I forgot to mention that if the user is served text/html, he is also served the XHTML 1.0 Strict doctype instead. Anyhow, I prefer to use XHTML 1.1 in my program because it enforces valid XML, and it will render according to standards compliance rather than quirks mode. The standards compliance mode for text/html isn't as strict as the one for application/xhtml+xml, so it's possible to introduce weird quirks into the styles when using text/html.
Thanks for the advice regarding the q= bit of the user agent; I never really considered that. I think I'll attribute your statement in the source for it as well.;)
Also, thanks for the link to hixie.ch's XHTML rant, but I've read that months ago. I already know all the oddities of serving XHTML as application/xhtml+xml (including the background of the document being styled to the root element; I do that on normal text/html pages in the first place). I send JavaScript (the _single_ script I have so far) as application/javascript. I use the business. I'm also looking into what other accessibility or news-feed XML namespaces I might be able to include. I'm used to doing XML stuff, so XHTML is simply just another XML format to me (with its namespace being at http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml). Since nearly everything is formatted in PHP, I've found that applying XSL[T]'s to my documents would be somewhat pointless. At least MSIE supports client-side XSL, right?
Having all the keys lined up like that would induce unnecessary strain on your fingers and joints. Try out a natural keyboard thinger and then tell me again that you want a lined up one.
I also recall that in the past (don't know if it holds true to date), Microsoft's APIs didn't give a clear line between Administrator and User functionality, so developers would just go ahead and used whatever was most convenient for them. Of course, that meant a lot of unnecessary admin-level functionality being implemented into common userspace programs, so now we have this admin hell that Microsoft accidently (I wouldn't say they did it on purpose...) created. Good thing Unix had this all figured out some thirty years ago, so we never really have this problem on Linux and the BSDs.
Since you mention cat decoding JPEG images, I'm sure that less already does or will support transcoding JPEG images to ASCII art sometime soon. Jesus, man, that thing does everything! Who needs to whip out xpdf when less will show you the textual information from a PDF? Sure, it's only good for quick checking of the document, but you still get all that fancy search capabilities less has.
Am I being naughty if I'm serving XHTML 1.1 with application/xhtml+xml only to browsers that support it? I mean, who gives a damn if MSIE gets it as text/html since it doesn't have the damnedest clue what application/xhtml+xml is?
That, and they're also realising that developing applications for Mac OSX is not worth the effort when you make your own OS in the first place. Sure, they'll probably continue to release MS Office for OSX, but that's about it (I hope).
I trust that my filesystem will deny any asshat that tries to access a file without proper permissions. Provided you don't get rootkitted, chmodding your accounts.xml file is probably the best security you're going to get.
I hate to be the one who has to break it to you, but anyone who is using AIM encryption would also be using the official AIM client, thusly they are on a 'doze box, and thusly any encryption efforts on such are futile as they are probably loaded with spyware and/or viruses/trojans/worms/STDs/etc. Your typical techie using 'doze won't be using crap like the official AIM client anyhow, so any secure communications you want to have with people are not going to be via AIM...
I think it's called "playing devil's advocate" where you look at the other side of a problem as if it were your viewpoint, even if it was just to analyze it, not necessarily trolling.
Slashdot Mirror
Zbtb7!
Now to add that to the checklist of Pokemon whose name is very hard or impossible to pronounce... Gotta love them Japanese folk.
Is "internationalisationable" even a word?
One point twenty one jiggawatts!
Don't forget about the free karma when you're the first person to point out it's a dupe with a prior /. link. Mmmm, karma.
OT, but from reading two posts from you, I can already tell you're either from SA or LL primarily.
Zonk is the games editor, and he writes reviews every few weeks or so. PoP:TTT is a multiplatform game by the way, so don't assume it's all Xbox...
Or, I dunno, the Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past?
Your real life analogy is inaccurate because of tollways. Sorry, but thanks for playing!
Ultrasonic = above sound (i.e. sounds a human can hear) frequency = ~20 kHz.
Basically, the point of ultrasound is that it is above the range of human hearing.
I forgot to mention that if the user is served text/html, he is also served the XHTML 1.0 Strict doctype instead. Anyhow, I prefer to use XHTML 1.1 in my program because it enforces valid XML, and it will render according to standards compliance rather than quirks mode. The standards compliance mode for text/html isn't as strict as the one for application/xhtml+xml, so it's possible to introduce weird quirks into the styles when using text/html.
;)
Thanks for the advice regarding the q= bit of the user agent; I never really considered that. I think I'll attribute your statement in the source for it as well.
Also, thanks for the link to hixie.ch's XHTML rant, but I've read that months ago. I already know all the oddities of serving XHTML as application/xhtml+xml (including the background of the document being styled to the root element; I do that on normal text/html pages in the first place). I send JavaScript (the _single_ script I have so far) as application/javascript. I use the business. I'm also looking into what other accessibility or news-feed XML namespaces I might be able to include. I'm used to doing XML stuff, so XHTML is simply just another XML format to me (with its namespace being at http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml). Since nearly everything is formatted in PHP, I've found that applying XSL[T]'s to my documents would be somewhat pointless. At least MSIE supports client-side XSL, right?
Having all the keys lined up like that would induce unnecessary strain on your fingers and joints. Try out a natural keyboard thinger and then tell me again that you want a lined up one.
Wow, two Pennsylvania quotes in a row! Creepy...
I also recall that in the past (don't know if it holds true to date), Microsoft's APIs didn't give a clear line between Administrator and User functionality, so developers would just go ahead and used whatever was most convenient for them. Of course, that meant a lot of unnecessary admin-level functionality being implemented into common userspace programs, so now we have this admin hell that Microsoft accidently (I wouldn't say they did it on purpose...) created. Good thing Unix had this all figured out some thirty years ago, so we never really have this problem on Linux and the BSDs.
Since you mention cat decoding JPEG images, I'm sure that less already does or will support transcoding JPEG images to ASCII art sometime soon. Jesus, man, that thing does everything! Who needs to whip out xpdf when less will show you the textual information from a PDF? Sure, it's only good for quick checking of the document, but you still get all that fancy search capabilities less has.
Am I being naughty if I'm serving XHTML 1.1 with application/xhtml+xml only to browsers that support it? I mean, who gives a damn if MSIE gets it as text/html since it doesn't have the damnedest clue what application/xhtml+xml is?
So does that make 95% of web developpers incompetent?
Yes.
~J
That, and they're also realising that developing applications for Mac OSX is not worth the effort when you make your own OS in the first place. Sure, they'll probably continue to release MS Office for OSX, but that's about it (I hope).
After tweaking the video [to get 1280x800 working which took me all of two hours]
OK, this has to be a piss-take.
Indeed. I think it took me at least five weeks to get my fucking resolution up to 1280x800. Way to go, X!
I trust that my filesystem will deny any asshat that tries to access a file without proper permissions. Provided you don't get rootkitted, chmodding your accounts.xml file is probably the best security you're going to get.
I hate to be the one who has to break it to you, but anyone who is using AIM encryption would also be using the official AIM client, thusly they are on a 'doze box, and thusly any encryption efforts on such are futile as they are probably loaded with spyware and/or viruses/trojans/worms/STDs/etc. Your typical techie using 'doze won't be using crap like the official AIM client anyhow, so any secure communications you want to have with people are not going to be via AIM...
You can always keep a gpg-encrypted backup of that file as well. OR, you could `tar -cj ~/.gaim | gpg -eo gaim.tar.bz2.gpg` or similar...
In Korea? Starcraft, of course! kekekekeke
I think it's called "playing devil's advocate" where you look at the other side of a problem as if it were your viewpoint, even if it was just to analyze it, not necessarily trolling.
Your method to monetary compensation for the infringement of prior patents has already been patented dozens of times by other slashdotters.