BurningbirdCreated my first formal Drupal patch, providing an XHTML content type to the Atom module. Once I walked through the module, and the procedure to apply a patch, it really wasn’t all that difficult to both create the patch, and submit it for review. And the feed validates, though with a warning because of the object element in the last post.
I was surprised at how easy it was to modify the administration form for the module— a couple of lines of code, and that’s it.
Michael Bernstein sent me a chain of links that went from pyjamas to the pyjamas sample page on the canvas element to the canvas tutorial at Mozilla to the Mozilla animations demo page to this charming use of the canvas element.
The example just referenced doesn’t use Flash. It does use one of the elements in the proposed HTML 5, input of which is being currently sought by at WaSP, 456 Berea Street and elsewhere.
This is addition to the new effort to reactivate the HTML effort in order to act as a bridge between the older HTML specifications and the newer XHTML efforts currently underway at the W3C.
Not to mention Adobe’s open sourcing it’s ActionScript virtual engine into the Mozilla effort, in a project called Tamarin.
So what do I think of all of this? I think it’s exciting, I love the canvas element and I’m interested in many of these other innovations, it’s good to revisit HTML, but I wouldn’t be me if I also didn’t note concerns: HTML element bloat; confusion as to direction of standards and where people should be heading; vastly incompatible web pages as browsers desperately try to keep up with all the changes; frustrated web page developers and designers also trying to keep up with changes; and a growing dominance of Mozilla/Adobe in regards to JavaScript and whether this could lead to a non-neutral ECMAScript 4.x, which does no one any good.
Still, it is nice to feel excited about web tech again. I’m not sending up fireworks, but I am pulling the end off of a Christmas cracker in celebration. Now, excuse me as I go push around that cute little blob.
Update Michael also sent me a note about this weblogger, Joshua Ellis who has started a micropatronage drive to travel to Africa. Joe Clark, from the last post. also mentions him as an example of successful micropatronage. I don’t know him from Adam, but I do know Michael and Joe, so am passing on the link to the weblog. It’s the FOAFy thing to do.
Besides: I want to go to Australia … someday…
Recovered from the Wayback Machine.
I apologize for late replies to emails and such. I’ve not been checking either email or weblog posts that frequently lately, and will only be doing so erratically for the next couple of months. If I don’t reply, don’t think me rude. Well, don’t think me rude only because I’m not replying right away.
As mentioned in the last post, I’ve had a heck of a time trying to figure out what I want from my new sites. The trend now, especially with tech sites is white or gray or gradient backgrounds, centered content, no or minimum graphics, and ads. It’s all very purposeful, professional, but there’s not a bean of personality in most of it.
I don’t think returning to the days of yore when we had paisley backgrounds and bright blue fonts is necessarily the way to go, but I wonder sometimes at the parsimonious nature of web sites–especially ones related to technology. True, we don’t want to load the sites down with graphics, but we all dump in photos from Flickr and videos from YouTube, so I don’t think bandwidth is the consideration. It’s as if we’re afraid that adding our personality to the page lessens its value, which is a hell of a thing.
Regardless, I do want the new sites to project a level of competency along with the personality, and therein becomes the challenge. I just couldn’t come up with a general theme to drive out the sites, not until this last week.
I’ve taken up book binding as a hobby again. I really can’t spare the time, but I find it helps with stress, and I need something other than work on tech, work on book, work on weblog, shuffle out for a walk and a pic, and repeat. I need something to do with my hands, and I find it wonderfully soothing to touch the many different hand pressed papers; to enjoy the rich colors and the infinite variety of patterns and forms.
This has, in turn, acted as inspiration for the design of the new sites, each of which will celebrate a specific form of craft: such as batik, bookbinding, engraving, stained glass, and the delicate enamel and metal popular in the Art Deco period. I like the idea of writing about modern technology in a site whose design is inspired by a textile method as old as time. At a minimum, it’s a fun challenge and a way of growing my design skills, slight as they are.
Speaking of crafts, O’Reilly recently started a new magazine and site, Craft as companion to its Make magazine. One reason given is to attract a female demographic, which made me wince at the stereotyping. I think, though, if the site dumps the obvious pink lettering and doesn’t completely focus on female centric projects, it can successfully attract both men and women.
The whole concept of ‘craft’ encompasses both culture as well as artifact and goes beyond that which was taught in home ec or shop. Any person who has seen a person lovingly oil a hand carved cherrywood table, spin a pottery vase, create a magnificent mosaic of glass–or bind a book–understands what I mean when I say craft. Many people would disdain to call themselves ‘artist’, preferring the more solid craftswoman or craftsman. Not all boys want to build robots to scare the dogs, and not all girls want to knit mittens, but both sexes can take pride in their skill working on a craft, whatever that craft is.
Book binding, batik, wood carving, embroidery, weaving, engraving and metal work, and so on–there is nothing in any of this that’s inherently unique to any specific sex, though there are gender specific practices. In Jakarta, for instance, using a pattern tool or cap in batiking is traditionally done by men, while batiking by hand is traditionally done by women. Why this difference, I don’t know, but it is an interesting question. Therein lies the point: a site that’s focused on attracting both men and women leads to such questions, which in turn generates discussion and understanding, which can lead, someday, to a lessening of such gender-based boundaries and stereotypes.
O’Reilly can do much to ensure a good audience of both men and women in Craft–as long as the company remembers the long history and legacy associated with the word ‘craft’, and doesn’t focus only on knitted iPod holders and making Halloween decorations out of tampons, (though kudos for such imaginative use of every day material).
Recovered from the Wayback Machine.
From OpenAjax update:
With each member company having one vote, OpenAjax Alliance elected its inaugural 7-member Steering Committee: Dojo Foundation (SitePen), Eclipse Foundation, IBM, Nexaweb, Tibco, Zend and Zimbra. The individuals that represent these member companies on the Steering Committee are: Alex Ruseel (Dojo/SitePen), Mike Milinkovich, David Boloker(IBM), Coach Wei (Nexaweb), Kevin Hakman (Tibco), Mike Pinette (Zend) and Scott Dietzen (Zimbra).
In my opinion, this is a well balanced committee that would give OpenAjax Alliance the right leadership and guideline to make it successful.
No this isn’t. You have no women, you have no expert on accessibility, you’re too heavily weighted to Java, you have little representation outside of commercial interests, you have no representation from leaders in the fields related to the individual components of the technology, you mentioned confidentiality agreement in the first paragraph, which is counter to any movement that begins with “Open”, I can’t tell for sure, but it doesn’t look like you have anyone from outside the States, and more importantly, you have no critics: people who provide the necessary ballast when the balloons get too high.
What’s Ajaxian for ‘echo chamber’?
Recovered from the Wayback Machine.
Privacy issues, nothing: wait until you see what developers really think about their users.
Kottke has a listing of searches on Google’s new code search feature. What happens when you mix data mining and programmer’s deepest darkest secrets, locked away in comments not meant to be seen? Well, I don’t know about how useful the results, but it’s entertaining as hell. (She says after first frantically searching to see if any of her secrets are included–thank goodness for developing in scripting languages such as JavaScript and PHP, where everything is out in the open.)
Among some of the discoveries that Kottke details are usernames and passwords, and proprietary and confidential code. That’s not funny. What is funny is searching on terms such as stupid users, though to be fair, stupid programmer is also entertaining. My personal favorites are:
…and that classic: piece of shit
I feel like the Google’s code search is introducing the non-tech world to a newly discovered tribe: with our own hidden language and bizarre rituals and customs.
I am called Shelley, and I’ll be your native guide.
update And Google code search is really broken, too. I guess maybe the developers were tired.