Older blog entries for LotR (starting at number 16)

13 Jul 2002 (updated 13 Jul 2002 at 18:39 UTC) »

I really wonder why wikis are so popular. Why would you want to make your readers think YourSpaceBarIsBroken, or that YouHaveParkinson so YourPinkyKeepsHittingThatDamnShiftKeyByAccident?

Yes, I've heard the stories about it making creating content super-easy. But is that really worth making your readers suffer when reading your material? People have enough problems reading properly anyway.

And wouldn't a slightly more restrictive way of creating content make you pay more attention to what you're doing, and so hopefully help with its quality?

On a slightly related note, I ran the advogato main page through the HTML Validation Service, and it came up with the following error, proving that input validation is A Good Thing(tm):

    * Line 85, column 52:

It is now <a href=http://www.opencm.org/>released</a> and usable! ^ Error: end tag for element "A" which is not open; try removing the end tag or check for improper nesting of elements

fxn: actually, I don't think the diary ratings will be more accurate (accuracy from my point of view of course), since the confidence you have in other people's ratings is based on the already (highly) inaccurate certification system. For it to really have a chance to be accurate, there'd need to be an accompanying rating system to rate how well you think other people are at certifying/rating people.

The good news (IMHO) is that this rating system at least allows you to filter out the trolls that don't get caught by the certification trust metric

Malx: My local mod_virgule lets you give diary entries a topic. If this topic matches a project name, the entry gets added to the project page in recentlog style. I'm biased of course, but I think this is a much nicer way of getting the functionality you want than the way you suggested.

My patch isn't completely ready yet though, which is why I haven't submitted it to virgule-dev yet. The biggest problem is how to let people specify the topic unobtrusively. For now it is a seperate text entry on the diary entry form, but this means you get only one topic per diary entry. But people seem to be aggregating several topics in one entry (which is very understandable, since you only get one entry in the recentlog).

bagder, your statistics and the comments you base on them certainly prove to me that you can use statistics to back up any point you like :)

In that one year, there are suddenly 746 extra people with a journeyer status, while at the start there were only 313 apprentices. It could be that lots of experienced people hadn't bothered yet to join Advogato, but if you look at the recent joins list, this seems highly unlikely.

So yes, I do believe there is cert-inflation (also because I've become a master, a status I certainly haven't earned). Still, I'm not sure if it is really a bad thing. We certainly shouldn't attach much real value to these certifications, and the inflation certainly helps everyones ego :)

That ego thing is a good reason not to start with negative certifications I think. It might be interesting to have the status a person receives be based on a weighed average of the certs instead of on the higest one he gets from someone who is capable of actually giving that type of certification. Maybe raph will start experimenting with that if the diary certification is a success

Bah, lilo's diary is almost as bad as bytesplit's. We need a diary-writing trust metric!

So, I polished up my diary.xsl stylesheet a bit, and thought I'd share it with the world. (with accompanying xml file for month names)

if you add the following to the top of your downloaded xml advogato diary, you can get mozilla to present it to you as html.

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="diary.xsl"?>

(and thanks to kirillov for reminding me I had a diary.xsl :)

ianmacd seems to think Ruby's missing_method is a unique feature. I think it's more likely it was borrowed from Perl:

#!/usr/bin/perl

sub main::AUTOLOAD { my ($method, $data, %attrs) = ($AUTOLOAD, @_); my ($tag) = $method =~ /.*::(\w+)/g; my $attr_str; foreach my $key (keys %attrs) { $attr_str .= sprintf (" %s='%s'", $attrs{$key}); } return sprintf ("<%s%s>%s</%s>", $tag, $attr_str, $data, $tag); }

print &a ('Google', href => 'http://www.google.com'), "\n"; print &ul(&li('item1') . &li('item2') . &li('item3')), "\n";

Of course, TMTOWTDI, and ianmacd already mentions CGI.pm, which does the same thing, only more robustly.

Another module is quite useful if you want to edit your html tree at some point after creating it, HTML::Element. An example of how to create a tree with it, and print it:

use HTML::Element;

my $foo = HTML::Element->new_from_lol ( ['p', ['a', {href => 'http://www.google.com'}, 'Google' ], ['ul', map ['li', $_], qw(item1 item2 item3) ], ], );

print $foo->as_HTML;

Posted through the XML-RPC interface from Perl

grr. I *HATE* stupid bugs caused by mindless copy-n-paste "coding"

Stop scaring us, mtearle

7 older entries...

New Advogato Features

New HTML Parser: The long-awaited libxml2 based HTML parser code is live. It needs further work but already handles most markup better than the original parser.

Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.

If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!