Lotus, Linux, Apple, Australia and whatever else crosses my mind...http://www.browniesblog.comen-usMon, 21 Jun 2010 07:10:05 AM -0500 Esgijvvj dx/07052009111929AMMBR3KR.htm?opendocument&comments#07252010012426AMDOM9JB.htm who make valium dx/07052009111929AMMBR3KR.htm?opendocument&comments#07252010012521AMDOM9JW.htm Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:10:05 AM -0500 Petter Avoid using JavaScript getYear() function
n2s: read entire blog entry :-)]]>
n2s: read entire blog entry :-)]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/21062010190919MBRCRE.htm?opendocument&comments#06212010071005AMDOMGAC.htm Mon, 21 Jun 2010 06:45:51 AM -0500 Mike Brown Avoid using JavaScript getYear() function
And I said so in the last line of the post!]]>
And I said so in the last line of the post!]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/21062010190919MBRCRE.htm?opendocument&comments#06212010064551AMDOMFT8.htm Mon, 21 Jun 2010 06:26:08 AM -0500 Petter Avoid using JavaScript getYear() function http://www.browniesblog.comdx/21062010190919MBRCRE.htm?opendocument&comments#06212010062608AMDOMFEV.htm Fri, 30 Apr 2010 08:04:28 AM +1100 Mike Brown New NAB Name Picker for the Web
FYI, that line is actually the jQuery library. The full call is like this:

// Create the request object

// Microsoft failed to properly implement the XMLHttpRequest in IE7

// so we use the ActiveXObject when it is available

// This function can be overriden by calling jQuery.ajaxSetup

xhr:function(){

return window.ActiveXObject ? new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP") : new XMLHttpRequest();

}

However, that was in jQuery 1.3.2, which I the latest version at the time I rewrote the dialog code. We're now up to jQuery 1.4.2 and the equivalent code looks like this:

// Create the request object; Microsoft failed to properly

// implement the XMLHttpRequest in IE7 (can't request local files),

// so we use the ActiveXObject when it is available

// This function can be overriden by calling jQuery.ajaxSetup

xhr: window.XMLHttpRequest && (window.location.protocol !== "file:" || !window.ActiveXObject) ?

function() {

return new window.XMLHttpRequest();

} :

function() {

try {

return new window.ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");

} catch(e) {}

}

I haven't tested it yet, but I'm guessing that this issue might have been fixed by this change. I'll test it when I've got some time and add it to the main post if it does.]]>
FYI, that line is actually the jQuery library. The full call is like this:

// Create the request object

// Microsoft failed to properly implement the XMLHttpRequest in IE7

// so we use the ActiveXObject when it is available

// This function can be overriden by calling jQuery.ajaxSetup

xhr:function(){

return window.ActiveXObject ? new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP") : new XMLHttpRequest();

}

However, that was in jQuery 1.3.2, which I the latest version at the time I rewrote the dialog code. We're now up to jQuery 1.4.2 and the equivalent code looks like this:

// Create the request object; Microsoft failed to properly

// implement the XMLHttpRequest in IE7 (can't request local files),

// so we use the ActiveXObject when it is available

// This function can be overriden by calling jQuery.ajaxSetup

xhr: window.XMLHttpRequest && (window.location.protocol !== "file:" || !window.ActiveXObject) ?

function() {

return new window.XMLHttpRequest();

} :

function() {

try {

return new window.ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");

} catch(e) {}

}

I haven't tested it yet, but I'm guessing that this issue might have been fixed by this change. I'll test it when I've got some time and add it to the main post if it does.]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/07122009183645MBRAXK.htm?opendocument&comments#29042010050428PMDOMTVU.htm Thu, 29 Apr 2010 02:41:19 PM -0500 James Kelley New NAB Name Picker for the Web
return window.ActiveXObject ? new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP") : new XMLHttpRequest();

with this code:

var xhr;

try {

xhr = new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP"); //IE with ActiveX enabled

} catch(ex) {

xhr = new XMLHttpRequest(); //IE7+ with ActiveX disabled and Non-IE

}

Love the address dialog ... keep up the good work!!]]>
return window.ActiveXObject ? new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP") : new XMLHttpRequest();

with this code:

var xhr;

try {

xhr = new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP"); //IE with ActiveX enabled

} catch(ex) {

xhr = new XMLHttpRequest(); //IE7+ with ActiveX disabled and Non-IE

}

Love the address dialog ... keep up the good work!!]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/07122009183645MBRAXK.htm?opendocument&comments#04292010024119PMDOMR4D.htm Wed, 7 Apr 2010 03:45:13 AM -0500 Rick Jelliffe Shock! Horror! Man responsible for OOXML admits "failure"
However, companies only play ball as much as it is in their perceived interest. MS took the strategy of "opening their outside so they wouldn't have to open their inside": open standards are less unpalatable than open source for them.

So there always was a significant risk that Microsoft would, if the govt pressure that made them go to open standards in the first place wained, either go slow or stall adoption of the bits of the OOXML standard that came from outside requests. You could see their behaviour at W3C in several cases; but they are no different from other big companies (IBM, Snoracle, etc) in this: SC34 was largely founded by IBM-ers, now some IBMs are very negative about it, and in a decade's time they will think it is great again. That is what they all do: don't be sucked in by their hype.

But if MS didn't implement, so what? From the standards POV, we had an agreement on OOXML that was not what MS wanted but obviously close enough for them to implement, and not what many NBs would want exactly but close enough to want on the books.

There was no unfairness or ganging up on them that they can blame; if after a process which has even come to court based on hysteria (e.g. the laughable UK suit against BSI which the judge threw out as being without foundation) MS will not implement ISO OOXML Strict, that makes the nature of their standards participation very clear, and provides an objective basis for procurement decisions.

Which is why you go into a standards process: it stops being issues of "They stink because Bill write this memo 15 years ago" to "This product does not conform to the standard that the international community negotiated with Microsoft/Ecma for, therefore we will not use it." Objective reasons that can actually be used by procurement departments and which are not discriminatory.

Standards are a double-edged sword. Once your technology is on the books, your own products can get judged by them too.

(I should be clearer here: there seems to be no opposition from MS on cosmetic syntactic changes to the XML formats. And many of the changes, such as removing VML, were part of their long term plans anyway. At the BRM I was one of the few voices who pointed out that more adventurous National Bodies got in their demands, the more the risk of that MS would pull out: that would not be a bad thing in itself where that change was important to the NB, but not for gratuitous, vexatious or provocative changes.)]]>
However, companies only play ball as much as it is in their perceived interest. MS took the strategy of "opening their outside so they wouldn't have to open their inside": open standards are less unpalatable than open source for them.

So there always was a significant risk that Microsoft would, if the govt pressure that made them go to open standards in the first place wained, either go slow or stall adoption of the bits of the OOXML standard that came from outside requests. You could see their behaviour at W3C in several cases; but they are no different from other big companies (IBM, Snoracle, etc) in this: SC34 was largely founded by IBM-ers, now some IBMs are very negative about it, and in a decade's time they will think it is great again. That is what they all do: don't be sucked in by their hype.

But if MS didn't implement, so what? From the standards POV, we had an agreement on OOXML that was not what MS wanted but obviously close enough for them to implement, and not what many NBs would want exactly but close enough to want on the books.

There was no unfairness or ganging up on them that they can blame; if after a process which has even come to court based on hysteria (e.g. the laughable UK suit against BSI which the judge threw out as being without foundation) MS will not implement ISO OOXML Strict, that makes the nature of their standards participation very clear, and provides an objective basis for procurement decisions.

Which is why you go into a standards process: it stops being issues of "They stink because Bill write this memo 15 years ago" to "This product does not conform to the standard that the international community negotiated with Microsoft/Ecma for, therefore we will not use it." Objective reasons that can actually be used by procurement departments and which are not discriminatory.

Standards are a double-edged sword. Once your technology is on the books, your own products can get judged by them too.

(I should be clearer here: there seems to be no opposition from MS on cosmetic syntactic changes to the XML formats. And many of the changes, such as removing VML, were part of their long term plans anyway. At the BRM I was one of the few voices who pointed out that more adventurous National Bodies got in their demands, the more the risk of that MS would pull out: that would not be a bad thing in itself where that change was important to the NB, but not for gratuitous, vexatious or provocative changes.)]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/03042010111256AMMBR2A6.htm?opendocument&comments#04072010034513AMDOMCAB.htm Wed, 7 Apr 2010 05:40:27 PM +1100 Michael Brown Shock! Horror! Man responsible for OOXML admits "failure"
First off, I'm flattered that you should take the time to travel out to this backwater of the Blogosphere to say "hello"!

Personally, I've never accused Alex or you or anybody else involved at the BRM of "corruption", so I'm off the hook on that score. Naiviety is all I had left to understand the decision taken there... oh, apart from collective insanity, of course!

So, if not naive then what? You said that did not base your decisions on trust in Microsoft. That's fine. So are you now saying that you took those decisions in the knowledge that Microsoft probably wouldn't play ball once they got their ISO stamp of approval? Sorry, but to an outsider, that makes even less sense than naivety.

Cheers,

- Mike]]>
First off, I'm flattered that you should take the time to travel out to this backwater of the Blogosphere to say "hello"!

Personally, I've never accused Alex or you or anybody else involved at the BRM of "corruption", so I'm off the hook on that score. Naiviety is all I had left to understand the decision taken there... oh, apart from collective insanity, of course!

So, if not naive then what? You said that did not base your decisions on trust in Microsoft. That's fine. So are you now saying that you took those decisions in the knowledge that Microsoft probably wouldn't play ball once they got their ISO stamp of approval? Sorry, but to an outsider, that makes even less sense than naivety.

Cheers,

- Mike]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/03042010111256AMMBR2A6.htm?opendocument&comments#07042010054027PMMBRAZW.htm Wed, 7 Apr 2010 12:00:44 AM -0500 Rick Jelliffe Shock! Horror! Man responsible for OOXML admits "failure"
The idea that at SC34 we somehow based our decisions on trust in MS is ludicrous. I suppose after people have found they cannot support allegations of corruption, or technical incompetence, then they give naivity a burl. Anything but admit that reasonable people can reasonably have different views and strategies.

To get a better idea of what my (and I think Alex is not too far from this, though he can speak for himself) view actually was, see

{ Link }

or

{ Link }

For example:

"The analogy I have used before is that we have to be like bear trappers: when the bear walks into the trap, they have to do so voluntarily because of some honey, but when they are inside you don't throw them out of the cage merely because you decide they are too smelly for you. If we want to wait around until Microsoft and IBM are pure as the driven snow, or until there are no SNAFUs or idiots involved anywhere, then we will wait forever. Participation in standards work is not predicated on trust. Indeed, in standardization you perhaps really want to get arch competitors agreeing more than back-scratching cartel-buddies."

and

"After a decade and a half in standards work, I know and accept that the big companies blow hot and cold on standards bodies. (This is my “trap the bear when it is in the cage” argument.) They jump ship to the bodies that will give them the best result, they try to convince people that they jumped ship because the ship was rotten and not because they were rats, and they implement a standard only as far as it fits in with their development/marketing cycle, which often means minor version changes are not implemented, or that there can be periods of stagnation. Even the largest companies find it hard to stay on standards committees when they know they have no intention to implement that standards or its updates. "

I suppose it is funny: I suspect the people who swallow the "they are being naively used" line of being rather naive themselves. But talking through the issues with a modicom of civility is the only way forward (at least, at a standards organization); and for that, all the parties need to be at the table.

P.S. Alex was not "largely responsible". He chaired one large and difficult meeting, with assistance from officials from ISO and IEC at his side to discuss procedural issues. The full JTC1 plenary (of National Bodies) later confirmed that the meeting had been run strictly in order. All key decisions about how the meeting was conducted was voted on at the meeting and agreed by the delegations, Alex didn't just pull decisions about the scope of the meeting or its conduct out of his hat. (I was there, btw.) I think there would have been similar results regardless of who chaired the meeting.

OOXML was voted a standard because about 75% of National Bodies voted in favour, and only about 14% voted against IIRC.]]>
The idea that at SC34 we somehow based our decisions on trust in MS is ludicrous. I suppose after people have found they cannot support allegations of corruption, or technical incompetence, then they give naivity a burl. Anything but admit that reasonable people can reasonably have different views and strategies.

To get a better idea of what my (and I think Alex is not too far from this, though he can speak for himself) view actually was, see

{ Link }

or

{ Link }

For example:

"The analogy I have used before is that we have to be like bear trappers: when the bear walks into the trap, they have to do so voluntarily because of some honey, but when they are inside you don't throw them out of the cage merely because you decide they are too smelly for you. If we want to wait around until Microsoft and IBM are pure as the driven snow, or until there are no SNAFUs or idiots involved anywhere, then we will wait forever. Participation in standards work is not predicated on trust. Indeed, in standardization you perhaps really want to get arch competitors agreeing more than back-scratching cartel-buddies."

and

"After a decade and a half in standards work, I know and accept that the big companies blow hot and cold on standards bodies. (This is my “trap the bear when it is in the cage” argument.) They jump ship to the bodies that will give them the best result, they try to convince people that they jumped ship because the ship was rotten and not because they were rats, and they implement a standard only as far as it fits in with their development/marketing cycle, which often means minor version changes are not implemented, or that there can be periods of stagnation. Even the largest companies find it hard to stay on standards committees when they know they have no intention to implement that standards or its updates. "

I suppose it is funny: I suspect the people who swallow the "they are being naively used" line of being rather naive themselves. But talking through the issues with a modicom of civility is the only way forward (at least, at a standards organization); and for that, all the parties need to be at the table.

P.S. Alex was not "largely responsible". He chaired one large and difficult meeting, with assistance from officials from ISO and IEC at his side to discuss procedural issues. The full JTC1 plenary (of National Bodies) later confirmed that the meeting had been run strictly in order. All key decisions about how the meeting was conducted was voted on at the meeting and agreed by the delegations, Alex didn't just pull decisions about the scope of the meeting or its conduct out of his hat. (I was there, btw.) I think there would have been similar results regardless of who chaired the meeting.

OOXML was voted a standard because about 75% of National Bodies voted in favour, and only about 14% voted against IIRC.]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/03042010111256AMMBR2A6.htm?opendocument&comments#04072010120044AMDOM7VZ.htm Thu, 1 Apr 2010 02:18:12 AM -0500 Sean Cull Setting up Domino on Amazon’s EC2 cloud servers
{ Link }

Sean]]>
{ Link }

Sean]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/10032010184744MBRB6E.htm?opendocument&comments#01042010021812DOMAKX.htm Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:48:37 PM -0500 Michael Masterson Domino image now on Amazon EC2... errmm, I think!
We weren't actually anticipating this being published until the image is live and available on Amazon. We're very close and will have an announcement on both developerWorks and Amazon when its LIVE. We should have the images fixed by then as well :)]]>
We weren't actually anticipating this being published until the image is live and available on Amazon. We're very close and will have an announcement on both developerWorks and Amazon when its LIVE. We should have the images fixed by then as well :)]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/31032010063034PMMBRATP.htm?opendocument&comments#03312010104837PMDOM6GX.htm Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:13:05 PM -0500 Richard Moy Update and upgrade Ubuntu in one command http://www.browniesblog.comdx/31032010065926PMMBRBDP.htm?opendocument&comments#03312010031305PMDOMRQ8.htm Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:01:13 PM -0500 Mike Brown Setting up Domino on Amazon’s EC2 cloud servers
{ Link }

I've checked my own EC2 AWS Console and can confirm that the AMI image *is* there.

I've not tried to use it though. I will do so soon and then either update this article and/or write a new one.]]>
{ Link }

I've checked my own EC2 AWS Console and can confirm that the AMI image *is* there.

I've not tried to use it though. I will do so soon and then either update this article and/or write a new one.]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/10032010184744MBRB6E.htm?opendocument&comments#30032010090113PMDOM4DT.htm Fri, 26 Mar 2010 07:22:54 AM -0500 Kevin Crocker Installing Notes 8.5.1 over the 8.5 Hotfix/fixpack on Ubuntu
Thanks again. At least it's running, even if I can't open any emails - the view capability for messages doesn't work at all.]]>
Thanks again. At least it's running, even if I can't open any emails - the view capability for messages doesn't work at all.]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/20102009174902MBR9ZQ.htm?opendocument&comments#03262010072254AMDOMGJD.htm Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:22:27 PM -0500 Mike Brown Installing Notes 8.5.1 over the 8.5 Hotfix/fixpack on Ubuntu
The instructions to which you linked are for the 64-bit version of Ubuntu. Is that the version that you're running?

Not come across the "Attempt to use an invalid slot number" error before, so can't help you there. There are a few entries for that error on the IBM Support Site though. { Link }]]>
The instructions to which you linked are for the 64-bit version of Ubuntu. Is that the version that you're running?

Not come across the "Attempt to use an invalid slot number" error before, so can't help you there. There are a few entries for that error on the IBM Support Site though. { Link }]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/20102009174902MBR9ZQ.htm?opendocument&comments#25032010092227PMDOM4T4.htm Thu, 25 Mar 2010 06:12:19 PM -0500 Kevin Crocker Installing Notes 8.5.1 over the 8.5 Hotfix/fixpack on Ubuntu Link } ) that has details on installing Notes.

The only problem I have at the moment is that every time I try to do something I get an error "Notes error: Attempt to use an invalid slot number". I don't even know what a slot number is and what it does. Oh well, perhaps the fix packs will solve these problems.

Thanks again]]> Link } ) that has details on installing Notes.

The only problem I have at the moment is that every time I try to do something I get an error "Notes error: Attempt to use an invalid slot number". I don't even know what a slot number is and what it does. Oh well, perhaps the fix packs will solve these problems.

Thanks again]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/20102009174902MBR9ZQ.htm?opendocument&comments#03252010061219PMDOMV89.htm Thu, 25 Mar 2010 05:45:18 PM -0500 Mike Brown Installing Notes 8.5.1 over the 8.5 Hotfix/fixpack on Ubuntu
That download link should be:

{ Link }]]>
That download link should be:

{ Link }]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/20102009174902MBR9ZQ.htm?opendocument&comments#25032010054518PMDOMUPD.htm Thu, 25 Mar 2010 05:44:23 PM -0500 Mike Brown Installing Notes 8.5.1 over the 8.5 Hotfix/fixpack on Ubuntu
You can download it from here:

{ Link }

It requires an IBM ID, which is freely available. Passport not usually required for hotfixes etc.

Having just looked it up for you, I see that there's also now a Fixpack 2 for 8.5.1. Here's the release notes for both versions:

8.5.1 Fixpack 1 Release Notes

{ Link }

8.5.1 Fixpack 2 Release Notes

{ Link }]]>
You can download it from here:

{ Link }

It requires an IBM ID, which is freely available. Passport not usually required for hotfixes etc.

Having just looked it up for you, I see that there's also now a Fixpack 2 for 8.5.1. Here's the release notes for both versions:

8.5.1 Fixpack 1 Release Notes

{ Link }

8.5.1 Fixpack 2 Release Notes

{ Link }]]> http://www.browniesblog.comdx/20102009174902MBR9ZQ.htm?opendocument&comments#25032010054423PMDOMUNS.htm Thu, 25 Mar 2010 04:12:25 PM -0500 Kevin Crocker Installing Notes 8.5.1 over the 8.5 Hotfix/fixpack on Ubuntu http://www.browniesblog.comdx/20102009174902MBR9ZQ.htm?opendocument&comments#03252010041225PMDOMSVB.htm