(skip)
05/01/2002 - 05/31/2002 06/01/2002 - 06/30/2002 07/01/2002 - 07/31/2002 08/01/2002 - 08/31/2002 09/01/2002 - 09/30/2002 10/01/2002 - 10/31/2002 11/01/2002 - 11/30/2002 12/01/2002 - 12/31/2002 01/01/2003 - 01/31/2003 02/01/2003 - 02/28/2003 03/01/2003 - 03/31/2003 04/01/2003 - 04/30/2003 05/01/2003 - 05/31/2003 06/01/2003 - 06/30/2003 07/01/2003 - 07/31/2003 08/01/2003 - 08/31/2003 09/01/2003 - 09/30/2003 10/01/2003 - 10/31/2003 11/01/2003 - 11/30/2003 12/01/2003 - 12/31/2003 01/01/2004 - 01/31/2004 02/01/2004 - 02/29/2004 03/01/2004 - 03/31/2004 04/01/2004 - 04/30/2004
NeoOffice/J 0.8.2 is highly recommended if you're on OS X. It has tons of scary this-is-beta-and-might-not-even-work warnings, but it does. It seems snappier, looks somehow better (is it the font smoothing?), the command/ctrl keys work like you'd expect (not reversed, as with the X11 version), and it works better for drag-n-drop opening files. -m
Apparently, the Apple store does not let you redownload songs you've paid for. Despite the "FairPlay" DRM, that the tracks are only authorized to play on up to 3 computers. It would be trivial for them to allow this, but they prefer to have their customers pay again. Since you're not buying any physical media, you'd think they'd attempt to make it a little more robust.
The system seems to conspire against you. Tracks on your iPod aren't visible as files. Then when you connect your iPod to a newly-formatted Mac, it cheerfully offers to wipe all the tracks off your iPod. So there's a point there where you still have the track--could even listen to it--but have no choice but to erase it. Grr. -m
For the 2nd time in two months, my hard drive has been corrupted beyond what fsck/Disk Utility/DiskWarrior can repair. Even the TechTool software that comes with the AppleCare package reported "Surface Scan Failed" and "Volume Structure Failed". If anyone else has seen this, please send me mail.
Specifically, 1) is this a sign of an impending catastrophic hard drive failure? 2) Are there any utilities that can provide a definitive report that the Apple technicians will take as a "replace that hard drive now" situation? Or am I being overly-paranoid again?
The friendly Apple guys reformatted my hard drive, which made the errors go away (for the time being). So, what's up?
-m
So, you've been hanging around on the edges of XForms--why don't you take the plunge and learn it from the inside out?
Come see me at the O'Reilly Open Source conference in Portland, for a half-day tutorial, on the afternoon of Monday, July 26. There's also a shorter 45-minute session on Thursday the 29th. -m
This is essentially a snapshot of today's talk at the Gilbane conference.
So why should you pick XForms vs. some non-XForms system?
1) The uninstaller argument
If you had two functionally similar pieces of software, one with a great uninstaller, and one with a tedious/manual uninstall, which would you install first on your own system? I thought so. Ironically, having a great uninstaller gives users peace of mind, making them *less* likely to actually uninstall the program. Open standards, with the associated non-lock-in, have the same effect.
2) Cost of change
Another way to look at the lock-in situation: even a mid-sized organization can have 1000 forms around. If each has a design/production/review cycle of 8hrs, that's an investment of 4 Man-years. Does it make more sense to invest that much in a single-source solution, or something that could be reused/shopped around? If you have a dozen forms, go ahead and try anything. For serious amounts of, use standards.
3) Metadata needs standards too
Forms are metadata. It doesn't seem obvious at first, but it's true. Forms provide a context and interpretation for a core piece of data. Metadata needs to be standardized as much as regular data, maybe more.
4) Choosing your point on the continuum
It's not like you can draw a black and white diagram of "standards-based" and "non-standards-based" software. It's all shades of gray. The flipside of this is that useful standards support isn't a checklist feature. Lots of forms systems have long lists of individual standards supported, but still use a proprietary layer that effectively negates many of the usual benefits of open standards. You have to pick the point on the continuum at which you are comfortable. -m
Somebody running the Gilbane conference had fun with Photoshop. :-) Yes, that's the same as my Orkut photo. -m
I'm on the way to the Gilbane Conference on Content Management. I'm part of the double-length session _ Electronic Forms & Content Management_, moderated by Bill Trippe and additionally featuring speakers from Microsoft and Adobe.
This will be my first speaking assignment for my new employer, Verity. In preparation, I have updated the UBL+XForms example to work much better with formsPlayer. Check it out. -m
Of the 7 regular readers around here, four generous souls (none of whom I'd met previously) offered to volunteer to review my Hack that will be in _XML Hacks_.
In no particular order:
Stephen had great comments on the overall flow and structure. Lots of markers where stuff was good too, not just the bad.
Patrick had too had good comments, especially on the ever-important opening lines. Lots of detailed suggestions and great advice.
Eric helped me see my blind spots, where I was skipping over material too fast.
Daniel had lots of detailed comments, almost copyeditor class. Exactly what I needed.
Good job and thanks to all!
-m
Here's an interesting project that ties in nicely with my recent reading of Text Processing in Python: markdown, a plain-text-ish format for writing.
I just used David Mertz's format in writing a Hack for _XML Hacks_, and I have to admit it was far easier than skipping over the tags, or even the rather good attempt at tagless-WYSIWYG-XML-editing I got from Morphon.
My initial comments:
Paragraphs should be allowed to be uniformly indented a few spaces. Like code, most text is read far more often than written, and every little bit of extra readablility helps.
The inline link syntax -- This is [an example](http://example.com/ "Title") inline link. -- doesn't seem natural. It's not the kind of thing you'd see in use anywhere. (The out-of-line links, however, are very slick) The image syntax is even less so -- 
For the image case, I'd take a hint from TPIP and use keywords (which are only recognized at the start of a line) in these cases
IMAGE:
-m
here.
Bullet item - Support more standards: SVG, XForms; MNG subset?
- sub bullet -As extensions at first, by default if low overhead
-m
I'm writing a chapter for an upcoming book, _XML Hacks_. If you're interested in reviewing a whirlwind tour of XForms, mail me.
The objectives here are:
(1) introduce the concepts clearly
(2) demonstrate it in a way the the reader can easily duplicate
(3) reference all resources
(4) do it in roughly 2 to 5 printed pages.
-m
Cool, an Orkut community for DreamHost. A great, SCO-free Linux Debian host, if I do say so. -m
On the forthcoming CSS book, 2nd edition. Another thing for the reading queue. -m
Find out using the DuCharme method.
mdubinko@yahoo.com
For external use only. I doubt the enforcability of click-through licenses anyway. Copyright 2003 Micah Dubinko. All rights reserved.
