No, your browser only tells sites your email address when you tell it to.
If you have multiple identities, you select which email address you want to present to the site.
It can be the same as with username/password authentication: when you log into your email provider, you see a box that says "store this login info", and you don't check it.
You didn't read the document, did you?
You've got the W3C's blessing to serve XHTML as text/html, but there are differences in the way Javascript and CSS are processed when it's served on a page as application/xhtml+xml.
This is not true. When malformed XHTML is served with an application/xhtml+xml mimetype, Firefox (for example) gives you the yellow "XML Parsing error" page, as it should.
I believe Opera does something similar, and IE doesn't even support application/xhtml+xml.
The question that was asked was what he would do differently given the chance; ie. if he had been in chare of DNS. I'm sure TBL is quite aware that reuse of standards is a good thing.
The information necessary for these things are in (or should be in) feeds anyways. If your aggregator isn't capable of it, *shrug*
The rest would be nice to have, but aren't needed in most cases. This is hardly anything new - eg. NNTP is a pretty basic protocol, and a lot of the things commonly used with it are extensions. If you want them, there are extensions for your other complaints; threading, expiration
. Commenting requires a protocol of some kind; the Atom Publishing Protocol would be nice, but it isn't through the IETF yet.
BTW, this is all Atom. RSS solutions probably exist, but the thought makes me feel very, very dirty.
What does Ruby have to do with web development? I suspect you think there's some connection there because of the popularity of Rails, but it's not the case.
Slashdot Mirror
What exactly are you going to man-in-the-middle? The only things being sent are public keys and signed assertions.
The tech isn't novel, but it's not crippled by client cert's terrible UI.
No, your browser only tells sites your email address when you tell it to. If you have multiple identities, you select which email address you want to present to the site.
Just to be clear, your email provider asks your browser to generate a new public/private keypair. The email provider only ever sees your public key.
To whatever site you decide to give it to. User intervention (at least one click in the browser chrome) is required.
(This is obvious, why do people assume that new systems do the dumbest thing possible and not even bother to check?)
It can be the same as with username/password authentication: when you log into your email provider, you see a box that says "store this login info", and you don't check it.
You log into your email provider, which asks your browser to generate a key. Your email provider signs the key, and your browsers stores it.
There's no single keyair that you're totally dependent on.
Yes, it is true. Example: ring species.
Any system will be a victim of spam. There is no technical solution.
You *do* know the difference between the Internet and the Web, right?
You didn't read the document, did you? You've got the W3C's blessing to serve XHTML as text/html, but there are differences in the way Javascript and CSS are processed when it's served on a page as application/xhtml+xml.
This is not true. When malformed XHTML is served with an application/xhtml+xml mimetype, Firefox (for example) gives you the yellow "XML Parsing error" page, as it should. I believe Opera does something similar, and IE doesn't even support application/xhtml+xml.
> Isn't XHTML suppose to be a transition path to XML?
No, no, and still no. It is a specific application of XML.
Planescape: Torment, of course. Considering how old the engine is, don't hold your breath (unless they open-source it, of course).
XML + HTTP != SOAP
And lets not forget having to upgrade every application when there's a bug or vulnerability in the library they all duplicate.
The question that was asked was what he would do differently given the chance; ie. if he had been in chare of DNS. I'm sure TBL is quite aware that reuse of standards is a good thing.
It already exists and it's called XUL.
This is exactly what XML wasn't designed for. XML is shit for flat data like this.
XML is good at representing documents. On XML's turf - well, all the lisp representations of HTML that I've seen are confusing and ugly.
"hello, this is lih-nus torvalds and i pronounce linux lih-nux."
Damn you puritan work ethic, laziness isn't a troll!
that's what unicode is for, silly.
The rest would be nice to have, but aren't needed in most cases. This is hardly anything new - eg. NNTP is a pretty basic protocol, and a lot of the things commonly used with it are extensions. If you want them, there are extensions for your other complaints; threading, expiration . Commenting requires a protocol of some kind; the Atom Publishing Protocol would be nice, but it isn't through the IETF yet.
BTW, this is all Atom. RSS solutions probably exist, but the thought makes me feel very, very dirty.
try XMMS 2 or beep-media-player.
What does Ruby have to do with web development? I suspect you think there's some connection there because of the popularity of Rails, but it's not the case.