[In the following, all questions will be in the form of answers, nothing
new for The Kenny think to come of it.]
Hmmm, looked at W3C, CSS, JS, DOM... seems to me the nature of the Web
already forces developers into a declarative mindset (stealing much of
Cells's thunder) cuz here comes da page! Here comes da page! What do we
do? I dunno, look at the data!
ie, the developer already has a data-driven mindset cuz they do not get
the history of a user's interaction, they get This Page Now, however it
got that way.
Yes, no?
My other thought is, well, we cannot assume scalably that the same
server handles the page every time.
Yes, no? Hmmm. I see Arc pushing the continuation thang as a brilliant
way of linking a series of pages. Is the plan to scale by eventually
transparently faking continuations with data stored in the page? Gosh,
mebbe I should look, mebbe Arc does that already?
Then I had a shazzam moment: I just did Triple Cells! If the Web page is
encoded into so many RDF triples (with Cells Inside(tm)) then we just
need a single DB accessible to any server -- is that how it is done? Or
is that just whacky for latency?
Now for a new subject. Is the desktop dead? Do I *have to* move my
algebra desktop app to the Web?* One big problem is doing a responsive
editor in real-time. The good news is that I just have to emit MathML
and never worry about imaging math again. But even if I do JS, how fast
will it be? I am about to experiment for myself, but what I be wondrin
is, if I have this massive JS math editing script emitting a whole new
wodge of MathML after every keystroke, does the browser just redraw that
element? Will it be flashing worse than George Micheal in a Port
Authority mens room? Sorry for that image.
I have so much to learn, and so little time!
:)
kenny
* This would be a good thing and save me from ever having to ship --
nah, I checked, the editor is under a thousand lines. k
--
http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"In the morning, hear the Way;
in the evening, die content!"
-- Confucius
Ken Tilton wrote:
> [In the following, all questions will be in the form of answers, nothing
> new for The Kenny think to come of it.]
>
> Hmmm, looked at W3C, CSS, JS, DOM... seems to me the nature of the Web
> already forces developers into a declarative mindset (stealing much of
> Cells's thunder) cuz here comes da page! Here comes da page! What do we
> do? I dunno, look at the data!
>
> ie, the developer already has a data-driven mindset cuz they do not get
> the history of a user's interaction, they get This Page Now, however it
> got that way.
>
> Yes, no?
FWIW, I have a little web app project on the back burner, and (of
course) I was thinking of doing something cells-inside-ish.
Since I come from the desktop, I looked into using cl-weblocks for the
front end, which thanks to its widget orientation could yield something
like "cells-weblocks" (in analogy to cells-(g)tk). I believe this could
be a *really* promising road to go down.
One thing at a time, though. I'll need to get this cells-gtk3 thing
wrapped up, plug in opengl, and hook up cells-ode first. And it will be
small step from the cells-driven world simulator to cells-driven world
domination. But I digress.
> Now for a new subject. Is the desktop dead? Do I *have to* move my
> algebra desktop app to the Web?*
Hate to say it, but most likely, yes.
> One big problem is doing a responsive
> editor in real-time. The good news is that I just have to emit MathML
> and never worry about imaging math again. But even if I do JS, how fast
> will it be? I am about to experiment for myself, but what I be wondrin
> is, if I have this massive JS math editing script emitting a whole new
> wodge of MathML after every keystroke, does the browser just redraw that
> element?
Can't speak for MathML, but as to response time: If you can do a photo
editor via a web browser [1], a few math formulae should be doable, no?
[1] http://www.splashup.com/
Maybe you should stick with your custom rendering and wrap it all into
something running on the client side. But I don't know what I'm talking
about.
Plus, real life is closing in on me. Got to prepare for job interviews.
Peter
On Feb 26, 11:08 am, Peter Hildebrandt <·················@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Ken Tilton wrote:
> > [In the following, all questions will be in the form of answers, nothing
> > new for The Kenny think to come of it.]
>
> > Hmmm, looked at W3C, CSS, JS, DOM... seems to me the nature of the Web
> > already forces developers into a declarative mindset (stealing much of
> > Cells's thunder) cuz here comes da page! Here comes da page! What do we
> > do? I dunno, look at the data!
>
> > ie, the developer already has a data-driven mindset cuz they do not get
> > the history of a user's interaction, they get This Page Now, however it
> > got that way.
>
> > Yes, no?
>
> FWIW, I have a little web app project on the back burner, and (of
> course) I was thinking of doing something cells-inside-ish.
>
> Since I come from the desktop, I looked into using cl-weblocks for the
> front end, which thanks to its widget orientation could yield something
> like "cells-weblocks" (in analogy to cells-(g)tk). I believe this could
> be a *really* promising road to go down.
I'll second weblocks recommendation, weblocks is very nice especially
with new UI DSL,
and deserves to be cellified . Also it comes with API that could be
used for adapting different database backends.
Think triplecells , AllegroCache, AllegroGraph etc.
> Ken Tilton wrote:
> Now for a new subject. Is the desktop dead? Do I *have to* move my
> algebra desktop app to the Web?*
Why don't you ship your desktop theoryalgebra and see for yourself?
If it sinks you can remade it into a web service around weblocks, for
quickly learning math.
Slobodan
http://tourdelisp.blogspot.com/
Peter Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> [1] http://www.splashup.com/
Wow, who knew? Pretty amazing.
kenny
--
http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"In the morning, hear the Way;
in the evening, die content!"
-- Confucius
On 2008-02-26 11:32:54 -0500, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> said:
> Peter Hildebrandt wrote:
>
>>
>> [1] http://www.splashup.com/
>
> Wow, who knew? Pretty amazing.
Not so much. I tried to open a tiff file from my hard drive to edit it
and, after spinning its wheels for about 15 seconds simply returned the
error:
"There was an error opening your file. Please try again."
Trying again yielded the same error.
It was successful opening a small jpeg though - woot.
The tools cover basic image editing but are significantly less
featureful than Adobe's tools for professional use (e.g., you can't
feather a selection).
There will continue to be applications that make intensive use of local
desktop resources that are best written as desktop apps which are web
enabled, rather than apps that run inside a web browser.
On Feb 26, 9:49 am, Raffael Cavallaro <················@pas-d'espam-
s'il-vous-plait-mac.com> wrote:
> On 2008-02-26 11:32:54 -0500, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> said:
>
> > Peter Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> >> [1]http://www.splashup.com/
>
> > Wow, who knew? Pretty amazing.
>
> Not so much. I tried to open a tiff file from my hard drive to edit it
> and, after spinning its wheels for about 15 seconds simply returned the
> error:
>
> "There was an error opening your file. Please try again."
>
> Trying again yielded the same error.
>
> It was successful opening a small jpeg though - woot.
>
> The tools cover basic image editing but are significantly less
> featureful than Adobe's tools for professional use (e.g., you can't
> feather a selection).
>
> There will continue to be applications that make intensive use of local
> desktop resources that are best written as desktop apps which are web
> enabled, rather than apps that run inside a web browser.
what about forth?
On Feb 26, 11:32 am, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
> Peter Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> > [1]http://www.splashup.com/
>
> Wow, who knew? Pretty amazing.
It's Flash instead of JS, but ActionScript is pretty close to
JavaScript and Flash wouldn't be a bad choice for a web algebra UI I
suppose.
I created a white board app (similar to
http://www.imaginationcubed.com/ ) and started off with JavaScript and
SVG, but it was painful. I ended up using Flash 8 (this was before 9)
which allowed communicating between JavaScript and ActionScript pretty
seamlessly, so I was able to decide where to put the logic.
>
> kenny
>
> --http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
>
> "In the morning, hear the Way;
> in the evening, die content!"
> -- Confucius
Brian Adkins wrote:
> On Feb 26, 11:32 am, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>Peter Hildebrandt wrote:
>>
>>
>>>[1]http://www.splashup.com/
>>
>>Wow, who knew? Pretty amazing.
>
>
> It's Flash instead of JS, but ActionScript is pretty close to
> JavaScript and Flash wouldn't be a bad choice for a web algebra UI I
> suppose.
I had a feeling. I had already downloaded the trial version a coupla
days ago for some reason, just hurled at the first sight of anything
other than Lisp. :(
thx, kenny
--
http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"In the morning, hear the Way;
in the evening, die content!"
-- Confucius
Ken Tilton wrote:
>
>
> Peter Hildebrandt wrote:
>
>>
>> [1] http://www.splashup.com/
>
> Wow, who knew? Pretty amazing.
It's one of PG's y combinator start ups. What do you expect? ;-)
Peter
> kenny
>
On Feb 26, 5:02 am, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
> [In the following, all questions will be in the form of answers, nothing
> new for The Kenny think to come of it.]
>
> Hmmm, looked at W3C, CSS, JS, DOM... seems to me the nature of the Web
> already forces developers into a declarative mindset (stealing much of
> Cells's thunder) cuz here comes da page! Here comes da page! What do we
> do? I dunno, look at the data!
Cells still makes it easier to define the data though. Imagine a
family
of objects that all implement an html (or something) generic method.
Then
you just fm-traverse the family and pass the result to hunchentoot for
display.
For extra credit, you can use http streaming to propagate updates in
the
same way they are propagated to tk. jquery has a really nice
interface for
injecting stuff into the DOM. From what I've read (I haven't spent
any
time actually developing any of this stuff), the principle obstacle is
making the streaming thing work cross-browser but there do seem to be
commercial solutions out there so it must be possible.
This is what I've been thinking about recently and I've actually
started
some coding to make hunchentoot send cells families to the browser but
progress is slow only because I have a million other things to be
doing at
the same time.
> My other thought is, well, we cannot assume scalably that the same
> server handles the page every time.
>
> Yes, no? Hmmm. I see Arc pushing the continuation thang as a brilliant
> way of linking a series of pages. Is the plan to scale by eventually
> transparently faking continuations with data stored in the page? Gosh,
> mebbe I should look, mebbe Arc does that already?
>
> Then I had a shazzam moment: I just did Triple Cells! If the Web page is
> encoded into so many RDF triples (with Cells Inside(tm)) then we just
> need a single DB accessible to any server -- is that how it is done? Or
> is that just whacky for latency?
What about storing your RDF triples locally (where by locally I mean
on your
own fast network) and having a uri to them on the page? At least then
you
wouldn't have to send them out/recieve them from
the client.
--
Andy
On Feb 29, 12:21 pm, Andy Chambers <··············@googlemail.com>
wrote:
[snipped terribly wrapped message]
Sorry about that. I took care to put newlines in but google seems to
have mangled them. Are you just supposed to write the message without
any newlines and let google put them in? I know that GNU (Google's
Not Usenet) but all I've got is a browser at the moment.
--
Andy
Forgot to react to this...
Andy Chambers wrote:
> On Feb 26, 5:02 am, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>[In the following, all questions will be in the form of answers, nothing
>>new for The Kenny think to come of it.]
>>
>>Hmmm, looked at W3C, CSS, JS, DOM... seems to me the nature of the Web
>>already forces developers into a declarative mindset (stealing much of
>>Cells's thunder) cuz here comes da page! Here comes da page! What do we
>>do? I dunno, look at the data!
>
>
> Cells still makes it easier to define the data though. Imagine a
> family
> of objects that all implement an html (or something) generic method.
> Then
> you just fm-traverse the family and pass the result to hunchentoot for
> display.
Yep. There is still a decent functional / declarative / decomposition
thing I guess.
>
> For extra credit, you can use http streaming to propagate updates in
> the
> same way they are propagated to tk. jquery has a really nice
> interface for
> injecting stuff into the DOM.
Ah, that is what I am looking for, a little granularity. Not that I know
the bandwidth issues. Exploring now.
From what I've read (I haven't spent
> any
> time actually developing any of this stuff), the principle obstacle is
> making the streaming thing work cross-browser but there do seem to be
> commercial solutions out there so it must be possible.
>
> This is what I've been thinking about recently and I've actually
> started
> some coding to make hunchentoot send cells families to the browser...
Ah, the Cells installed base surges! We can almost field a basketball
team now.
kenny
--
http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"In the morning, hear the Way;
in the evening, die content!"
-- Confucius
Andy Chambers wrote:
> On Feb 26, 5:02 am, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>[In the following, all questions will be in the form of answers, nothing
>>new for The Kenny think to come of it.]
>>
>>Hmmm, looked at W3C, CSS, JS, DOM... seems to me the nature of the Web
>>already forces developers into a declarative mindset (stealing much of
>>Cells's thunder) cuz here comes da page! Here comes da page! What do we
>>do? I dunno, look at the data!
>
>
> Cells still makes it easier to define the data though. Imagine a
> family of objects that all implement an html (or something) generic
> method. Then you just fm-traverse the family and pass the result to
> hunchentoot for display.
>
> For extra credit, you can use http streaming to propagate updates in
> the same way they are propagated to tk. jquery has a really nice
> interface for injecting stuff into the DOM. From what I've read (I
> haven't spent any time actually developing any of this stuff), the
> principle obstacle is making the streaming thing work cross-browser
> but there do seem to be commercial solutions out there so it must be
> possible.
>
> This is what I've been thinking about recently and I've actually
> started some coding to make hunchentoot send cells families to the
> browser but progress is slow only because I have a million other
> things to be doing at the same time.
btw, fwiw I will be happy to assist anyone trying to integrate Cells
with anything Interwebby. I am starting to think I should at least push
something for the desktop out the door and then worry about the Web so
I'll be concentrating on that, but I'd have enough time to help out
some. Usually any new application calls for something new in Cells (I
just did with-client-propagation (well, the code still says
with-one-datapulse but I finally realized I was doing client
propagation) to support Cells-ODE so it could setf a kabillion input
cells and just incur one recalculation per cell) and sometimes these
opportunities will not even appear to someone not all over the internals
so... don't hesitate to call. :)
btw, after an evening of messing with jQuery / JavaScript, well, the
non-sexpr crowd really does not need to be talking about anybody's
syntax. :) But I can imagine having some fun with it. Gonna seriously
need XML I think for the math rendering.
kenny
--
http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"In the morning, hear the Way;
in the evening, die content!"
-- Confucius