# Tuesday, 13 July 2004

Hooray - Zeepe: is OK

Lots of email flew around, and Dave eventually seemed to buy in to the idea of using semi-pseudo namespaces. I thought this meant that he’d require something like xmlns:apple="http://www.apple.com/2004/xhtml-extended/" on the root element and then use <apple:dashboard>. Of course it wouldn’t really be a namespace when it was being used in HTML, but it would be an OK tag name and wouldn’t cause any software heartburn. And when it was in XHTML, it would really be a namespace and everything would be fine. [via ongoing · Extending HTML, Again]

Oh this is all such fun! Tim lays into Ian and says (by implication) what Zeepe is doing is fine (xmlns:zeepe="http://www.zeepe.com"), and what Apple (or Dave) originally proposed to do was fine - glad to see a consensus emerging!. (Note, they are not discussing Zeepe, but Dashboard, but Zeepe does similar things to Dashboard, but on Windows).

#    Comments [0] |

HTML is dead

Apple could have put forward their proposals, discussed them, got concensus, and everyone would have thought they were just planning these features for the Web Application space. [via Hixie's Natural Log]

Don't touch HTML, or if you want to, tell some one about what you want to do and lie about why. Funny old world, you can see why MS is not interested [anymore].

The best from Ian is this:

For specific features like these, it doesn't take long to get consensus; they are small features whose basic design can be agreed reasonably quickly.

All depends on your definition of 'reasonable' I suppose and given how long the WHAT group have been discussing things and it is not, to my understanding, a consensual environment (you get to rant, Ian gets to decide) I don't really see how it helps.

Still, the bottom line is we should not claim that Zeepe displays HTML because while it can, it can sometimes also display something else - though they are not at all sure what that something else is. .... <sigh>

#    Comments [1] |
# Friday, 09 July 2004

How to find out which process is locking a DLL

How to find out which process is locking a DLL.  ...  Just type: tasklist /m thelocked.dll and it will return all processes that have loaded that DLL! [via WinClient]

Very useful.

#    Comments [0] |

Good job I used zeepe:

Hyatt and the Safarians look like they’re willing to try a sensible semi-pseudo-namespaced approach [via ongoing · How To Grow HTML]

Apple writes a little program to enable development of widgets. They thought 'we could create yet another mark-up language', or, 'we could use html and add some bits, hey everyone will know this is just for use in this application'.

Oh no, no, no. World + dog descends - how dare you polute html, how dare you play with a standard, how dare you.... oh gawd it goes on and on.

Just to show how stupid and ignorant I am, everyone would be happy if this stuff had been discussed at a standards group or even just a group (like WHAT). Weird. Even weirder, putting this:

<!DOCTYPE html SYSTEM "http://www.whatwg.org/dtd/2004/whatml-10.dtd">

At the top of the file would have made it all OK because then Eric would have known that he wasn't looking at real html.

These people would seriously freak-out if they ever looked at zeepe. Or perhaps they wouldn't, all the 'extensions' are in the zeepe: namespace.

On a different tack, I note that Apple has added <canvas> (or <apple:canvas>). This is an idea I've toyed with for quite a while but never came up with the application idea that absolutely demanded it.

#    Comments [0] |
# Thursday, 08 July 2004

XP SP2 and web sites

Fine-Tune Your Web Site for Windows XP Service Pack 2.  Make your Web site work well with the new security features in Windows XP SP2 that affect ActiveX controls, file downloads, pop-up windows, and more. [via MSDN Just Published]

I should think it is getting near to it being a requirement that your site plays well with SP2 and hopefully these documents are describing final functionality.

#    Comments [0] |
# Wednesday, 07 July 2004

Windows is a pain at times - but whose fault is it?

In writing the IP Address Widget (Zeepe sample), I decided to take the opportunity to look at WMI (looking beyond the initial widget it might enable looking at the IP addressing on any machine). Anyway, what the widget wants to know is a) what are the available IP connections and b) what type are they (ethernet, wireless etc).

The WMI classes Win32_NetworkAdapter and Win32_NetworkAdapterConfiguration seemed appropriate. The latter has IPEnabled and IPAddress properties so one can determine the active adapaters and their ip address. The former has the property AdapterType, described as Network medium in use, sounds perfect but it has the caveat "This property may not be applicable to all types of network adapters listed within this class".

Oh well, lets move on and hope as usual - a few lines of script later (common, scripting together components just makes so much sense) and we are up and running. And on every machine I've tried it it comes back as Ethernet 802.3 for all adapters, even the wireless ones..... <sigh>. Perhaps the caveat should more accurately be written as "This property may occassioanly be correct for network adapters listed within this class" - has a higher level of warning don't you think.

Presumably this isn't a problem with Windows/WMI per se, but with the driver implementation. Who knows, all one knows is it doesn't do what one wants with any usable level of realiability.


#    Comments [0] |

Web pages as widgets

Over at the Zeepe samples page a couple of new widgets have appeared.

These are written as web pages, that means html + css + script.

They appear as full blown apps on your desktop - they don't have to appear within some other container (dashboard).

#    Comments [1] |
# Tuesday, 06 July 2004

In a land far far away

UK industry in 'dramatic' decline.  TUC warns that 750,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost since the Labour government came to power. [via BBC News | News Front Page | UK Edition]

Once upon a time that would have been a devastating headline for a Government (and once upon time I wouldn't have been wondering how you can warn about something that has already happened....)

#    Comments [0] |

You will almost certainly be able to do this in XAML, but in the meantime there is IE

dhteumeuleu.com needs no introduction, Gérard Ferrandez' superlative site stuffed full of the very best scripts ever to have graced the www. Go there and learn, my young Padawan.  [via evolve - links]

Needed an introduction to me - well worth a visit if you have some spare time just to play. Internet Explorer only.

#    Comments [0] |
# Monday, 05 July 2004

Review of BBC online.

"Philip Graf has produced a thorough and insightful review of the BBC's online service," they said.

Yes he has, and it is well worth reading if you are producing content in 'competition' (e.g. education) with the BBC.

"He is generally positive about the distinctiveness of its content and its impact on commercial competitors.  [via BBC NEWS | Entertainment | BBC websites must redraft remit]

Errrr, well, not quite generally. There is an excellent sequence on impact about how the jury is still out, case unproven either way and in particular that the BBC's expensive defence document by KPMG is of very dubious merit (particularly amusing given the new DGs comment that only the BBC can bridge the digitial divide is that he finds the BBC's contention that it has driven Internet access takeup completely unproven).

Where I really diverge from Graf is his contention that the BBC should provide a search service because otherwise we will all use an American one. What is unclear is whether he is proposing that the BBC 'brand' some other's technology (as they do now - was Google, now Inkotomi); given that the technology will almost certainly be American, what is the point, or is he saying that American search engine databases are skewed (they might be, but he should produce evidence). Or, the BBC should develop their own search engine technology - complete waste of license fee (there might be some mega technology sitting in a University research lab, but if there is they should commercialise it and take over the world - don't need the BBC to do that).

Whatever, the BBC most certainly needs to review its search offering - there are some fairly damaging statements in the report (to summarise, BBC search is biased).

#    Comments [0] |