menu item on the context/popup menu in Konq is what I believe EVERY file manager should have.
The way it works is you right click on an item in the folder or tree view and mouse-over the "Copy to" menu item, then it will expand the directory tree of your drive, and you can chose where to copy to. IMHO, this is only slightly less efficient then using the CLI when it comes to sheer speed; but if you are having to browse for the destination dir, then it is an order of magnitude faster. (damn that tab lag in bash. =P)
Believe it or not, you can install other competing products on windows! Seems to me like you have never used the OS before.
Now mind you, I am no MS aficionado, but I do use the OS on a regular basis (along with Linux and other OS's), and I can assure you that competing products work just fine along side MS bundled applications.
And with regard to your comment about rolling your own distro, this is possible with OEM licensing from MS, if you're willing to pay!
I know that I'll get flamed by all you Apple
worshipers out there, but this had to be said.
Is it just me, or am I the only one who cannot
ignore the fact that Apple does this very thing
with its bundling of the i-line of applications
and more?
Let's see... just a quick glance over at the Apple
site, and I have run into the following:
Browser: Safari
IMC: iChat
E-mail Client: Mail
Calendar Software: iCal
Media Player: QuickTime
DVD Software: iDVD
Media Manager: iTunes
Video Editor: iMovie
Photo Management: iPhoto
Not to mention their Free development utilities
available on the OS X CD!
Let's face, people are only really interested
in one thing here: to get a piece of the MS pie.
These people didn't become the monster that they
over night. It was a deliberate, grandiose, well
executed plan on the part of MS, and they have
won! If it were not them, it would have been
somebody else. Do not kid yourselves!
And they'll be wrong, unless they mean every need, in which case nothing does.
Most of what you're hearing is uninformed urban legend, because most Japanese engineers are no better informed about Japanese text issues than most Western engineers are about Western text issues.
Interesting that you should say this, as a great deal of the core development work in Japan is almost always deeply related to some j10n involved issue. And I cannot tell you a time that I have been in a Japanese egineering department that didn't possess a copy of the JIS X 0202:1998 standard reference manual.
None of much importance compared to the issues in legacy Japanese encodings. Unicode is a dramatic improvement over any common Japanese alternative, which is why it has so much support from Japan's own national representatives on international standards committees.
While this is true, it does not in any way contradict my original point. Unicode does not handle all the complex i18n issues in one fell swoop, as most would believe it does.
I'm writing this from a Gentoo Linux installation with *full* Japanese support. It's in there, but it is a huge mess.
In my opinion, there are some pretty flawed design concepts behind GNU/Linux i18n.
For instance, in order to scale Locale settings across the board, all running applications would have to continually poll the LANGUAGE environment variable. AFAIK, there is no universal event mechanism at the even the X level that informs applications of a change to LANGUAGE. This is how a few other OSs handle Locale changes dynamically, and is by far the cleanest method.
Another broken aspect about i18n in GNU/Linux, or more specifically X, is that Asian IMs have to be explicitely listened for at the widget level. This sucks because there are only 5,000 different widget sets for Linux, and not all behave uniformly.
For example, if I want to change moz to handle input, I cannot simply turn on kinput2 and a runnning instance of moz will pick it up. Rather, I have to kill moz and restart with XMODIFIERS="@im=kinput2". This just sucks hard boiled eggs.
In Windows, I can just toggle the 'Hankaku/Zenkaku|Kanji' key, and the running app will then accept Japanese. Even apps that never intended to receive Kanji will begin accepting it.
And lastly, to get back on the topic of this thread, Unicode is *NOT* the i18n panacea that most think it to be. Just ask any Japanese engineer worth his weight in rice and they will tell you that Unicode does not satisfy the needs of Japanese text processing. There are numerous issues with Unicode not providing fair ground for Japanese specific Kanji.
gecc is a proof of concept. It is heavily inspired by ccache and distcc. You could chain these tools to achieve the same goals gecc tries to reach. Both tools are much more mature and work in production environments. gecc just started with a little different concept. gecc has a central component (distcc has not).
My idea is that gecc could better handle a varying set of compile nodes: if you have some machines that only from time to time could help in distributed compiling than this is nice.
With a central component it might be easier to monitor the compilation and distribute the compile jobs.
Right now gecc is only useful if you read the source.
Emphasis is mine.
I guess it all depends on whether or not you want to work with production quality code or not.
Perhaps there exists divergent conceptions of what the term warranty implies; and I would assume that the more generally accepted definition entails slightly more than a unilateral guarantee as to claims of product fitness or an acceptable degree of accountability to the quality of services offered.
Now, IANAL, but warranty seems to me to imply much more than just a weak sense of obligation of a producer to bolster its claims through some sort of consumer protection scheme, like product replacement or cost compensation. Suffice it to say that I feel there is much graver responsibility expected of a producer with regard to the protection of the consumer.
What is interesting to note, however, is that there seems to be some sort of magical formula that exempts software vendors from the types of legal guarantees that all other industries are subject to.
For example, even the more popular Microsoft EULAs fall short on these terms.
What I mean to say is that there is no implied warrenty as to the fitness of any of Microsoft's software in any of the EULAs that I have read. In fact, I would assert that they have no intent whatsoever to insure the fitness and behaviour of their product outside of the general extent of their support services.
So, if, for example,.NET Server saw it fit to arbitrarily vanquish any and all ext3 partitions that it discovered on my hard disk, seeking to preserve some sort of convoluted sense of system security, Microsoft has, by means of the EULA, gained unequivocal impunity from any of the retributions that may ensue from charges that I might bring against them for loss of critical, irreplaceable data.
And I am just using MS as an illustration. In fact, I think that one might be hard pressed to find any EULA that warrants the software in such a way as to insure the fitness and behaviour of the application in all environments.
Slashdot Mirror
To which I would reply, "IE only survived because MS crippled the net."
Not that they have the transformations for OO.org XML to HTML, but a framework does exist that would make this procedure trivial at most.
Have a look at the Apache Cocoon project.
KDE has Alt+Tab for windows AND Shift+Tab to toggle between virtual desktops!! Can't get any better than that mate.
I think that you are overcomplicating the issue here.
If it were as concrete an issue as you propose, then I have a feeling that the Egyption Religious Rulers should also take issue with the other philosophically oriented productions that Hollywood has released for public consumption.
Some examples of such films are "Contact," for its obvious religious implications that God-proper does not exist (based on Carl P^HSagan's work, nonetheless), "What Dreams May Come," for its touting of Buddhist-like reincarnation.
Now hear me out... what I am not asserting is that these films are in any form suggestive as to the nation of Israel's claim to the Gaza Strip. But rather, that The Matrix is no more Zionist in nature and philosophy than Robin Williams role in What Dreams May Come promotes Buddhism.
Your statement "Matrix is widely regarded as an allegorical story, pitched in modern technological terms, regarding the lost races of Zion and the Jewish struggle for freedom." is totally and completely unfounded, and I am surpised that someone of your intellect would even suggest such tripe.
Now I think that it would be wise, even as you suggest, to consider the history and culture of Egypt, *yourself*.
The term Zion is no more Jewish than it is Islamic. If I am not mistaken, I believe that Islam was founded on the principles of Judaism, inextricably linked historically with the Zabur, and especially the Tawrat.
This means that the use of the term Zion ('tsee-yohn') should evoke sentiments of comfort and refuge, as this was the original appellation that Allah, Himself, gave his holy dwelling place.
Refuge... now, that sounds a lot more like what the utilisation of the term Zion in the Matrix constitues.
It is only extremists that will read more into the meaning than that which was intended; geek and Muslim alike.
Here is a little twist for you... What role do these Islamic extremists feel the ship Nebuchadnezzar plays in all this? Historically, Nebuchadnezzar was a pagan Babylonian king who overtook Jerusalem, carrying away captive a great multitude of the Jews. Seems to me that they should eat this concept right up.
One thing that I would like to mention that Konq does that Explorer doesn't is the "Copy to" functionality. This little menu item on the context/popup menu in Konq is what I believe EVERY file manager should have.
The way it works is you right click on an item in the folder or tree view and mouse-over the "Copy to" menu item, then it will expand the directory tree of your drive, and you can chose where to copy to. IMHO, this is only slightly less efficient then using the CLI when it comes to sheer speed; but if you are having to browse for the destination dir, then it is an order of magnitude faster. (damn that tab lag in bash. =P)
Damn cut-n-paste. Here is the working link: P800,
Not exactly what you are asking for, but very close, I believe: Sony Ericsson P800.
Is this a trick question?
Believe it or not, you can install other competing products on windows! Seems to me like you have never used the OS before.
Now mind you, I am no MS aficionado, but I do use the OS on a regular basis (along with Linux and other OS's), and I can assure you that competing products work just fine along side MS bundled applications.
And with regard to your comment about rolling your own distro, this is possible with OEM licensing from MS, if you're willing to pay!
I know that I'll get flamed by all you Apple
worshipers out there, but this had to be said.
Is it just me, or am I the only one who cannot
ignore the fact that Apple does this very thing
with its bundling of the i-line of applications
and more?
Let's see... just a quick glance over at the Apple
site, and I have run into the following:
Browser: Safari
IMC: iChat
E-mail Client: Mail
Calendar Software: iCal
Media Player: QuickTime
DVD Software: iDVD
Media Manager: iTunes
Video Editor: iMovie
Photo Management: iPhoto
Not to mention their Free development utilities
available on the OS X CD!
Let's face, people are only really interested
in one thing here: to get a piece of the MS pie.
These people didn't become the monster that they
over night. It was a deliberate, grandiose, well
executed plan on the part of MS, and they have
won! If it were not them, it would have been
somebody else. Do not kid yourselves!
Though this is authored by microsoft, I felt that it was fairly well done, overall a genuinely balanced comparison.
Most of what you're hearing is uninformed urban legend, because most Japanese engineers are no better informed about Japanese text issues than most Western engineers are about Western text issues.
Interesting that you should say this, as a great deal of the core development work in Japan is almost always deeply related to some j10n involved issue. And I cannot tell you a time that I have been in a Japanese egineering department that didn't possess a copy of the JIS X 0202:1998 standard reference manual.
None of much importance compared to the issues in legacy Japanese encodings. Unicode is a dramatic improvement over any common Japanese alternative, which is why it has so much support from Japan's own national representatives on international standards committees.
While this is true, it does not in any way contradict my original point. Unicode does not handle all the complex i18n issues in one fell swoop, as most would believe it does.
I'm writing this from a Gentoo Linux installation with *full* Japanese support. It's in there, but it is a huge mess. In my opinion, there are some pretty flawed design concepts behind GNU/Linux i18n. For instance, in order to scale Locale settings across the board, all running applications would have to continually poll the LANGUAGE environment variable. AFAIK, there is no universal event mechanism at the even the X level that informs applications of a change to LANGUAGE. This is how a few other OSs handle Locale changes dynamically, and is by far the cleanest method. Another broken aspect about i18n in GNU/Linux, or more specifically X, is that Asian IMs have to be explicitely listened for at the widget level. This sucks because there are only 5,000 different widget sets for Linux, and not all behave uniformly. For example, if I want to change moz to handle input, I cannot simply turn on kinput2 and a runnning instance of moz will pick it up. Rather, I have to kill moz and restart with XMODIFIERS="@im=kinput2". This just sucks hard boiled eggs. In Windows, I can just toggle the 'Hankaku/Zenkaku|Kanji' key, and the running app will then accept Japanese. Even apps that never intended to receive Kanji will begin accepting it. And lastly, to get back on the topic of this thread, Unicode is *NOT* the i18n panacea that most think it to be. Just ask any Japanese engineer worth his weight in rice and they will tell you that Unicode does not satisfy the needs of Japanese text processing. There are numerous issues with Unicode not providing fair ground for Japanese specific Kanji.
Emphasis is mine.
I guess it all depends on whether or not you want to work with production quality code or not.
Perhaps there exists divergent conceptions of what the term warranty implies; and I would assume that the more generally accepted definition entails slightly more than a unilateral guarantee as to claims of product fitness or an acceptable degree of accountability to the quality of services offered.
Now, IANAL, but warranty seems to me to imply much more than just a weak sense of obligation of a producer to bolster its claims through some sort of consumer protection scheme, like product replacement or cost compensation. Suffice it to say that I feel there is much graver responsibility expected of a producer with regard to the protection of the consumer.
What is interesting to note, however, is that there seems to be some sort of magical formula that exempts software vendors from the types of legal guarantees that all other industries are subject to.
For example, even the more popular Microsoft EULAs fall short on these terms.
What I mean to say is that there is no implied warrenty as to the fitness of any of Microsoft's software in any of the EULAs that I have read. In fact, I would assert that they have no intent whatsoever to insure the fitness and behaviour of their product outside of the general extent of their support services.
So, if, for example, .NET Server saw it fit to arbitrarily vanquish any and all ext3 partitions that it discovered on my hard disk, seeking to preserve some sort of convoluted sense of system security, Microsoft has, by means of the EULA, gained unequivocal impunity from any of the retributions that may ensue from charges that I might bring against them for loss of critical, irreplaceable data.
And I am just using MS as an illustration. In fact, I think that one might be hard pressed to find any EULA that warrants the software in such a way as to insure the fitness and behaviour of the application in all environments.