SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 97 of 97
  1. #76
    Hibernator YuriKolovsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malaga, Spain
    Posts
    1,072
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by w3dx View Post
    Just wondering what you mean by "proper code wrapping"? (Sorry, I may have missed it if mentioned earlier.)
    Oh, its the the
    Code HTML4Strict:
    /*<![CDATA[*/
     
     /*]]>*/
    Wrapping for the css that was seen in scout1idf's entry

    its the ultra proper way to add embedded css, that will comment it out for any browser that does not support CSS, while I pointed out on how much background compatibility is actually feasible depends purely on your target audience.

  2. #77
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by YuriKolovsky View Post
    The only time I see judging without cracks is when some mathematical problem is solved, because you can't argue with maths.
    Hmmm... Really?!


    But seriously, math is a relative science. You start with suppositions based on observations made in a given reference system. Once you change this subjective reference system, all math theory goes to drain.

    The numbers theory is proof of that. In school you learn the that the natural numbers set is {0,1, ..., ∞}. You use it as an axiom. You don't question that.

    When you go to faculty, you learn that there is a whole complex theory proving how you start with 0, use a unit to get 1, and how the unit adding provides a way to create this natural number set. It's not taken for granted anymore. It's proven. But still, only using a given reference system.

    Isn't this something!
    What do you know, math has cracks too!

  3. #78
    Hibernator YuriKolovsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malaga, Spain
    Posts
    1,072
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:

    I disagree completely, and your wording has cracks, "math is based on observations made in a given reference system", once you change the reference system, you get more math, it never goes to drain, how could you even suggest that!
    your not a mathematically minded person after all!

    you change the rules, and you get different but correct results

  4. #79
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You shouldn't disagree completely.

    Math exists because is invented. Based on a given reference system, observations made on that particular reference system, and extrapolations made starting from those observations.

    Math is fragile and relative. The/Some rules applied in math are strict, yes. But the whole system is unstable. If you can understand that, you know more, you don't know less.

    You're saying math is unique like a database. I agree. But I say math is far from being the data warehouse it should be to cover all the reference systems possible. Reaching that potential would change math, to the point of not being math anymore, much like a data warehouse is not a database.

    Once you change the reference system, the math is not math anymore, is something else completely.

    I believe though that what you mean is that when you change something smaller, parameters, variables, then you get more math.

  5. #80
    Hibernator YuriKolovsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malaga, Spain
    Posts
    1,072
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:


    Whether I'm using A's or B's or X's or 1's or base 10 or base X or any other underlying system, it's still maths.

  6. #81
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "base 10" or "base X" are parameters in the same reference system. The same axioms (initial observations) are the base here for the same reference system.

    And these axioms, these observations, are only statistically proven correct. Meaning there is margin for error. Making math relative.

    Probably you have a case of "not seeing the forest because of the trees". You have dealt with so many theorems proof, you start to believe math is not relative. You need to go back to those axioms (unproven grounds, statically correct being sufficient enough) on which the theorems stand. Take those away, and all the math theory falls down like a House of Cards.

  7. #82
    Hibernator YuriKolovsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malaga, Spain
    Posts
    1,072
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:

    You are saying my vision is clouded while your's is clear?
    That I am wrong while you are right?
    That there can't be any different but still correct interpretation of math other than yours?

    Take those away, and all the math theory falls down like a House of Cards
    Well, yeah, a building can't stand on ground without a base. Whats the point being made here?

  8. #83
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm saying you start dancing around the bush the moment it gets deeper. Ogre here talking. And to think of it, it all started innocent: math has no cracks.

    The points made here:

    - that ground, on which that base is put, belongs to a certain reference system.

    - the axioms are not carved in stone.

    - the math is a relative science, even more, restricted to a certain reference system.

    Take the axioms - proven correct only statistical - away. You can do that, since statistic is relative also.

    You have no foundation for math.

    Put the axioms back in. A relative ground. Axioms are known to be correct by statical proof only. You have now a relative foundation for math. Hence, math is relative.


    You'll notice I go green (forest, tree) while you go... buildings!

  9. #84
    Hibernator YuriKolovsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malaga, Spain
    Posts
    1,072
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:

    Math is relative, yet it has no cracks, same as a glass has no holes, yet particles pass through it

  10. #85
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    We're off to physics now!

    I must warn you, my brother-in-law knows physics! He is a PhD Physics. And he's really good at it. He's doing research for a big international private mining company. For real.




    Yeah, math has cracks. And, when everything else fails, they use the famous "reduction to absurdity" to patch them. (I hope I get the English term right?)

  11. #86
    Hibernator YuriKolovsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malaga, Spain
    Posts
    1,072
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:


    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post


    We're off to physics now!

    I must warn you, my brother-in-law knows physics! He has a PhD in Physics. And he's really good at it. He's doing research for a big private mining company. For real.

    haha, no, were still talking about the social consequences and interpretations of specific rules according to the unique ways people see things.

    even though I love physics, and I'm naturally good at it, I'm no where near any professional level.

    also, why warn me? is your brothers extra knowledge going to make you right? and then end the conversation while satisfying your ego? (ego is not a bad thing)
    It's not about who is right or who is wrong, it's about the fact that people see things differently and are bound to errors due to their own personality maintenance.

    I only pointed out that math can't be argued with, because it's organizational and rules level is highly superior to that of interpreted language, which ends in something funny now and then, for example when there is some competition, and the jury say the person failed, but later find out that it was them who were wrong, there is no biased opinion of right or wrong. This can't happen with creative contests for example.



  12. #87
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    449
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by YuriKolovsky View Post
    depends on what is meant by a hack, mediocre? workaround? cut-up? Yes, it is a hack in terms of working around the images restriction, but there was no images restriction
    Yes, I mean workaround.

  13. #88
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,809
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by YuriKolovsky View Post
    support for xhtml is low
    the only browsers that do not support xhtml are IE8, IE7, and IE6.

    Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Opera, and IE9 all support xhtml.

    I suppose that because xhtml doesn't work at all in browsers that don't support it then around 70% of users supporting it can still be considered to be low.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  14. #89
    Hibernator YuriKolovsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malaga, Spain
    Posts
    1,072
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    the only browsers that do not support xhtml are IE8, IE7, and IE6.

    Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Opera, and IE9 all support xhtml.

    I suppose that because xhtml doesn't work at all in browsers that don't support it then around 70% of users supporting it can still be considered to be low.
    I suppose your right, but IE's share is a bit larger than estimated by the w3c, I guess google has the best usage estimates.

    Still the situation for actually requiring proper xhtml has been low, where html4 was sufficient, and I would rather move to html5 now that it is available and supported by all major browsers (and IE with some scripting help).

  15. #90
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,809
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by YuriKolovsky View Post
    I would rather move to html5 now that it is available and supported by all major browsers (and IE with some scripting help).
    HTML 5 isn't even finished yet so no browser can support it since it doesn't yet exist as a standard for them to support. By the time HTML5 is a standard XHTML will be well established and so XHTML5 will be what a lot of people move to once the browsers actually do support the standard (once there is a standard to support).
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  16. #91
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    449
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    HTML is antiquated... It's RDF and SPARQL for me... I'm done designing for humans.

  17. #92
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As far as I'm concerned, the future of web dev is SVG.

    It should have been so since 2004-2005. There was no support then like now. And it will continue to get better and make SVG the perfect solution for flexible layouts, to replace clumsy bitmap images (that get in the way of flexible), for zoom issues, for different media type issues.

    There were no good editors then. There are a few now. Hand coding your pages will die, something like DW, but better, only this time for SVG, will emerge.

    The history will repeat it self like it was the case with desktop programming and the IDEs taking the productivity up and onward.

    All that because HTML5, Fred, W3C, WHATWG, & Comp aren't converging. And, at one point, they will all be dropped. And a converging point, like SVG, says me, will appease. SVG means XML, means scalable graphics. The two things neither HTML nor Silverlight/Flash/Air provide at the same time: text markup and better graphics.

    But it will probably be renamed and rebranded. From SVG to SVGML. Something like that.

  18. #93
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    449
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    As far as I'm concerned, the future of web dev is SVG.
    I disagree entirely... that's based on the opinion that the power of the web is in distinct interfaces.

    In my opinion, nterface disparity isn't a good thing - it's a problem!!! SVG enhances that problem by making it possible for people to do virtually anything in a website... might as well go back to Flash!!!

    In my opinion, the power of the web is data. Facebook is still facebook in an iPhone app, right? Twitter is still twitter? An RSS feed of your FB wall still updates you in the same manner and provides you plenty of useful info.

    This is all because the data is what's really important to us... memorizing various interfaces to get important data is just confusing. RDF and SPARQL are a unique set of technologies that propose to turn the entire web into a database.

    This means that we can have singular points of contact with the web - a singular interface that's familiar and powerful to collect all the data that's important to us, and present it in a fashion that's easily understood and interfaced with.

    IMO, that's the future of the web - at least much of the web. Imagine the ability to aggregate everything that's important to you online, filter it with highly configurable rules, and present it in a single interface for you to easily absorb in one shot... your life would be so much more efficient!!!

    Theoretically, you could do something like that in your email client (e.g. Outlook), where you get your FB feed, bank statements, news updates, etc. directly in-line with your email, and instead of opening an email from these services that links you to their websites, the message in your inbox IS the data from the website. Pretty awesome concept... I can't wait to see it in action!!!


  19. #94
    SitePoint Member w3dx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    England
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    But, have you looked at the mark up sources? Pretty much... everybody used XHTML.

    My gosh, you're right! I don't know if there are enough users left to fill the first three places, that used HTML. Pure HTML!
    I used HTML - "Pure HTML!"

    Quote Originally Posted by YuriKolovsky View Post
    Oh, its the the
    Code HTML4Strict:
    /*<![CDATA[*/
     
    /*]]>*/
    Wrapping for the css that was seen in scout1idf's entry

    its the ultra proper way to add embedded css, that will comment it out for any browser that does not support CSS, while I pointed out on how much background compatibility is actually feasible depends purely on your target audience.
    Ah OK thanks, I'm with you now as regards "proper code wrapping". Although this does not "comment it out for any browser that does not support CSS". It comments out the CDATA section markers for when the page is served as text/html.

    Strictly speaking, however, I don't think the CDATA sections are actually required in scout1idf's entry, or several of the other entries for that matter (if served as application/xhtml+xml) since the embedded CSS does not contain any character sequences that require escaping. Namely <, &, ]]> OR --. I'm not saying it's not good practise though.

  20. #95
    SitePoint Member w3dx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    England
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by transio View Post
    In my opinion, nterface disparity isn't a good thing - it's a problem!!! SVG enhances that problem....

    In my opinion, the power of the web is data.
    I would agree. SVG is a tool that should be used appropriately like anything else. The web has always been about the transference of information.

  21. #96
    Hibernator YuriKolovsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malaga, Spain
    Posts
    1,072
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by transio View Post
    HTML is antiquated... It's RDF and SPARQL for me
    Whats RDF and SPARQL? how does it make my life easier?

  22. #97
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by transio View Post
    I disagree entirely... that's based on the opinion that the power of the web is in distinct interfaces.
    Not quite.

    SVG asks for a XHTML/XML environment. Which means namespaces also.

    The way you are used to see it now is by having SVG inside XHTML. Namespaces makes it OK to use XHTML inside SVG.

    The revolutionary desktop IDEs provided just that for the developers: code inside interface. As opposed to interface inside code.

    You have interface inside code now, with HTML/XHTML etcetera. Using SVG as a "wrapper" for all your code, while SVG is taking care of your interface is the closest to the desktop IDEs concept I'm talking. Which would replace DW, for example. And we know DW is having a success story. Just that it's not quite there yet.

    Flash/Silverlight were/are having an audience precisely because of this concept, of code inside interface. Ignoring their success story doesn't prove anything.

    Furthermore, you talk about XML. That's RDF for you. It's not something new, it's just a microformat.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •