Algebra Rizing
in [Lisp]
|
From: Peder O. Klingenberg on 3 Jul 2010 06:49 Kenneth Tilton <kentilton(a)gmail.com> writes: > Did you try clicking "OK"? Of course. Repeatedly. Nothing happened. > How recently? I restarted the server/app a few hours agao and it is > still up and responding, no backtrace in sight. As in while as I was typing the last message. Check the date header and subtract up to a minute. Tried again just now, with much better results. I can edit just fine. The initial rendering of the page was a bit messy as the bits arranged themselves and not exactly blazing fast, but no slower than some of the more ad-riddled newspaper sites I visit from time to time. > You need the source for RoboCells, the application that does nothing > but talk to a soccer server over a socket. Pure Cells (plus football). Yes, probably, but then I also need to get hold of some round tuits. They're in short supply. It seemed much easier to just click around on a website. :) ....Peder... -- Sl�v uten dop.
From: HVS on 3 Jul 2010 09:52 On 7/3/2010 12:51 AM, Antony wrote: > The part about layout manager. I haven't done much CSS, every time I saw > the tricks needed to create a simple column layout I gave up (I had the > luxury mostly cause I wasn't responsible for the UI). > > On one hand I have forever heard don't use tables, use divs and css, > on the other hand one needs disproportionate effort doing the same thing > using divs and css. And then it is usually not flexible if you wnat add > a couple of more columns. > > Then there is span which seems to be utterly useless cause you can't put > any block elements in it. People talk about content and representation > separation, yet div and span are tied to visuals cause one says 'block' > and allows certain DOM strcuture and the other does not. > > AFAIK there isn't a layout manager built into a web browser from the web > developer point of view. > > What should one do if one needs a RIA and it has to be web based > > Are we saying HTML+CSS+Javascript only RIA solution is still way off > > Does HTML5 change anything above. > > Is there any popular book for managing layouts using HTML/CSS/Javascript > (unlike common lisp, this web stuff is way too popular, means way too > much effort to find the good stuff out of the mountain of things google > brings up) > > > -Antony > As someone who works on web applications on a day-to-day basis, I agree with your assessment of the tables vs. divs/css model. For enterprise-level web applications, the company I work at uses Ext JS (http://www.sencha.com/products/js/) which, once you understand the model, allows you to layout fairly robust (and heavy) web applications. It is not a "light" framework, though, and also requires quite a bit of work to customize the look and feel. It does, however, allow you to avoid a lot of the annoying CSS layout issues that you mention. CSS3 allows for better control of layout than previous versions. For example: http://ejohn.org/blog/css3-template-layout/ /Hans
From: Kenneth Tilton on 3 Jul 2010 12:16 Peder O. Klingenberg wrote: > Kenneth Tilton <kentilton(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> Did you try clicking "OK"? > > Of course. Repeatedly. Nothing happened. > >> How recently? I restarted the server/app a few hours agao and it is >> still up and responding, no backtrace in sight. > > As in while as I was typing the last message. Check the date header and > subtract up to a minute. > > Tried again just now, with much better results. I can edit just fine. > The initial rendering of the page was a bit messy as the bits arranged > themselves and not exactly blazing fast, but no slower than some > of the more ad-riddled newspaper sites I visit from time to time. > >> You need the source for RoboCells, the application that does nothing >> but talk to a soccer server over a socket. Pure Cells (plus football). > > Yes, probably, but then I also need to get hold of some round tuits. > They're in short supply. It seemed much easier to just click around on > a website. :) Oh, sorry, I made the mistake of taking you seriously! Hence the detailed response. My bad. Won't happen again.
From: Mario S. Mommer on 4 Jul 2010 14:33 Hi, Kenneth Tilton <kentilton(a)gmail.com> writes: > Thanks again for the report, but to anyone out there, please relax on > the bug reports. I have prominently announced that the thing is known > to be broken and incomplete and is being shared only for what does > work (which will expand in Algebra tutorial functionality before > anything else, except for tree bugs that make the tutorial forest > impossible to see). Kenny, that kind of thing very rarely, if at all, works. If you publish an unfinished prototype with a ten megawatt lightsign of a disclaimer, people will still complain about how buggy it is. No idea why. Same thing with text. If you send someone an unfinished text, clearly saying it is just an early draft, asking to just check if the concept has half a chance of going somewhere, you'll get even the spelling corrected 95% of the time. So, good luck with this. But please try not to insult all the nice folks that have given you feedback. Now feedback on the algebra app: I'm usually somewhat weary of telling kids that maths is easy, because that does not correspond to what their experience with it will be. After a while, when they don't get it, they not only feel frustrated, but also stupid (because you claimed it was /soooo/ easy, remember?). In my experience, an important part of the difference between people who do better in math and those who do not do that good is the level of tolerance to frustration. Regards, Mario.
From: Kenneth Tilton on 4 Jul 2010 16:07
Mario S. Mommer wrote: > Hi, > > Kenneth Tilton <kentilton(a)gmail.com> writes: >> Thanks again for the report, but to anyone out there, please relax on >> the bug reports. I have prominently announced that the thing is known >> to be broken and incomplete and is being shared only for what does >> work (which will expand in Algebra tutorial functionality before >> anything else, except for tree bugs that make the tutorial forest >> impossible to see). > > Kenny, that kind of thing very rarely, if at all, works. If you publish > an unfinished prototype with a ten megawatt lightsign of a disclaimer, > people will still complain about how buggy it is. No idea why. Human nature. I would do the same! It is impossible to look at something broken and not point it out. > > Same thing with text. If you send someone an unfinished text, clearly > saying it is just an early draft, asking to just check if the concept > has half a chance of going somewhere, you'll get even the spelling > corrected 95% of the time. > > So, good luck with this. But please try not to insult all the nice folks > that have given you feedback. You are confused. I have had a couple of perfectly pleasant exchanges with people offering bug reports by email and I thanked them and reassured them they could relax on that, tho there was at least one case where something I thought worked did not (because I had TeX fonts installed and did not notice I had cocked up the fallback image fonts). Other stuff as well, I think. The flaming you are seeing is me making life miserable for the js library haters, who yell about anything they can because things like qooxdoo do work. We have had fun before in c.l.js when I made the mistake of coming here looking for help and got attacked because I was using jsQuery (my first try, on an unrelated project). Can you imagine someone coming to c.l.lisp asking for help with ASDF or Slime and being attacked for using.... oops. > > Now feedback on the algebra app: I'm usually somewhat weary of telling > kids that maths is easy, because that does not correspond to what their > experience with it will be. After a while, when they don't get it, they > not only feel frustrated, but also stupid (because you claimed it was > /soooo/ easy, remember?). In my experience, an important part of the > difference between people who do better in math and those who do not do > that good is the level of tolerance to frustration. I agree that forewarned is forearmed, but in what we USians call "Algebra I" their experience is a function of the process, not the content. I explained it here: http://www.stuckonalgebra.com , tho it sounds like you read that. That is not me talking, that is what we learned when kids got exposed to the software: as long as they get immediate feedback the math anxiety goes away and they get quality practice (vs doing problems with no feedback so they do not learn what is right and what is wrong -- no, having a paper corrected the next day is not feedback, that is too late). But we are laying teachers off, not hiring them, so there is just no way the delivery model my software supports can be achieved without automation. The story from Margaret Lekse came as a surprise to me: failing students used the software for a short time and not only did better but caught up with the other kids. It seems a psychological hump got surpassed, after which kids Just Got It(tm). Which is why I will have a (very small) one-time fee, not charge by the month. :) kt -- "The best Algebra tutorial program I have seen... in a class by itself." Macworld |