Especially at the atrocious lunch buffet at the W3C Technical Plenary?
“Aren’t you Tim Berners-Lee?” I asked the man with no nametag who was clearly the inventor of the Web.
He “humorously” denied it, saying he’s actually Tom’s brother.
“I just wanted to thank you for… existing,” I said. But he interrupted my punchline by saying “Oh, you’re not allowed to do that!” and waving me off and backing away.
“You missed my punchline,” I told him.
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.28 13:41. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/28/tbl/
All is forgiven.
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.23 21:11. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/23/milagro/
…for the W3C Technical Plenary, inter alia, until next Wednesday.
Approved persons may meet me.
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.23 21:10. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/23/bos/
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.21 01:03. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/21/springfieldisforgayloversofmarriage/
Simple: A great deal of the “content” it indexes – chiefly video, but also many newspapers and research citations – could be displayed only if certain rights or payments had been worked out. Owning its own browser, particularly one that works on all widely-used platforms, eases the engineering exercise of such rights/permissions/micropayment scheme.
Hence Google Firefox is quite possibly about rights and payments (that is, digital rights management) rather than commitment to open source or Web standards. (Google has no commitment to Web standards whatsoever.)
In the future, if you wanted
then you might have to use their browser.
For extra credit, ponder the question: Will you be able to watch that video with captions and audio descriptions?
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.20 15:56. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/20/googlebrowser/
Jutta Kleinschmidt (no relation) races past, or indeed through, a herd of cattle who look painted in place, almost runic.
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.18 14:16. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/18/runic/
And no more shitty subtitle fonts, either.
Well, they will admittedly remain shitty for a while, but the end of shittiness is nigh, for I have launched a project that will commission and design and then test a series of fonts custom-engineered for the demands of reading captions and subtitles. This is for real.
Read the new site, Screenfont.ca. If it looks like someone competent actually designed it, that is because someone competent actually did – my esteemed colleague Antonio Cavedoni (op. cit.).
So read and learn and, if you’re a type designer, help us out. For everybody else? Well, my advice is simple: For the love of God stop using Arial.
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.16 20:42. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/16/screenfont/
As seen in my absolute fave periodicals, Expressen and Aftonbladet.
Which one of these would you rather wake up to?
Now reckon the chilling fact that his wife doesn’t have to choose.
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.15 19:23. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/15/alfredsson/
How do Mac OS X browsers handle three essential features (on top of the requisite standards compliance): Tabs, crash or quit protection, and print preview?
| Browser | New tab | Move from tab to tab | Close tab and you go… | Save browser state? | Print preview? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camino | Command-T | Option-Command- leftarrow/-rightarrow |
To next tab | No | No |
| Firefox, Mozilla | Command-T | Ctrl- PgUp/-PgDn (along with Fn key on PowerBooks) |
To next tab | No | No |
| IE5 | No tabs | No | Yes | ||
| OmniWeb | Command-T | Command- uparrow/-downarrow |
To next tab | Yes | No |
| Opera | Command-N | (Shift-)F6 | To previous tab | Yes | Yes |
| Safari | Command-T | Shift-Command- leftarrow/-rightarrow |
To next tab | No | No |
| Shiira | Command-T | Shift-Command- leftarrow/-rightarrow |
To previous selected tab | No | No |
Evidently, then, no single browser gives me everything I want. If Opera fixes its keystroke and tab behaviour, among other defects, it may win out.
The foregoing posting appeared on Joe Clark’s personal Weblog on 2005.02.13 16:30. This presentation was designed for printing and omits components that make sense only onscreen. The permanent link is: https://blog.fawny.org/2005/02/13/browsers/