Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Insider News
  4. css is 20(ish)

css is 20(ish)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Insider News
csscom
7 Posts 3 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • T Offline
    T Offline
    thewazz
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    https://dev.opera.com/articles/css-twenty-years-hakon/[^]

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • T thewazz

      https://dev.opera.com/articles/css-twenty-years-hakon/[^]

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Marc Clifton
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      It's funny, but I remember reading about CSS when I was about 30, and HTML before that, and I looked at what was going on in the nascent web world and thought how horrid all that markup looked -- arbitrary, confusing, contradictory, and most importantly, always always always lacking completeness, requiring the most arcane workarounds. I made a the semi-conscious decision to not get anywhere near that cesspool, and I've managed to too pretty damn well, finally plunging into Ruby on Rails (to which I now respond with a whole-hearted X| ) three years ago. It's been insightful, if only that the only insight of significance is that, after 20 years, what goes on in the web world is even more arbitrary, confusing, contradictory, and lacking completeness. I sometimes regret that semi-conscious decision, because I am now by now means an expert in all this cruff[^], but in other ways I am delighted to have only taken a glancing blow with regards to web "technologies" (and I use the term loosely.) Marc

      Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming

      R 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M Marc Clifton

        It's funny, but I remember reading about CSS when I was about 30, and HTML before that, and I looked at what was going on in the nascent web world and thought how horrid all that markup looked -- arbitrary, confusing, contradictory, and most importantly, always always always lacking completeness, requiring the most arcane workarounds. I made a the semi-conscious decision to not get anywhere near that cesspool, and I've managed to too pretty damn well, finally plunging into Ruby on Rails (to which I now respond with a whole-hearted X| ) three years ago. It's been insightful, if only that the only insight of significance is that, after 20 years, what goes on in the web world is even more arbitrary, confusing, contradictory, and lacking completeness. I sometimes regret that semi-conscious decision, because I am now by now means an expert in all this cruff[^], but in other ways I am delighted to have only taken a glancing blow with regards to web "technologies" (and I use the term loosely.) Marc

        Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming

        R Offline
        R Offline
        Rob Grainger
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        I agree whole-heartedly. It seems many people celebrate the state-of-the-art today only because they don't realise how much we've lost. This interview with Alan Kay brings a lot of this stuff into focus, including such gems as: "They have no idea where [their culture came from] — and the Internet was done so well that most people think of it as a natural resource like the Pacific Ocean, rather than something that was man-made. When was the last time a technology with a scale like that was so error-free? The Web, in comparison, is a joke. The Web was done by amateurs." Binstock: Still, you can't argue with the Web's success. Kay: I think you can. Binstock: Well, look at Wikipedia — it's a tremendous collaboration. Kay: It is, but go to the article on Logo, can you write and execute Logo programs? Are there examples? No. The Wikipedia people didn't even imagine that, in spite of the fact that they're on a computer. That's why I never use PowerPoint. PowerPoint is just simulated acetate overhead slides, and to me, that is a kind of a moral crime. That's why I always do, not just dynamic stuff when I give a talk, but I do stuff that I'm interacting with on-the-fly. Because that is what the computer is for. People who don't do that either don't understand that or don't respect it. There's lots more there, but I recommend more people read it to get some true perspective. And when he mentions Englebart, for example, look up what he did.

        "If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.

        M 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • R Rob Grainger

          I agree whole-heartedly. It seems many people celebrate the state-of-the-art today only because they don't realise how much we've lost. This interview with Alan Kay brings a lot of this stuff into focus, including such gems as: "They have no idea where [their culture came from] — and the Internet was done so well that most people think of it as a natural resource like the Pacific Ocean, rather than something that was man-made. When was the last time a technology with a scale like that was so error-free? The Web, in comparison, is a joke. The Web was done by amateurs." Binstock: Still, you can't argue with the Web's success. Kay: I think you can. Binstock: Well, look at Wikipedia — it's a tremendous collaboration. Kay: It is, but go to the article on Logo, can you write and execute Logo programs? Are there examples? No. The Wikipedia people didn't even imagine that, in spite of the fact that they're on a computer. That's why I never use PowerPoint. PowerPoint is just simulated acetate overhead slides, and to me, that is a kind of a moral crime. That's why I always do, not just dynamic stuff when I give a talk, but I do stuff that I'm interacting with on-the-fly. Because that is what the computer is for. People who don't do that either don't understand that or don't respect it. There's lots more there, but I recommend more people read it to get some true perspective. And when he mentions Englebart, for example, look up what he did.

          "If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.

          M Offline
          M Offline
          Marc Clifton
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Rob Grainger wrote:

          This interview with Alan Kay brings a lot of this stuff into focus, including such gems as:

          Great interview. Thanks for posting that!

          Rob Grainger wrote:

          And when he mentions Englebart

          Engelbart, BTW :) While I knew about his classic demonstration of a mouse and graphical user interface, I do not know much about the rest of his life, so I still looked him up. :) Marc

          Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming

          R 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • M Marc Clifton

            Rob Grainger wrote:

            This interview with Alan Kay brings a lot of this stuff into focus, including such gems as:

            Great interview. Thanks for posting that!

            Rob Grainger wrote:

            And when he mentions Englebart

            Engelbart, BTW :) While I knew about his classic demonstration of a mouse and graphical user interface, I do not know much about the rest of his life, so I still looked him up. :) Marc

            Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming

            R Offline
            R Offline
            Rob Grainger
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Thanks for the correction, noted. I'm glad you enjoyed the interview - I seem to post it fairly regularly in various places, it seems to cover a lot of ground. Another one worth checking is the Stroustrup, Ungar and Hewitt interview I posted in the news feed a while ago: Linkety. Really makes you think about concurrency properly. One of the reasons I've been learning functional programming properly recently is to prepare myself for the upcoming many-core world. Incidentally, which language (if any) do you concentrate on in the book you link to?

            "If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.

            M 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R Rob Grainger

              Thanks for the correction, noted. I'm glad you enjoyed the interview - I seem to post it fairly regularly in various places, it seems to cover a lot of ground. Another one worth checking is the Stroustrup, Ungar and Hewitt interview I posted in the news feed a while ago: Linkety. Really makes you think about concurrency properly. One of the reasons I've been learning functional programming properly recently is to prepare myself for the upcoming many-core world. Incidentally, which language (if any) do you concentrate on in the book you link to?

              "If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.

              M Offline
              M Offline
              Marc Clifton
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Rob Grainger wrote:

              Incidentally, which language (if any) do you concentrate on in the book you link to?

              Since SyncFusion is a Windows 3rd party control provider, the book focuses on F# but to make the transition less painful (and to illustrate F#'ish things) there's a lot of C# in the beginning as well. I actually spend very little time on how stateless languages make threading rather painless -- I probably should have mentioned that more. It's a free download, check it out - I'd appreciate your feedback. And it's on my list to read the other interview! Marc

              Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming

              R 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Marc Clifton

                Rob Grainger wrote:

                Incidentally, which language (if any) do you concentrate on in the book you link to?

                Since SyncFusion is a Windows 3rd party control provider, the book focuses on F# but to make the transition less painful (and to illustrate F#'ish things) there's a lot of C# in the beginning as well. I actually spend very little time on how stateless languages make threading rather painless -- I probably should have mentioned that more. It's a free download, check it out - I'd appreciate your feedback. And it's on my list to read the other interview! Marc

                Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming

                R Offline
                R Offline
                Rob Grainger
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Marc Clifton wrote:

                It's a free download,

                I hadn't spotted that - my bad. Will do so and let you know how I get on.

                "If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                Reply
                • Reply as topic
                Log in to reply
                • Oldest to Newest
                • Newest to Oldest
                • Most Votes


                • Login

                • Don't have an account? Register

                • Login or register to search.
                • First post
                  Last post
                0
                • Categories
                • Recent
                • Tags
                • Popular
                • World
                • Users
                • Groups