Comments for dolphinling's weblog http://blog.dolphinling.net ...whatever goes through my head... Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:50:20 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Happy Zombie Jesus day! by JW http://blog.dolphinling.net/2009/04/happy-zombie-jesus-day/comment-page-1/#comment-6993 JW Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:50:20 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/?p=214#comment-6993 I love it! I love it!

]]> Comment on Computer without a CD/DVD drive? by Espen http://blog.dolphinling.net/2008/12/computer-without-a-cddvd-drive/comment-page-1/#comment-6889 Espen Sun, 21 Dec 2008 02:01:19 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/?p=211#comment-6889 Bad idea, IMHO :) 1. Lower power usage; Considering the drive is in standby 99% of the time, and probably uses <1W when it is, I'd say this is too marginal to care about. 2. Faster boot; set up your BIOS properly and this won't be a problem :) 3. Fewer cables inside; by far the best argument for going for the external option if hour ask me. Especially considering most CD/DVD-drives are still hanging on to those horrid IDE cables. Sure, you can get them in non-brick-wall-shapes, aka. round, but they're still a bitch to work with. And don't even get me started on the whole master/slave situation 4. Frees up a 5 1/2 inch bay; I don't think I've ever heard of anyone, no matter how big their case is, that's run out of available 5 1/2 inch bays ;) Bad idea, IMHO :)
1. Lower power usage; Considering the drive is in standby 99% of the time, and probably uses <1W when it is, I’d say this is too marginal to care about.
2. Faster boot; set up your BIOS properly and this won’t be a problem :)
3. Fewer cables inside; by far the best argument for going for the external option if hour ask me. Especially considering most CD/DVD-drives are still hanging on to those horrid IDE cables. Sure, you can get them in non-brick-wall-shapes, aka. round, but they’re still a bitch to work with. And don’t even get me started on the whole master/slave situation
4. Frees up a 5 1/2 inch bay; I don’t think I’ve ever heard of anyone, no matter how big their case is, that’s run out of available 5 1/2 inch bays ;)

]]> Comment on Comments reenabled by Chad L. http://blog.dolphinling.net/2008/06/comments-reenabled/comment-page-1/#comment-6882 Chad L. Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:08:25 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/?p=203#comment-6882 Can I raise the average? Can I raise the average?

]]> Comment on Comments reenabled by dolphinling http://blog.dolphinling.net/2008/06/comments-reenabled/comment-page-1/#comment-6881 dolphinling Sun, 01 Jun 2008 11:39:29 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/?p=203#comment-6881 And of course, the obligatory test comment... yay! And of course, the obligatory test comment… yay!

]]> Comment on Ad-blocking DNS by Renee Cousins http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/03/ad-blocking-dns/comment-page-1/#comment-3288 Renee Cousins Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:12:47 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/03/ad-blocking-dns/#comment-3288 Or better, a publicly available DNS server that localhosts all bad sites. Or better, a publicly available DNS server that localhosts all bad sites.

]]> Comment on Do NOT attach “target” through script! by dolphinling http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/07/do-not-attach-target-through-script/comment-page-1/#comment-2493 dolphinling Tue, 17 Oct 2006 06:14:56 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/07/do-not-attach-target-through-script/#comment-2493 <p>The "in memory" document is the one that the user actually sees and interacts with; it's the <em>most</em> important to keep valid. Especially note, for example, assistive software. It's not so much an obvious problem with <code>target</code>, but it's equivalent to, for example, adding a <code>font</code> element inside a paragraph through script. The original markup will be valid, but the resulting DOM will be invalid, and it's the resulting DOM that the assistive software looks at. It'll see the invalid, non-semantic <code>font</code>, and not know what to do with it.</p> <p>PJ, yes, I'm entirely aware of the irony of writing this from wordpress. :-\</p> The “in memory” document is the one that the user actually sees and interacts with; it’s the most important to keep valid. Especially note, for example, assistive software. It’s not so much an obvious problem with target, but it’s equivalent to, for example, adding a font element inside a paragraph through script. The original markup will be valid, but the resulting DOM will be invalid, and it’s the resulting DOM that the assistive software looks at. It’ll see the invalid, non-semantic font, and not know what to do with it.

PJ, yes, I’m entirely aware of the irony of writing this from wordpress. :-\

]]> Comment on Do NOT attach “target” through script! by Rob Cherny http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/07/do-not-attach-target-through-script/comment-page-1/#comment-2490 Rob Cherny Mon, 16 Oct 2006 13:07:58 +0000 http://blog.dolphinling.net/2006/07/do-not-attach-target-through-script/#comment-2490 I have to disagree with the content of this post, dolphinling, and agree with Tantek Celik. If you dynamically insert a target attribute your original document is still perfectly valid. The only place the "invalid" document exists is at runtime, in memory, and there's no reasoning that the dynamic document, which doesn't even persist, matters in the world of validation. The page still renders (in standards mode no less), will continue to, and the DOM has added the behavior layer which is actually exactly the way it's supposed to work. I have to disagree with the content of this post, dolphinling, and agree with Tantek Celik. If you dynamically insert a target attribute your original document is still perfectly valid. The only place the “invalid” document exists is at runtime, in memory, and there’s no reasoning that the dynamic document, which doesn’t even persist, matters in the world of validation. The page still renders (in standards mode no less), will continue to, and the DOM has added the behavior layer which is actually exactly the way it’s supposed to work.

]]>