After dealing with many parents that recklessly have children with someone outside of their race, most of the doctors I know there strongly feel it is immoral to do so. If you do so and your child has serious health problems, what you did will have a serious negative consequence on your child.
That's an interesting position to take, seeing as one study said people of mixed race are rated more attractive, possibly indicating better health. (You'll want to google around, I pretty much just tried to remember a few terms from the article and picked the first result from a search that looked right. And hey, it was only one study, it might even be wrong. Though it does make sense, given that you're a lot less likely to hit a recessive genetic disease that way.)
What you say makes sense, though. I guess genetic diversity is good for the species as a whole, but bad for an individual needing an organ transplant.
Easy. Over 30% of drug company money is spent on marketing. With no patents, all drugs become "generic". No marketing is needed for generic drugs, because they're all the same. That's 30% of costs that drug companies aren't paying, and therefore 30% of costs that aren't passed on to consumers. Consumers now save 30% on their drugs. Tax them 15%, and spend that money on R&D grants. Consumers now save 15% over the original amount, and R&D has doubled.
Yes, that's a very simplified chain of events. However, the people who research this kind of thing are pretty sure that yes, that's about what would happen. If you're interested, I suggest you read up on it (I have only in small amounts, I'm more interested in the other parts of the Pirate Party platform).
Note that tables are also a hack, and even worse of one, because not only is it not what they're designed for, it also breaks the separation of content and style.
Note that it's also only "more compatible" if the viewer has a similar display to yours. If they have a very small screen, or a very large screen, or spoken, or braille, or text, or a pseudo-AI parser, or etc. a table will be less compatible.
Actually, IIRC there's a better solution coming, one designed specifically for tables (because nth-child() can fail if there are any multi-row/column cells).
Why are aspects of text handling like word wrapping not adequately addressed by CSS2? And yes, I know that IE supports word-wrap, but that is a proprietary attribute (wish MS would have instead spent time implementing the standards correctly, you know?) Are there plans to improve text handling with CSS?
Yes, there are. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work, see Text Layout. Note that this is incredibly hard to spec, because doing so properly for all languages requires knowledge of all languages. And not just basic knowlege, but detailed knowledge about the writing systems. The people writing this deserve huge amounts of respect.
Because if the default container is the viewport, you can still make the page a container, but if the default container is the page, you can't make the viewport a container.
In regards to your 2), do you mean "don't put this paragraph where it's placed in source order, but instead put it after that one over there"? If so, that's already slated for inclusion in CSS 3, IIRC. Not sure where offhand, but you can look around (perhaps in advanced layout?).
To answer your question so he doesn't have to: Layout is a part of style. CSS is definitely lacking in this area (the main property used for layouts, float, wasn't even intended to be used that way, and 99% of uses on the web are hacks). The CSS Advanced Layout Module is being designed to fix that. So no, another language doesn't need to be designed, CSS just needs to get the features it's lacking.
How do you feel about SVG (as currently specified, not as a concept)? What problems do you think it has, and why do you think those problems came about? If some other group (like the WHAT WG) were to rewrite it, would you support that?
So one question is "You have float: left, and you have float: right... why no float: center?"
Because that's not what floating is for!!
Floating is for one specific use case: columnar content, with a section taken out of flow but still within the column. Think of a newspaper, with an image and its caption. They don't interrupt the text but they're physically still within the column. CSS 3 does in fact introduce new float values, but they're for use with the new multicolumn features, like floating something partway in one column and partway in another.
All other uses of floats are hacks, in the bad sense. And yes, that does mean there's no good way in CSS 2.1 to do complex full-page layout. The CSS 3 Advance Layout Module is designed to fix that.
"Some reason" is that script is not an empty element. It can have content. When you don't close it, you're saying that everything after it is its contents.
And a/ does not close elements in HTML. Try it yourself. <em/>text</em> See? The only reason it "works" with img, etc. is that they automatically close themselves.
Actually, the mozilla codebase is constantly getting large updates removing cruft and cleaning things up to do them better. See Cairo (recently landed on some platforms, waiting temporarily on others), the reflow brach that (IIRC) David Baron is working on (slated (again IIRC) for the gecko 1.9 (=FFX 3.0) timeframe), and plenty of others. I'd hazard a guess that the Mozilla codebase is much cleaner than other projects of its size.
The Mozilla Foundation's mission is to "promote choice and innovation on the internet". When you donate to them, you're giving money to further that mission.
Choice is not limited to simply web browsers. Without Free OSes, you can't connect to the internet in a Free way. As an established, mature project that is having only monetary difficulties (not community difficulties), OpenBSD is an obvious choice to give money to.
As a group that develops OpenSSH and provides security audits, OpenBSD is also obviously helping innovation (not necessarily by making new features, but by making sure the ones there work well). Once again, it makes perfect sense for the Mozilla Foundation to, in the course of "promoting choice and innovation on the internet" to donate to them.
Wait. So now instead of <input type crash>, they make you add 16 characters in between? They obviously have no concept of usability. Remember, Microsoft, less typing for the user is GOOD.
I think you misunderstand... An extension can break the browser entirely: crashy, memory leaks, broken UI, even missing UI. And some of them will do this. If you don't believe this, try going and downloading old versions of extensions and hacking all of them to be enabled. You will not have a pleasant experience.
Javascript 2 is being worked on. (You may want to look around more, that's just the first thing I found.)
MNG wasn't "dropped" from Firefox 1.5, it was never even planned on being included. It hasn't been included in Mozilla since (IIRC) Mozilla 1.3, years ago. However, I was looking at it just yesterday, and the code is getting constantly smaller and better, so hopefully it will be included in Firefox 3.0 (planned, IIRC, for around a year from now).
Slashdot Mirror
That's an interesting position to take, seeing as one study said people of mixed race are rated more attractive, possibly indicating better health. (You'll want to google around, I pretty much just tried to remember a few terms from the article and picked the first result from a search that looked right. And hey, it was only one study, it might even be wrong. Though it does make sense, given that you're a lot less likely to hit a recessive genetic disease that way.)
What you say makes sense, though. I guess genetic diversity is good for the species as a whole, but bad for an individual needing an organ transplant.
Now, see, I have the opposite problem. I'm looking for a webcam that can't connect to the internet. Can anyone help me with that?
Easy. Over 30% of drug company money is spent on marketing. With no patents, all drugs become "generic". No marketing is needed for generic drugs, because they're all the same. That's 30% of costs that drug companies aren't paying, and therefore 30% of costs that aren't passed on to consumers. Consumers now save 30% on their drugs. Tax them 15%, and spend that money on R&D grants. Consumers now save 15% over the original amount, and R&D has doubled.
Yes, that's a very simplified chain of events. However, the people who research this kind of thing are pretty sure that yes, that's about what would happen. If you're interested, I suggest you read up on it (I have only in small amounts, I'm more interested in the other parts of the Pirate Party platform).
Note that tables are also a hack, and even worse of one, because not only is it not what they're designed for, it also breaks the separation of content and style.
Note that it's also only "more compatible" if the viewer has a similar display to yours. If they have a very small screen, or a very large screen, or spoken, or braille, or text, or a pseudo-AI parser, or etc. a table will be less compatible.
You can in CSS 3. (No, I don't know why you couldn't in css 2.1. Probably because no one had figured out exactly what the best way to do it was.)
Because of the way inheritance works. See http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1070385285&count=1.
Actually, IIRC there's a better solution coming, one designed specifically for tables (because nth-child() can fail if there are any multi-row/column cells).
Yes, there are. http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work, see Text Layout. Note that this is incredibly hard to spec, because doing so properly for all languages requires knowledge of all languages. And not just basic knowlege, but detailed knowledge about the writing systems. The people writing this deserve huge amounts of respect.
If you're iterested, see a post by one of the writers (temporarily down, so use the google cache).
Because if the default container is the viewport, you can still make the page a container, but if the default container is the page, you can't make the viewport a container.
In regards to your 2), do you mean "don't put this paragraph where it's placed in source order, but instead put it after that one over there"? If so, that's already slated for inclusion in CSS 3, IIRC. Not sure where offhand, but you can look around (perhaps in advanced layout?).
To answer your question so he doesn't have to: Layout is a part of style. CSS is definitely lacking in this area (the main property used for layouts, float, wasn't even intended to be used that way, and 99% of uses on the web are hacks). The CSS Advanced Layout Module is being designed to fix that. So no, another language doesn't need to be designed, CSS just needs to get the features it's lacking.
How do you feel about SVG (as currently specified, not as a concept)? What problems do you think it has, and why do you think those problems came about? If some other group (like the WHAT WG) were to rewrite it, would you support that?
Because that's not what floating is for!!
Floating is for one specific use case: columnar content, with a section taken out of flow but still within the column. Think of a newspaper, with an image and its caption. They don't interrupt the text but they're physically still within the column. CSS 3 does in fact introduce new float values, but they're for use with the new multicolumn features, like floating something partway in one column and partway in another.
All other uses of floats are hacks, in the bad sense. And yes, that does mean there's no good way in CSS 2.1 to do complex full-page layout. The CSS 3 Advance Layout Module is designed to fix that.
Well, imagine a beowulf cluster....
Doesn't look like that for me either. For me it looks like this
Oops, did I have my font size too high? Awww, I guess you'll just have to go back to school and learn how to design properly.
"Some reason" is that script is not an empty element. It can have content. When you don't close it, you're saying that everything after it is its contents.
And a / does not close elements in HTML . Try it yourself. <em/>text</em> See? The only reason it "works" with img, etc. is that they automatically close themselves.
I hope this has been informative.
That's generally considered a bug in the spec, and HTML 5 being developed by the WHATWG will undeprecate it.
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to paint, and he can eat paintings for life, and then die of lead poisoning.
Actually, the mozilla codebase is constantly getting large updates removing cruft and cleaning things up to do them better. See Cairo (recently landed on some platforms, waiting temporarily on others), the reflow brach that (IIRC) David Baron is working on (slated (again IIRC) for the gecko 1.9 (=FFX 3.0) timeframe), and plenty of others. I'd hazard a guess that the Mozilla codebase is much cleaner than other projects of its size.
The Mozilla Foundation's mission is to "promote choice and innovation on the internet". When you donate to them, you're giving money to further that mission.
Choice is not limited to simply web browsers. Without Free OSes, you can't connect to the internet in a Free way. As an established, mature project that is having only monetary difficulties (not community difficulties), OpenBSD is an obvious choice to give money to.
As a group that develops OpenSSH and provides security audits, OpenBSD is also obviously helping innovation (not necessarily by making new features, but by making sure the ones there work well). Once again, it makes perfect sense for the Mozilla Foundation to, in the course of "promoting choice and innovation on the internet" to donate to them.
Funny. Some Mozilla people were just about how Sun completely screwed up and all the different places (LAMP, interaction with webpages, etc.) where java could have been big, but wasn't.
Wait. So now instead of <input type crash>, they make you add 16 characters in between? They obviously have no concept of usability. Remember, Microsoft, less typing for the user is GOOD.
Heck, that's only if they're non-fiction. For all the fiction ones, you just alphabetize them.
And besides that, barcoding and sticking them in a database won't help you anyway, if what you want to do is find where they are in your house!
I think you misunderstand... An extension can break the browser entirely: crashy, memory leaks, broken UI, even missing UI. And some of them will do this. If you don't believe this, try going and downloading old versions of extensions and hacking all of them to be enabled. You will not have a pleasant experience.
Javascript 2 is being worked on. (You may want to look around more, that's just the first thing I found.)
MNG wasn't "dropped" from Firefox 1.5, it was never even planned on being included. It hasn't been included in Mozilla since (IIRC) Mozilla 1.3, years ago. However, I was looking at it just yesterday, and the code is getting constantly smaller and better, so hopefully it will be included in Firefox 3.0 (planned, IIRC, for around a year from now).