Categories
Just Shelley

Bright Copper Pennies

Walking down Main, as we would call our barely 5 block long main street that ran through the center of town, I tended to walk with my head down, gaze focused on the ground. This wasn’t because I was a shy child, or a quiet child, or I was being sulky or disrespectful. No, I kept my head down because I was always looking for treasure.

Sometimes I would find a button that someone had lost, or a pretty rock with bits of sparkle embedded in it. On rare occasions, I might find a nickle, which could then be traded at the store for a candy bar that was, well, close to my size in length, or at least that’s how I remember them.

If I found a dime I would buy a candy bar and a licorice rope from the stand close to the register, usually red, though sometimes black when the mood hit. And I would eat both one right after the other if it wasn’t too close to dinner and my mother allowed me. She usually did, though, knowing that candy bought with found money was outside the rules that governed how much candy I could have at any point in time.

If I found a quarter I would stop dead in my tracks and yell out my good fortune, before swooping down to pick it up.

“A quarter! Look, I found a quarter! A whole quarter!”

I would shriek and jump about bringing no end of embarrassment to whoever I was with. I instinctively knew that I’d used up all my good luck for the day so I’d keep my head up and walk along with the quarter held in outstretched hand in front of me, to show to all who passed. Luckily, we knew everyone who walked by or I might get looks of pity — poor daft child.

I would take that quarter home and look at it and gloat over my good fortune, being uncommonly good at gloating. To annoy my brother, I would insist on showing it to him as much as I could, until he threatened to pound me. Then I would wait until dinner to gloat just a wee bit more when Mom was there and could prevent physical violence.

I would save that quarter for trips into the City, the town of about 3000 or so 8 miles away, when we would visit the Five & Dime store. There I would carefully walk the aisles and aisles of sweets and toys, and stock up on more exotic fare, candy necklaces and candy buttons and those plastic things that had the gum and the little toys inside. Sometimes one of my friends would come with us and I would share whatever I bought with him or her. I wasn’t a selfish child, just one filled with the avarice all children have.

(Children are born pirates, becoming more subtle and less greedy over time only because those who mean us well keep teaching us that we can’t have everything.)

I wouldn’t save my found money because, as my Mother understood, found money is treasure and didn’t follow the normal rules of saving money for a rainy day.

I would also find pennies of course. However, even in those days when money meant something, I wouldn’t get too excited about a penny. The most a penny could buy was a bubble gum pipe or a red hot jawbreaker, nothing to get worked up over. Nothing, unless the penny was a new penney. New pennies were the greatest find of all.

I’d be walking along, head down, looking at the sidewalk of rough grays and dusty beige and dark cracks and pebbles. I’d see a glint, a shine of red-gold in the sun, and race up and instead of finding the usual, a piece of broken beer bottle glass, or a sparkly granite pebble I’d find a bright new shiny copper penny.

I never spent my bright copper pennies, but would instead put them into a glass jar that I kept on the table by my bed. Once a week or so, I would take all the pennies out and I would wash each one and dry it with a soft cloth, polishing it just to see the shine, to feel that brightness in my hand.

As I grew older I stopped looking down as much. I was at that age when I could now walk around town by myself and if I kept my head down, I would run into things like people and dogs. Keeping my head down also meant I couldn’t see as much around me and I was beginning to find that cars and adults and dogs and other kids, especially other kids, were much more interesting than treasure, though I still rejoiced when I would find a coin. People come and people go, but candy is a constant.

I also stopped washing my bright copper pennies because I had other things to do with my time. There were trees to climb and hide and seek to play and tether ball — remember tether ball? The pennies began to get duller and darker, pushed back into the corner with each passing month as other things such as drawing pads and big crayons were added to the desk.

Finally one day I wanted something, I don’t know what it was, and I didn’t have enough money. I spotted my jar of pennies and without thinking about it, I opened it, dumped all the pennies into a paper bag and took then down to the bank to covert into useful money. Money I could spend at the store.

Categories
Photography

B & W or color

Some photographers focus on black & white photography, others color, but many are like me and we’ll use both depending on the circumstances.

For myself, I’ve seen a photo in color that’s uninteresting until you desaturate it, reducing it to greys, blacks, and whites, and then it takes on life and interest. Conversely, other photos need the color; otherwise important detail is lost.

These photos were from a hike along the Katy Trail, in and around Rocheport, Missouri. I show both color and B & W images, so that you can see the difference when using one or the other. I’ve found that when I want to add a surreal quality to a photo — to build on the emotion — I always use B & W. However, when I want to focus more on the subject of the photo, I tend to use color.

Rocheport River

Two slightly different photos of the same river/creek that feeds into the Missouri river, right outside the Rocheport Tunnel. The scene looks good regardless of whether it’s in color or not, but the B & W tends to wash much of the warmth out of the photo.

rocheportriver.jpg

rocheportriverbw.jpg

Tunnel Entrance

This is a case where removing the color harms the photo, in my opinion. I believe that the colors of the rock and the leaves actually add detail, and the B & W comes off more flat, less interesting.

Of course, this is, again, my opinion.

tunnel1.jpg

tunnel1bw.jpg

In Stone

This photo is of a crack in the limestone cliffs, and is next to a dwelling actually made into this crack. I hide the dwelling behind these leaves in this photo — you can see the images at the Burningbird Images site for more detail.

In this case, the colors are flat because of the lack of sun — I think that B & W is much superior, and gives a interesting feel to the photo.

stonehole.jpg

stonehole2.jpg

No Choice

Two completely different photos to demonstrate that, sometimes, there is no option. A photo would be useless without color, or a B & W would be material for the garbage can if in color.

The first photo is of a pretty bug that landed on the back of my gold car, and the photo’s colors highlight the contrast. I have no idea what this bug is, but it was very tenacious. Even when I lifted the trunk lid to put my purse in the trunk, it maintained its grip.

prettybug.jpg

This photo is from inside the Rocheport Tunnel, looking towards the entrance. The light difference was extreme, and in color, it would be a muddy mess. However, in B & W, the effect is dramatic, even extreme. Many wouldn’t like this photo, but I love it — it was one of my favorites.

tunnel2.jpg

Categories
RDF

Mixing Vanilla XML with RDF/XML

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

What would it be like to add the ability to create RDF/XML “sub-trees” within a plain vanilla XML document? It would be like the following:

xoxoxoxoxoxxoxoxox xoxoxoxo xxoxoxooxoxxo foaf:knows xoxoxoxox xox xoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxox xxoxoxoxoxoxxo rss:item xoxoxoxoxoxox xoxoxoxo xxoxoxoxox xoxo xxxxoxo xxox x foaf:lastname xoxoxoxo xoxoxoxoxox oxxx oxoxox oxoxoxox xoxoxox postcon:reason xoxoxoxox xxxxoxoxo xoxoxox job:title xoxoxox xoxoxoxoxxx xoxo xxxxxxxxxxxx xooxoxox ooooooo xoxoxoxooxx oxxoxo xoxoxo xooxoxox xoxoxooo oooxoxoxo oxoxoxo xoxoxoxo oxoxox ooooooxoxox cc:license

Categories
RDF

You have your peanut butter in my chocolate!

Recovered from the Wayback machine.

Jon Udell has been exploring the concept of mixing, in his words, RDF-isms with RSS 2.0, which is a non-RDF, single use XML vocabulary.

First, important note – when RDF people talk about RSS, they usually mean RSS 1.0, which is an RDF-enabled vocabulary.

Second important note – RDF puts certain constraints and requirements on an XML document for it to be valid RDF/XML, and to be usable within RDF applications and APIs.

The question began with namespaces, and Dan Brickley pointing out what is one of the major strengths of RDF – if a vocabulary is RDF compliant, then it’s namespace would work within other RDF-compliant vocabularies. As Dan wrote in comments in the original thread:

In the RSS1 design (via the love-it-or-loathe-it RDF approach) we had a more loosly coupled, de-centralised design: a namespace worked with RSS1 if it worked with RDF. If someone created an RDF vocab for Jobs, then it worked with RSS1. If someone else creates an RDF vocab for locations (to talk in more detail about where the jobs are), then that too just worked. Same goes for a skills vocab (there’ll likely be several). Or person-descriptions (not just FOAF, vCard but the several others people have created to qualify those).

Jon took this tidbit and stretched it – waaaay out of shape – into a discussion about using RDF in conjunction with RSS 2.0. He comes up with a sample feed. It validates with the RSS validator. Fine and good – but it’s not going to validate as RDF, which provide those aforementioned rules and criteria and constraints that keep any old XML from being used as RDF and violating the RDF model that forms the basis of the RDF/XML.

There is a mathematical model we all use that says when we add 2 plus 2, we get 4. In addition, within this model a value of ‘3′ is greater than a value of ‘2′. You can create your own mathematical model, and in it, 2 plus 2 could equal 5, or 3, or 6 if you want, and a value of ‘2′ is greater than ‘3′ – but it won’t work with the existing model.

You could take your model and document it nicely and say, “Please use it. It’s better and more simple”, and you might be able to get people to use it – but then they would never be on time for trains, and they would never have correct change, and they would most likely be in trouble with the income tax folks.

The point is that the numbers, the operators, and even the syntax that we use within our mathematical system isn’t what’s important – it’s the model, not the pictures that counts.

Jon today states:

Actually, I’m not saying that I want to put RDF into RSS. I’m trying to ask and answer two questions: 1) Is it feasible? and 2) What benefits would it confer?

Jon, in a nutshell: 1) no , 2) many, but would require that you abandon the single-use RSS 2.0 architecture in favor of a more universally defined architecture, which is the aforementioned RDF/XML.

Lots of new RDF/XML vocabularies coming down the road, Jon, and not just the new RSSJobs which is this week’s hot spot. (Is this RSS 1.0 or RSS 2.0 – can’t find info on this.) Many excellent RDF/XML vocabularies, all of which will not work with RSS 2.0 because RSS 2.0 is a single-use, single-purpose simple syndication feed that doesn’t care whether it mixes with other vocabularies. That’s cool. That’s your choice.

update: 

Did find a comment thread where Dan talks about mixing RDF namespaces in with regular XML.

Dan’s a patient man. He wants to allow the XML freeforall world to benefit from RDF/XML. I admire him for this. I disagree with even attempting to do this.

What’s the point of the model, the rigor, the challenges associated with RDF/XML, if we’re going to say, “Oh, well, we don’t want to force you to use our model. Don’t worry your pretty little heads about it – just go ahead and just take what you want, we don’t mind.”

It’s the same as saying use your mathematical model, we’ll learn it so that we can give you the proper change when you buy that beer you so obviously need for doing something so daft.

You want to combine plain vanilla XML and RDF/XML? Fine. Use XSLT. Or a sledgehammer. Or drugs.

Categories
Weblogging

Weblog Links: Part 1—The Impermanence of Permalinks

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

Webloggers may vary in their support of technologies such as comments and trackbacks and RSS, but two things most agree on: weblogs support archives for older posts, and each post is accessible individually with a URL called a permalink. In fact, it is these two items that give all webloggers pause before they switch from one weblogging tool to another — none of the weblogging tools support a standardized permalink/archive structure, and moving can result in that horror of all horrors for webloggers — broken permalinks.

 

Tool Differences

 

To demonstrate the differences between tools, Blogger uses a numeric hash value for each individual item, and archives pages are listed by date and by weblog name. For instance, Jeneane Sessum talks about getting funky in an archive page called: 2003_08_03_allied_archive.html, located on Blogspot, and the individual item is identified by the value 106011655159322454.

Compare and contrast this with a weblog posting created using Bloxsom, such as this wonderful book recommendation by Rael Dornfest. In this particular case, the individual item can be found within a hierarchical structure, and the file is named the title of the post: society/literature/tears_of_the_giraffe.html.

Marc Cantor posted photos of his lovely little girl, and you can access these through a structure of date, and a fragment identifier for the individual item, most likely based on some internal value: 2003/08/05.html#a1590.

My own Movable Type weblogs use the standard out of the box numeric identifier that’s incremented with each posting. So this individual item is…well whatever it is, because I haven’t created the page yet. Since I create individual pages for individual items, though, you won’t find a URI fragment (that thing following the pound sign ‘#’) for each item. Additionally, I don’t use a complicated archival setup, so all the pages are listed in the same sub-directory: archives.

 

Archiving

 

Speaking of archives, each of us has a preferred archival scheme — category, month, week, day, whatever. I used to support multiple archive schemes, but after reviewing a years worth of weblog access patterns of my readers, the statistics showed me that very few people use dated archives such as monthly and weekly archives; however, people do like a listing of recent items and items by category. Based on this, I support category archives, individual item archives, and provide lists of both.

Regardless of your preferences, most tools allow you to choose the type of archiving you want, and at a minimum, tools should support some kind of dated archive and individual items. Personally, I think they should also support categories, but that’s my own preferences showing.

Archive choice can impact on your permalink. For instance, if you support daily archives, and each individual weblog posting has it’s own URI fragment, the URL to access this item will be different from my own individual page items. Both wil be different for the site that supports weekly archive items only, and so on.

Not a problem — unless you’re thinking of moving.

 

Moving between tools

 

Regardless of the archived format, most tools provide functionality that allows you to export all your archives — or at least, all tools should provide this functionality. If you didn’t have this, you wouldn’t have a way to make your independent copies for personal backup. In addition, you wouldn’t be able to export your data for import into another tool.

Most tools also support imports from other tools as long as you follow given procedures, usually provided by the tool vendor. After all, it’s bad business sense to not support data importing.

In fact, moving from one tool to another isn’t that complicated, unless the tools differ drastically. For instance, if you use a weblogging tool that dynamically generates pages, and you want to move to a different tool, you’re going to have some problems — archival data is stored within an independent data store, and it’s the tool that generates the pages.

However, lets say that you’re using a weblogging tool such as Blogger, and you want to move to another weblogging tool such as Movable Type — is this doable? Sure, and the Movable Type folks provide detailed instructions on how to do this. In fact, there are people from my weblogger co-op — Reading & WritingSiblog, and Baker’s Dozin’ — who have moved from Blogger to MT recently.

However, moving the data between tools isn’t the real challenge — it’s all those links that you leave behind that cause the pain. This is made more complicated if you’re moving from a hosted environment, to your own domain.

 

The Link you lose

 

A lot of webloggers started their weblogging career out at in a hosted environment, such as Blogger’s blogspot. The advantages to this are that there is no issues of tool installation, and you don’t have to go through the hassle of finding a web site, supporting it, and so on. However, there’s a major disadvantage to hosted weblogs — when you move, your address changes, and unlike the post office, there are no little cardboard cards you send to let everyone know you’ve moved.

(Yet.)

When you have a weblog at an address such as burningbird.blogspot.com, you don’t own the primary domain, though you own the content. If you move off of Blogger, or of you move to your own server, your URL for your weblog won’t be the same. Lately, with a flurry of acitivity among weblogging tools, more and more webloggers are moving and more and more webloggers are running into the problem of lost addresses because the domain name changes for their weblogs.

For Blogger, moving to another location is an inconvenience, but it’s not impossible — you just put a link at your old weblog telling people where to go for the new one. When Mike Golby moved from blogspot to the Wayward Weblogger co-op, he used the following to let people know he moved:

 

Cheers Y’all….I’m Goin’ Away

I’m shacking up with Shelley

 

Now, contrary to what this sounds, Mike isn’t snuggled up next to me at the moment — what the words overlayed was a link to his new location on the co-op server. Still, it is a great way to point out that you’ve moved locations.

Of course, though people can still find you, there are other problems associated with this type of move. For instance, those who have you listed on their blogroll have to change their links. Any links from the buzz sheets such as Technorati won’t know where you are, and neither will webbots such as the Google Bot. You’ll exist in limbo for a time — one foot in the old home, one foot in the new — until the change propagates through known space.

It’s a hassle, but you’re not lost. This is good. But what happens if your weblog is hosted, and for some reason or another — it just gets yanked?

 

Cut Adrift

 

This happened recently with a well-known weblogger, John Robb. When John left his old employer, Userland, his Userland-hosted weblog was literally yanked from the server. No one knew where he was; no one knew how to find him. It took a combination of emails and links and word of mouth among the webloggers before we re-discovered him, and I imagine that he’s still listed as “missing in action” in more than one blogroll.

John wrote about this and added the now fairly well-known line:

 

NEVER (under any circumstances) publish a weblog to a domain that you don’t control.

 

Radio Free Blogistan christened this Robb’s Law.

Never host your weblog on a site where you don’t control the domain name. Webloggers are taking this to heart and moving their sites to doman names they controlled, moving out of hosted envinronments, if necessary. Liz Lawley recently moved her weblog, Mama’s Musings to its own domain, facing some unique challenges along the way (which we’ll cover in Part 2). Originally the site was hosted on her University’s server, and though we can assume some permanence with the location — the URL is not under her control. This was also a major factor in AKMA starting up the Desseminary domain name.

Tool makers are hearing this, or should be. When the new TypePad hosted environment released, the Six Apart company took this to heart and are building in domain name pointer support for their sites. With this, even though the weblogs are hosted in a controlled tool-driven environment, the pages are still under your domain name. This is going to be the next big trend with all hosted environments, enough so to lead me to create my own law:

 

Never publish a weblog within a hosted environment whereby the host doesn’t provide support for domain name pointers. And never brush your teeth with a salmon backbone.

 

 

But that’s not the whole problem…

 

Of course, if you have your own domain, you can move your weblog between hosts and servers and people will never lose track of you. Still, this is only part of the problem — the other is that pesky, persistent, permalink. If during a move, either to a different host or tool or archival format, your permalink structure changes, there is going to be a major disconnect between the old and the new.

Even though you’ve moved on to other things, any links to your old weblogging pages will either go to your old site, or go into that well-known void, the terror of Web surfers everywhere — the 404, Page Not Found. So what can you do, besides leaving broken links strewn in your path, like leaves in the Fall?

End of Part 1.