PUBLIC MARKS with search rules

This script will Read sitemap.xml.gz file Extract page URLs out of it (add optional filtering step here) Output Apache .htaccess redirect rules so that old links will point to the new site

From: Leif Halvard Silli

Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:28:00 +0200

Ahem ... Please advice people to use HTML5, as you obviously don't understand HTML4 ... ;-)

Il n'y a jamais eu d'HTML4, seulement HTML 4. Mais côté HTML-LS ils ont du mal avec la barre espace visiblement.

But, to answer Russel's question, this behaviour is not correct, as no Web browser behave that way. Hence, HTML5 has changed the rules to be more in line with how browsers actually act: In the HTML serialization of HTMl5, the "</div>" *is* permitted. (In the XML serialization - also known as XHTML - it remains forbidden.)

La sérialisation XML de HTML 5 n'a strictement rien à voir avec XHTML. A se demander si c'est de l'incompréhension ou de la simple désinformation.

Further more, if Russel simply just replaces the XHTML doctype with the HTML5 doctype, the file will validate as is, with the xmlns namespace >and everything. (The xmlns namespace validates only because HTML5' generous permission - and not because it plays any role.)

Si un jour vous vous demandez comment dire "blatant disregard" poliment en anglais, vous avez désormais la réponse : "generous permission". Et note, ce super conseil de faire sauter le DOCTYPE est donné à quelqu'un qui mentionnait explicitement vouloir utiliser XHTML : "HTML5, rien à battre de ce que tu veux, t'en boufferas quand même".

The trouble is that the "training" doesn't really produce consistent results, so Youthful Programmer starts creating rules and procedures that are meant to make more consistent results. Over the years, the rule book grows and grows. Soon it's a six-volume manual called The Methodology.

After a few dozen years, Youthful Programmer is now a Huge Incompetent IT Consultant with a capital-M-methodology and a lot of people who blindly obey the Methodology, even when it doesn't seem to be working, because they have no bloody idea whatsoever what else to do, and they're not really talented programmers -- they're just well-meaning Poli Sci majors who attended the six-week course.

Joel Spolsky écrivait cela il y a plus de dix ans. Aujourd'hui, les méthodologies ne sont plus sur la programmation. De la même manière qu'UML2 est passé au niveau meta-meta, les Méthodologies sont désormais à propos des méthodologies. Le pire étant que les déçu de l'Agile qui s'est Méthodologisée sont aussi en train de reconstruire une nouvelle méthodologie, para-Agile.

I think with the WHATWG improvement just happens. More as a byproduct of the larger goal and not really getting in the way of anybody. At the W3C there is too much bureaucracy for "just happens" and so instead of working on what you want to be working on, you have to argue about rules.

Rules are simple: Get a box Put all books you want to recycle in the box Give the entire box to a friend Friend takes out books he wants, puts in books he wants to recycle Friend gives the entire box to someone else.

From 25 May, European laws dictate that "explicit consent" must be gathered from web users who are being tracked via text files called "cookies".

The slides could be improved by mentioning a few things more.

slide 19 – W3C didn’t pay for the logo work.

slide 21 – The WHATWG announces that they rename their document as HTML Living Standard. The snapshot which is published on W3C Web site under *patent policy* will be html5

slide 39 – The W3C has always said it was out for community review.

slide 56 – Things are cut from specs when there are not at least a double implementations of each features (Candidate Recommendation). It is the *normal* process. Nothing new. No aggressive timeline.

slide 69 – W3C here is W3C members. It illustrates a disagreement in between W3C members.

slide 82 – Microsoft is not joining the WHATWG because of the lack of patent policy. Nokia is not there, Access (NetFront) is not there, etc.

slide 93 – What are secret rules? The W3C Process is public, most of the WGs have their work in public. Specs are published in public.

slide 94 – Many working groups are open to public participation without fees. Example: HTMLWG.

slide 95 – False. There is a majority of Not For Profit and Affiliate companies.

slide 96 – False. By W3C Process, every member has one voice. W3C is a community of members. The listen is a bit strange.

slide

slide 98 – W3C members decided to move away from HTML brokeness and tried to move a cleaner markup leveraging on XML. We know it didn’t work and retrospectively it was a mistake.

slide 99 – False. The W3C moved from RAND (like IETF for example) to RF (Royalty Free) to give a safer environment for developers.

slide 102 – W3C said: “Be careful if you use the technology in production. There is no full interoperability yet”.

slide 107 – WHATWG people are exactly the same people that are working inside W3C Membership. Part of the work btw is done by the W3C webapps WG by the exact same people.

slide 125 – is spot on! ;) unfortunately.

simple script to convert my Mail.app rules to sieve commands.

I suggested privately that you call this effort HTML 5. I

still think this is a good idea. I notice that your DOCTYPE includes

"HTML5".

[Aside: I don't particularly *like* the HTML 5 name, but I think

it is clearer than HTML 4 + WebForms + processing rules +

behaviour + XML support sort-of + other stuff]

nlproject is a set of software facilities that provide development environments for logic programming in Python. At its core is nl, a bare bones logic system, comprising the basic building blocks for sentences and rules, and an in-memory knowledge base to hold these sentences and rules. On top of it is nlserv, that provides persistence for nl‘s knowledge bases and an XML-RPC interface to them.

I want to introduce the "right to be forgotten". Social network sites are a great way to stay in touch with friends and share information. But if people no longer want to use a service, they should have no problem wiping out their profiles. The right to be forgotten is particularly relevant to personal data that is no longer needed for the purposes for which it was collected. This right should also apply when a storage period, which the user agreed to, has expired.

MarcoPolo brings context-aware computing to your portable Mac computer.

It allows your computer to determine its context through gathering evidence

from your environment (evidence sources), using flexible rule-based

fuzzy matching to make an educated guess (rules), and then

performing arbitrary actions upon changing context (actions).

karl dubost 0 minutos atrás I guess there are other things which might influence than only the raw number of participations. The social dynamic of Wikipedia system has evolved. The rules (like any communities) have strengthened and are more rigid than what they were in the past. It is basically more and more painful to create content for Wikipedia. As an occasional editor, I'm less and less inclined to make the effort to contribute because the article might go quickly under "Articles for Deletion" hammer.

Interesting thing to look at:

1. Timeline of Articles for Deletion (raw number and % of how many new articles)

2. Deletion compared to new contributors (stable, going down, going up)

3. Timeline should also plot the milestones of new editing rules.

4. The rate of new articles creation compared to the number of contributors.

These could drive to new processes, maybe there is a need for a better drafting tool that will help an article to reach a stage of maturity to be part of Wikipedia, and this will create another set of behaviours ;) Not a closed system.