Heh, I remember those days - I worked in pre-press back then.
If I remember correctly we had more problems with the anti-virus software we installed than we ever had with the actual virus. At least the virus was free!
I think you are confusing plain old "Splunk" with "Splunk Base" - they are two different things. Both offered by the same people, but different none the less.
TITLE is more popular than BR as it's used to create the title of the page - the bit that appears in the browser's title bar. Just about every HTML document will have it. BR is just for line breaks and not necessarily needed (or even ideal in the days of CSS).
So no real surprise that it is more popular really.
Fair enough, I (vastly) overstated it when I said that XMLHTTPRequest 'solved' it and I do understand the point he made.
I guess I was trying to point out that whilst stuff like XMLHTTPRequest isn't perfect it can be used to good effect in certain situations. All is not completely lost.
Whist it's not perfect and support does vary it solves the problem you mention. Javascript makes the request and handles the response so there is no need to do a full page refresh just to get one word back to stick in the middle of the page (or whatever).
You probably could write an IRC client using this technique (not saying you should, just could). It would need to poll the server every n seconds or something to check for updates and then grab the lastest comments if there are some and append them to the current list. It could do that behind the scenes without a full page refresh each time. Not ideal but not impossible either.
The older versions of Explorer are not going to suddenly disappear. All the nasty hacks currently being used and all the problems with trying to make stuff work with pokey old Explorer are still going to exist.
The kind of people that use non-IE browsers are more likely to upgrade to the latest and greatest versions. The kind of people that do use IE (i.e. most people) are a lot less likely to do so. Perhaps auto-update will have an effect but there will still be people that don't upgrade.
Whilst I'm glad that Microsoft are finally doing something with IE it is a double edged sword. As IE can't be un-invented I guess it's better that it is improved though.
It will be interesting to see the take up of IE7 and to view some access logs in 12 months time.
why can't someone build a decent framework that follows the simple "directories are directories and files are pages" model used by asp, php, cgi, etc
Er, because when my site has got about a thousand or so pages that gets a little bit tedious.
Go do some Googling on Model 1 vs Model 2.
Just because you don't get/need it doesn't make it bad or worthless.
When logged in at Flickr (http://flickr.com/) you can quickly edit photo titles and other bits of info by simply clicking on then and typing in a new value. When you submit the value it uses XmlHttpRequest to send your change to the server without refreshing the page and works really well. Makes it really simple to make small quick changes to stuff.
With XmlHttpRequest being supported cross browser (I think Safari is getting it soon) and starting to get more mindshare I think we are going to see a lot more of this.
For all the talk about labels vs. folders, I find labels are counter-intuitive. Here in my filing cabinet I sort documents into folders; I don't stick 3 or 4 different labels on documents and throw them all into the same drawer. It's crazy!
You're so wrong it hurts me!
Computer interfaces don't have to be exact mimics of the real world. They can improve on it too sometimes! If your filing cabinet could hand back the right documents when you just ask for some specific label then you probably would just throw them in the same drawer. Just because your real world filing cabinet can't do this doesn't mean an on-line version of a filing cabinet should have the same limitation.
Being limited to only one 'home' for stuff that could be categorised into many is what's crazy.
You kind of can do this in Mac OS X (and I think on XP to). You can mount FTP and WebDAV servers in the finder so unless I'm missing something you could pretty much do exactly what you said on a Mac. The only difference would be that you would need to mount the remote side first - not the greatest of hardships.
I'm too lazy to try this right now but I think I have this right.
I don't fully understand the implications of what KDE supports but I suspect your example isn't the best way to champion it.
Using Safari 1.2.3 (v125.9) and all is fine. Tried the online version of the tester and just got a blank page (with crazy source). No crash, no hang, no problems as far as I can tell.
And at any point in time, the respective existing model is all you've got to base a sound argument on.
Doesn't that make your "sound" argument no better than just a best guess?
Mind you, nothing wrong with best guesses. Be better all round if more people admitted that was all they had rather than the de facto answer all the time.
Yeah, right. Like the eveyone's gonna rush out to vote just because proportional representation was brought in.
Reality check needed methinks. People don't vote for loads of reasons. I suspect (and it's only my hunch) that the kind of person that even knows what proportional representation is probably does actually vote anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
And in JSP...
<%= "Hello World" %>
You guess wrong. But thanks for playing.
Heh, I remember those days - I worked in pre-press back then.
If I remember correctly we had more problems with the anti-virus software we installed than we ever had with the actual virus. At least the virus was free!
I think you are confusing plain old "Splunk" with "Splunk Base" - they are two different things. Both offered by the same people, but different none the less.
http://www.splunk.com/
TITLE is more popular than BR as it's used to create the title of the page - the bit that appears in the browser's title bar. Just about every HTML document will have it. BR is just for line breaks and not necessarily needed (or even ideal in the days of CSS).
So no real surprise that it is more popular really.
Fair enough, I (vastly) overstated it when I said that XMLHTTPRequest 'solved' it and I do understand the point he made.
I guess I was trying to point out that whilst stuff like XMLHTTPRequest isn't perfect it can be used to good effect in certain situations. All is not completely lost.
You are aware of XMLHTTPRequest yeah?
Whist it's not perfect and support does vary it solves the problem you mention. Javascript makes the request and handles the response so there is no need to do a full page refresh just to get one word back to stick in the middle of the page (or whatever).
You probably could write an IRC client using this technique (not saying you should, just could). It would need to poll the server every n seconds or something to check for updates and then grab the lastest comments if there are some and append them to the current list. It could do that behind the scenes without a full page refresh each time. Not ideal but not impossible either.
If you were a real geek dad then your children's ages would be 8,4,2, and 1yrs.
Pah!
I largely agree.
The older versions of Explorer are not going to suddenly disappear. All the nasty hacks currently being used and all the problems with trying to make stuff work with pokey old Explorer are still going to exist.
The kind of people that use non-IE browsers are more likely to upgrade to the latest and greatest versions. The kind of people that do use IE (i.e. most people) are a lot less likely to do so. Perhaps auto-update will have an effect but there will still be people that don't upgrade.
Whilst I'm glad that Microsoft are finally doing something with IE it is a double edged sword. As IE can't be un-invented I guess it's better that it is improved though.
It will be interesting to see the take up of IE7 and to view some access logs in 12 months time.
SOAP? Easy!
Just implemented local Google search on my little Rails project using the Google API, SOAP, and half a dozen lines of code.
Oh yeah - silly me, I've even written some code using it! D'oh.
I was thinking of support for contentEditable and in page WYSIWYG editors. That's coming soon I think.
When logged in at Flickr (http://flickr.com/) you can quickly edit photo titles and other bits of info by simply clicking on then and typing in a new value. When you submit the value it uses XmlHttpRequest to send your change to the server without refreshing the page and works really well. Makes it really simple to make small quick changes to stuff.
With XmlHttpRequest being supported cross browser (I think Safari is getting it soon) and starting to get more mindshare I think we are going to see a lot more of this.
You're so wrong it hurts me!
Computer interfaces don't have to be exact mimics of the real world. They can improve on it too sometimes! If your filing cabinet could hand back the right documents when you just ask for some specific label then you probably would just throw them in the same drawer. Just because your real world filing cabinet can't do this doesn't mean an on-line version of a filing cabinet should have the same limitation.
Being limited to only one 'home' for stuff that could be categorised into many is what's crazy.
Safari goes to the wrong URL too.
Just tried the demo and ended up at Google rather than where the link looked like it should go.
Damn!
You kind of can do this in Mac OS X (and I think on XP to). You can mount FTP and WebDAV servers in the finder so unless I'm missing something you could pretty much do exactly what you said on a Mac. The only difference would be that you would need to mount the remote side first - not the greatest of hardships.
I'm too lazy to try this right now but I think I have this right.
I don't fully understand the implications of what KDE supports but I suspect your example isn't the best way to champion it.
Using Safari 1.2.3 (v125.9) and all is fine. Tried the online version of the tester and just got a blank page (with crazy source). No crash, no hang, no problems as far as I can tell.
Score one to the kool aid.
Doesn't that make your "sound" argument no better than just a best guess?
Mind you, nothing wrong with best guesses. Be better all round if more people admitted that was all they had rather than the de facto answer all the time.
Yeah, right. Like the eveyone's gonna rush out to vote just because proportional representation was brought in.
Reality check needed methinks. People don't vote for loads of reasons. I suspect (and it's only my hunch) that the kind of person that even knows what proportional representation is probably does actually vote anyway.
Er, the iPod plays normal mp3's as well as AACs.
If you can legally download an mp3 song then you can play it on your ipod.
Sounds like the sort of pokey debugging processes I go through writing little programs in my spare time!
What about stuff like Test Driven Development and Unit Testing? Would that have made any odds here?