|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Radio's Outliner: How to write an HTML page in the outliner.  News.Com interviews the Brains Behind Kazaa. Jon Udell: "As blogspace evolves all around us, new forms of writing appear." Cydney Gillis: Did Gates lie? AP: "Gates argued that the penalties would keep Microsoft from releasing timely security updates." Jacob Reider is looking for benevolence in business.  Boy the Google API has stimulated a lot of discussion on the XML developer mail lists. Rob McNair-Huff, editor of MacNet Journal, has a public outline of Mac OS X apps by category that tracks the development of each product. This is beyond what the tech pubs used to do. They'd publish snapshots of markets, that were useful, but didn't change over time. This is very cool.  It may be time to decide how to display OPML docs in HTML browsers. Of course I'd rather it work in decentralized fashion, with rendering happening on the local machine. I don't want to put up a free centralized Web app. Can it be done with XSLT? Another possibility is doing it in Radio, but of course that would only work in desktop apps that clone our /system/pages structure (which is actually happening). I want this because there's a mostly invisible world of frequently updating outlines, following the pattern of the changes.xml file on weblogs.com. If we had a consistent way to render OPML in HTML I could put this in a box on weblogs.com. Recently updated outlines. Weird? When you see it, it's quite natural. Scott Johnson: "Write a renderer in PHP." Phillip Pearson: "Why not just render them when they're generated?" Truth is as strange as fiction. Brent Simmons found an outliner in AppleWorks. Apparently it's a pretty good one. Martin Traumwind has a graphic Java browser for Google relationships. 4/2399: "Airport security has stopped hijacking." Ooops. Matt Goyer: "It even works in Opera.. Damn I'm good!" Howard's Zope Notes: "Thanks Guido!" Kevin Stewart: "Microsoft already 'supports' modular versions of Windows with Windows CE and Windows NT Embedded. They allowed a form of Chinese Menu construction of those OSes. Which supports my vote that Gates is misleading the court. Just my $0.02." The battle for the Web continues  Good morning. A small flood of mail about yesterday's Microsoft survey. Some comments follow. When I read the account of Gates' testimony yesterday I dashed off an email to people at Microsoft who I consider friends. I'm still willing to help Microsoft, but first we have to deal with the mess. Here are some facts. 1. MS has the dominant Web browser. 2. They got there illegally. They were convicted. 3. We're in the penalty phase now. My belief: The conviction was the correct result. Now they must come up with a penalty that is appropriate, that will prevent Microsoft and future would-be Microsofts from using a monopoly in one technology to gain a monopoly in another. To allow juggernauts like Netscape a little breathing room to learn and make mistakes before they have to deal with a monopoly that acts willfully to cut off their air supply. To make Microsoft a better platform vendor, with more developers, with more new ideas being tried out. To help developers and their investors trust the market, without illegal and unethical interference from Microsoft. On strictly pragmatic terms, if Microsoft isn't lying when it says it wants developers for its new platform, they should welcome the opportunity to get its developer relations back on track. Yesterday's survey says that at least people who read Scripting News, many of whom are developers, don't trust them. You can try to rationalize it any way you want, but a majority said clearly that they believe Gates lied about something that is central to the issues at hand. Arguing with me is pointless. The problem is deep. A major correction now is something that a Microsoft that's thinking long-term should welcome. Microsoft clearly doesn't have any vision for the Web other than owning and controlling and freezing it. As Web developers, it was our air supply that Microsoft cut off. The correct solution is to decouple the Web from Microsoft in a permanent and non-revokable way. It should be done in a way that causes the least possible disruption of service for users, while creating the maximum possibility for competition. For Microsoft to argue fairness is ridiculous. They are not qualified to argue about fairness. 7/12/01: Restoring competition to the browser market. |
 
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
© Copyright 1997-2005 Dave Winer. The picture at the top of the page may change from time to time. Previous graphics are archived. Previous/Next |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
