What practical purpose for your everyday web developer does enforcing XML have?
I used to demand that every single thing I wrote be proper XML, then I realized I was wasting my time. A br or hr doesn't need to be closed. Closing an input tag is just plain silly, or a link to a stylesheet? Why should that need to be closed?
What makes the web great is that so many people are making content for it, and there's no reason to bother most of those people with XML's unnecessary demands.
Someone running SPARC and Itanium can probably cope without FatELF, however, people running Ubuntu, that don't even know their computer has an architecture could be helped when they, unbeknownst to them, upgrade from 32 to 64 bit, or from one architecture to another.
The question is how to use a barometer to measure the height of the building, not a barometer and a rope, not a barometer and a ruler, and not a barometer and a stopwatch. The superintendent one is the only successful answer.
Those seem like small details of a larger problem to me. It's hard to realize the problems with the status quo until it has past.
I would like to see a system with applications that fill the height of the screen and expand themselves horizontally to take up as much space as they need. You could then scroll your applications horizontally to switch between programs, reorder them and lock apps to the sides of the screen. Alt-tab would be great, it would just be a picture of all your apps.
The WIMP model has served us well, but if you told me I would never have to deal with a window, menu, or a pointer again I would be the happiest person in the world.
If open source wants to innovate, can we get away from little floaty things that you move around on the screen? Right now you're thinking "what else are we going to use?" Interfaces could have gone in a different direction, I don't completely know or understand what the other direction would be, but there HAS to be something better than these little floaty things.
OLPC has done a good job with it, second and third world kids are going to have a leg up on us because their interfaces have done away with all the annoying crap we have to deal with. Can we please have something that doesn't "take advantage of" all the interface advancements from the 1980s that we deal with on a day to day basis?
Am I asking too much? Maybe, but I want something better and I know you do too.
Also, ponder this without trying to find a solution: Would you be elated to find out you never have to see another window again? I know I would, and I would be happy to not have to see another pointer again in my life. The solution is obviously not easy. It will require great minds and years of research.
In that case you can guess by the link text. You'd probably be on your on with religious or political editorials, but boobs are pretty much always NSFW. If they're not you probably know.
About 130 Sacramento State students, including Juarez, participated in the experimental test, administered to 6,300 college and students across the country.
This is a pretty good definition: Ergonomics (from Greek ergon work and nomoi natural laws) is the study of optimizing the interface between human beings, and the designed objects and environments they interact with.
Those pretty mice are only ergonomic to one person. Anyone with hands that are a different size can't use it as well, and even the person that it was designed for can only use it one way. Truly ergonomic items were meant to be used in more than one way so you can switch the way you use it during the day. It prevents repetitve stress problems.
Mice are designed pretty well, but to avoid repetitive-stress you need to be able to change the way you use it throughout the day. Just switching the buttons does this for you (assuming you're not using an "ergonomic" mouse. Quotes because they're not really ergonomic, just pretty).
I like the idea of automatically detecting which button to use. Could be a pain if you got the wrong one.
How about a comment system that switches to HTML only if you use a HTML tag instead of murdering my beautiful plain text.
That's true, but often decisions are made then justified. Putting the scroll bar on the left puts it near the content, which could help you see where you are (especially with wide monitors, although they weren't concerned about that in the late 70s and early 80s). I'm sure the people at Xerox had plenty of justification for the left.
The right mouse button bothers me far more, the only reason it's the primary button is because we read right to left. Holding the mouse with your pointer finger in the same place all the time is very bad from an ergonomic perspective, if the right button is primary you can use your middle or pointer finger to click, with a wheel mouse your pointer finger sits right on the wheel.
PDA's have a big problem with scroll bars, since you're using a pen the bar needs to switch sides depending on hand you're holding the PDA in. Anyone heard of a PDA that detects which hand you're holding it in?
It would be intuitive if we all used SmallTalk, but the other side was chosen for the Mac and history decided the right was the side for scrollbars (right as in opposite of left, not right as in correct).
Sometime switch the left and right mouse buttons. Once you get used to it you'll never go back. There's no reason behind a lot of standards, it's just the way things are done.
I put it in Opera, looks like it doesn't work. I couldn't even give it focus by clicking on it. It looks like it's not valid, but I can see it being useful.
Absolute positioning is in relation to a relatively or absolutely positioned parent/grandparent, etc.
If no parent element is relatively or absolutely positioned it defaults to the document body.
You press shift+arrow keys to navigate between form inputs and links. I often use it instead of the mouse. Tab runs through form inputs. On a Mac you can also use alt-tab to switch between tabs. I don't know what the key is on Windows/*nix.
"The whole process of linking information across many data sites can be reproduced - and shared with others who can insert it into their own memexes. Bush even imagined products - for instance, sets of sophisticated trails running through databases - that could be purchased and dropped into a memex. He also foresaw the rise of new professionals who, not unlike today's Web designers or writers of data-mining software, "find delight in the task of establishing useful trails through the enormous mass of the common record."
Slashdot Mirror
I used to demand that every single thing I wrote be proper XML, then I realized I was wasting my time. A br or hr doesn't need to be closed. Closing an input tag is just plain silly, or a link to a stylesheet? Why should that need to be closed?
What makes the web great is that so many people are making content for it, and there's no reason to bother most of those people with XML's unnecessary demands.
Now teach grandma how to use it.
Someone running SPARC and Itanium can probably cope without FatELF, however, people running Ubuntu, that don't even know their computer has an architecture could be helped when they, unbeknownst to them, upgrade from 32 to 64 bit, or from one architecture to another.
Thanks, now I understand. Not what you're explaining, I understand why everyone's confused by X.
The question is how to use a barometer to measure the height of the building, not a barometer and a rope, not a barometer and a ruler, and not a barometer and a stopwatch. The superintendent one is the only successful answer.
Those seem like small details of a larger problem to me. It's hard to realize the problems with the status quo until it has past.
I would like to see a system with applications that fill the height of the screen and expand themselves horizontally to take up as much space as they need. You could then scroll your applications horizontally to switch between programs, reorder them and lock apps to the sides of the screen. Alt-tab would be great, it would just be a picture of all your apps.
The WIMP model has served us well, but if you told me I would never have to deal with a window, menu, or a pointer again I would be the happiest person in the world.
If open source wants to innovate, can we get away from little floaty things that you move around on the screen? Right now you're thinking "what else are we going to use?" Interfaces could have gone in a different direction, I don't completely know or understand what the other direction would be, but there HAS to be something better than these little floaty things.
OLPC has done a good job with it, second and third world kids are going to have a leg up on us because their interfaces have done away with all the annoying crap we have to deal with. Can we please have something that doesn't "take advantage of" all the interface advancements from the 1980s that we deal with on a day to day basis?
Am I asking too much? Maybe, but I want something better and I know you do too.
Also, ponder this without trying to find a solution: Would you be elated to find out you never have to see another window again? I know I would, and I would be happy to not have to see another pointer again in my life. The solution is obviously not easy. It will require great minds and years of research.
First Post!
Or it just changes the business model to the even more dishonest sport of product placement.
It will be nice to have niche shows around for longer though.
Thats $1.12 per picture. 20 TVs all running picture in picture can easily get the price up to $44.80.
In that case you can guess by the link text. You'd probably be on your on with religious or political editorials, but boobs are pretty much always NSFW. If they're not you probably know.
About 130 Sacramento State students, including Juarez, participated in the experimental test, administered to 6,300 college and students across the country.
Just Google CSU California
I have a degree in Industrial Design.
This is a pretty good definition:
Ergonomics (from Greek ergon work and nomoi natural laws) is the study of optimizing the interface between human beings, and the designed objects and environments they interact with.
Those pretty mice are only ergonomic to one person. Anyone with hands that are a different size can't use it as well, and even the person that it was designed for can only use it one way. Truly ergonomic items were meant to be used in more than one way so you can switch the way you use it during the day. It prevents repetitve stress problems.
Mice are designed pretty well, but to avoid repetitive-stress you need to be able to change the way you use it throughout the day. Just switching the buttons does this for you (assuming you're not using an "ergonomic" mouse. Quotes because they're not really ergonomic, just pretty).
I like the idea of automatically detecting which button to use. Could be a pain if you got the wrong one.
How about a comment system that switches to HTML only if you use a HTML tag instead of murdering my beautiful plain text.
That's true, but often decisions are made then justified. Putting the scroll bar on the left puts it near the content, which could help you see where you are (especially with wide monitors, although they weren't concerned about that in the late 70s and early 80s). I'm sure the people at Xerox had plenty of justification for the left. The right mouse button bothers me far more, the only reason it's the primary button is because we read right to left. Holding the mouse with your pointer finger in the same place all the time is very bad from an ergonomic perspective, if the right button is primary you can use your middle or pointer finger to click, with a wheel mouse your pointer finger sits right on the wheel. PDA's have a big problem with scroll bars, since you're using a pen the bar needs to switch sides depending on hand you're holding the PDA in. Anyone heard of a PDA that detects which hand you're holding it in?
It would be intuitive if we all used SmallTalk, but the other side was chosen for the Mac and history decided the right was the side for scrollbars (right as in opposite of left, not right as in correct).
Sometime switch the left and right mouse buttons. Once you get used to it you'll never go back. There's no reason behind a lot of standards, it's just the way things are done.
There are two shifts, how about shift-shift?
I put it in Opera, looks like it doesn't work. I couldn't even give it focus by clicking on it. It looks like it's not valid, but I can see it being useful.
Absolute positioning is in relation to a relatively or absolutely positioned parent/grandparent, etc. If no parent element is relatively or absolutely positioned it defaults to the document body.
Thanks for keeping Slashdot open minded by trying it out.
The implementation is the best I've ever seen.
You press shift+arrow keys to navigate between form inputs and links. I often use it instead of the mouse. Tab runs through form inputs. On a Mac you can also use alt-tab to switch between tabs. I don't know what the key is on Windows/*nix.
Poor kid. He worked so hard on that suit and it can't even take a step. He should have sold it in the first auction.
I hope he doesn't lose hope. He needs to learn about a wonderous new material called aluminum.
"The whole process of linking information across many data sites can be reproduced - and shared with others who can insert it into their own memexes. Bush even imagined products - for instance, sets of sophisticated trails running through databases - that could be purchased and dropped into a memex. He also foresaw the rise of new professionals who, not unlike today's Web designers or writers of data-mining software, "find delight in the task of establishing useful trails through the enormous mass of the common record."
I want someone to pay me for my browser history!