The BBC has a contest to vote for the Ten most embarrassing political moments. Funny enough they don't have the my favorite, the projectile vomitting incident involving George Bush senior and Kiichi Miyazawa of Japan.

When Mr Bush's father attended a state visit in Japan in January 1992, he responded to the arrival of Japanese beef steak (French-style) with a projectile vomit into the lap of Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa.

Suffering from flu at the time, George Bush Senior then slumped under the table before getting up a few minutes later and announcing he felt great. 

Too bad there isn't an option for a write-in vote.

 

I've gotten a complaint that in some cases it seems you need a Microsoft Passport account to download the latest version of RSS Bandit. For this reason I've setup an alternate download location, for anyone who's having this problem and doesn't have a Microsoft Passport account.

Enjoy.

 

Download it here. New features and bug fixes described below.

Differences between v1.2.0.43 and v1.1.0.61 below.

• FEATURE: One can now search for feeds by keyword as well as by URL. This means one can search the for 'CNN', 'RSS Bandit' or 'XML' and get back up to a hundred feeds back from the Syndic8 database that contain that requested text in the description. Very useful for browsing for new feeds to subscribe to.
  
• FEATURE: Added an [Apply] button to the Options dialog so one can test features such as the various XSLT themes for displaying feeds (the DOS theme is still my favorite) without having to close the dialog.
  
• FEATURE: Now provides visual indication when downloading the comments for a particular feed that supports wfw:commentRss.
  
• FEATURE: Added a tab in the options dialog for configuring the web search engines available from the Search toolbar (still have MSN Search, Feedster and Google by default)
  
• FEATURE: Option added to network settings dialog to take over proxy settings from Internet Explorer.
  
• FEATURE: Support for the feed:// URI scheme proposed by Greg Reinacker
  
• FEATURE: New user interface with an Office 2003 look & feel courtesy of Tim Dawson's SandBar controls
  
• FEATURE: Ability to subscribed feeds for items that contain a particular keyword (via View->Rss Search).For example,  searching for all posts with "RSS Bandit" in their content.
  
• FEATURE: now you can restrict the security settings of the embedded web browser (via Tools->Options->Web Browser). By default now only allows download of images, but no Javascript, ActiveX or Java applets.
  
• FIXED: Problem that occured infrequently where at certain times moving, renaming or deleting category nodes led to corruption of feedlist.xml file.
  
• FIXED: Clicking on a category node in the tree view no locks up the application thus making it unusable.
  
• FIXED: Certain websites which use "deflate" compression without headers caused exceptions on attempts to decompress the feeds such as MSDN or dasBlog feeds.
  
• FIXED: Maximum age to keep feed items sometimes is inconsistent between the value set in the options dialog and the value used for particular feeds.
  
• FIXED: Too many spurious XML-related errors showing up in 'Feed Errors' special folder.
  
  

 

Check out the screenshots of the two newest features added to RSS Bandit; filtered search and locating RSS feeds by keyword.
 

My latest column is up on MSDN, Extreme XML: EXSLT Meets XPath.

 

Robert Scoble wrote

I see over on Evan Williams site that it looks like Google (er, Blogger, which is owned by Google) is going to support Atom. So far Microsoft has been supporting RSS 2.0 (we've spit out RSS 2.0 on MSDN, on the PDC app, on MyWallop, and in a few other places). Atom is a syndication format that's similar, but slightly different from RSS. I wonder how the market will shake out now.

Evan: can you explain, in layman's terms, why you support Atom and not RSS?

This question is misleading. There are two parts to ATOM that are being discussed by Google, the ATOM API and the ATOM syndication format. The ATOM API is competitive with technologies like the Blogger API, MetaWeblog API and the LiveJournal API while the ATOM syndication format competes with technologies like RSS 1.0 and RSS 2.0.

There has been enough written about the history of feed syndication formats named "RSS" so I'll skip that discussion and move directly to discussing the history of weblog posting APIs.

The Blogger API was originally developed by Blogger (now owned by Google) as a way of allowing client applications to talk to blogger weblogs (using client applications such as w.bloggar). This API was later adopted by other blogging tools such as Radio Userland. However Dave Winer decided he didn't like some of the perceived deficiencies in the Blogger API and forked it thus creating the MetaWeblog API. Later on the Blogger folks came out with version 2.0 of the Blogger API which led to online war of words with Dave Winer because he felt they should use his forked version instead even though his version removed functionality that was crucial to Blogger. Eventually Blogger backed off from implementing v2.0 of thier API and has been waiting for an alternative which presented itself in the ATOM API. Most of this history is available from  Evan Williams's blog post entitled the Tragedy of the API.

<update source="Dave Winer" >

1. ManilaRPC came first, way before all the others you mention. It was an XML-RPC then SOAP-based API for driving Manila, and is still in use today, and is much deeper than any of the other APIs.
2. The MetaWeblog API addressed a very well-known deficiency in the Blogger API, no support for titles. You neglected to mention that it was broadly supported by tools and blogging systems, by everyone except Blogger.

</update>

The ATOM effort is aimed at replacing both the popular syndication formats and the popular weblog publishing APIs. Both of which have been burdened with histores full of turbulent turf battles and personal recriminations.  

Based on my experiences working with syndication software as a hobbyist developer for the past year is that the ATOM syndication format does not offer much (if anything) over RSS 2.0 but that the ATOM API looks to be a significant step forward compared to previous attempts at weblog editting/management APIs especially with regard to extensibility, support for modern practices around service oriented architecture, and security. The problem is that if one implements the ATOM API it makes sense that since this API uses the feed syndication format as the payload of the messages sent between the client and the server then one should also implement the ATOM syndication format. This is probably why Blogger/Google will support both the ATOM API and the ATOM syndication format.

I personally tend to agree with Don Park's proposal

IMHO, the most practical path out of this mess is for the Atom initiative to hi-jack RSS 2.0 and build on it without breaking backward compatibility.  A new spec will obviously have to be written to avoid copyright problems with Dave's version of the RSS 2.0 spec, but people were complaining about the old spec anyway.

As to the Atom API, I won't bitch about it any more if RSS 2.0 is adopted as the core Atom feed format because the feed format is far more important than the API.  This should satisfy Evan Williams since his real beef is with the API.  Yes, there are some issues people have with RSS 2.0 but they can be ignored or worked-around with extensions until later, hopefully much later.

This compromise will give the best of all world's to users. There is no discontinuity in syndication formats yet blog editting APIs are improved and brought in line with 21st century practices. I've mentioned this on the atom-syntax mailing list in the past but the  idea seemed to receive a cold reception.

Regardless of what ends up happening, the ATOM API is best poised to be the future of weblog editting APIs. The ATOM syndication format on the other hand...

 

I've begun to dread every time I see a blog entry in my aggregator with "XAML" in the title. It usually means I am either going to read a lot of inane fanboy gushing about the latest and greatest from Microsoft or some FUD from some contingent that either misunderstands the technology or has an axe to grind with Microsoft. So much so, I've been contemplating adding a "hide entry if contains keyword" feature to RSS Bandit so I never have to read another post about XAML. Anyway, back to the point of my post.

Diego Doval has an entry entitled XAML and... Swing which contained a number of opinions that completely perplexed me. I'll go over each one in turn.

XAML will be Windows-only, so in that sense the comparison is stretched. But this is a matter of practice, in theory an XML-based language could be made portable (when there's a will there's a way). XAML was compared a lot to Mozilla's XUL, and rightly so, but I think there are some parallels between it and Swing as well.

In theory, every language targetted at a computer is portable to other platforms. However if I wrap XML tags around  C++ code that uses Win32 API calls, how portable is that in practice? As for parallels between XAML and Swing, I thought this was extremely obvious. XAML is the XML-ized way to write what one could consider to be the next generation WinForms (managed APIs for interacting with Windows GUI components)  applications. In fact, someone has already implemented XAML for WinForms, called Xamlon. Considering that Swing (Java APIs for interacting with operating system  GUI components) is analogous to Winforms it isn't a leap to see a parallel to XAML and Swing.

One big difference that XAML will have, for sure, is that it will have a nice UI designer, something that Swing still lacks. On the other hand, I think that whatever code an automated designer generates will be horribly bloated. And who will be able to write XAML by hand?

One of the chief points of XAML being an XML-based markup language is so that peple can actually author it. My personal opinion is that this is more of a bad thing than a good thing, I prefer using GUI tools to design a user interface than dicking around with markup files. I've always disliked technologies like CSS and ASP.NET, moving GUI programming in that direction seems to me like a step backwards but based on the enthusiasm about XAML showed by various people in the developer community it seems I am a Luddite.

The main thing I want to point out about the Diego's statements so far are that they are FUD, no designer has been demoed for XAML let alone one that generates bloated code. This is all just negative speculation but let's go on...

And: the problem of "bytecode protection" in Java comes back with XAML, but with a vengeance. How will the code be protected? Obfuscation of XML code? Really? How would it be validated then? And why hasn't anyone talked about this.

XAML is compiled to IL. XAML obsfucation questions are IL obfuscation questions. If you're gung ho about protecting your "valuable IP" with IL obsfucation technologies then grab a copy of Dotfuscator or Spices.NET.

On a related note, Robert says this regarding XAML:

[...] you will see some business build two sites: one in HTML and one in XAML. Why? Because they'll be able to offer their customers experiences that are impossible to deliver in HTML.

Come on, Robert, these days, when everyone's resources are stretched to the limit, when CIOs want to squeeze every possible drop of code from their people, when everyone works 60-hour weeks as a matter of common practice, are you seriously saying that companies will have two teams to develop a single website? Is this Microsoft's selling point? "Here, just retrain all of your people, and double the size and expense of your development team, and you'll be fine."

I tend to agree with Diego here. Having a XAML-based website on the Internet will most likely be cost ineffective for quite a while. On the other hand, it is quite likely that using XAML on the intranet will not be. Corproate intranets are all about  homogenous environements which is why you tend to see more Java applets, IE-specific pages and ActiveX controls used within intranets than on the global World Wide Web. If I was a member of the Longhorn evangelization team or any other of the public faces of Longhorn or Avalon I wouldn't focus much on XAML on the World Wide Web but that's just my opinion.

That leaves two possibilities: 1) XAML will be niche and never really used a lot (think ActiveX, or, hey, even Java Applets!) or 2) XAML will kill HTML. 

Talk about completely missing the point. XAML is primarily for writing Windows client applications, y'know like RSS Bandit or SharpReader, not for delivering stuff on the Web. I don't think anyone at Microsoft is silly enough to think that XAML will replace HTML. The idea is completely laughable.

It is always amazing seeing how stupid and arrogant people tend to think Microsoft is.

 

 

 

Halley Suitt writes

Employers are about to lose a lot of "loyal" employees who have been sticking around through the bad economy, but are more than ready to jump ship as the job market snaps back.

Business Week wrote about this in October, but I think it's coming on even stronger now. BW suggests employers are in for a rude awakening:

I get the same feeling while walking the hallways of the B0rg cube. I suspect that if this becomes a problem in the near future the B0rg will try to adapt as it always has.

 

"Clairol haircolor transformed me from a college graduate to a successful financial advisor. Clairol gives my hair the shine I need to brighten my face and my spirit, which pumps up my confidence. I'm energized! Today I manage millions — next year I'll manage tens of millions! People trust me. That's inspiring!"

"My blonde hair had gone gray — I felt depressed. I went blonde one day for a big party and it was quite a hit! I felt GREAT! I started a diet, lost 72 lbs., began belly dance lessons to keep the weight off and still color my beautiful long blonde hair!"

It's quite impressive what a catalyst for self improvement a simple change like dying your hair can be. There were a number of similar testimonials submitted by the New Year New You! Contest Winners. Read them, be inspired, dye your hair.

 

Doc Searles wrote

Britt Blaser is a techblogger who will never be a warblogger because he's been there, done that, and collected a lot more than a t-shirt: namely, three Distinguished Flying Crosses, including one for the legendary Fire Flight at Katum.

His latest post is Voice of Experience:

This post will make the most sense for those who have witnessed war and are not freaked out by the cold calculus of accepting death as a constant and the loss of buddies as gut-stirring but as inevitable as taxes. Most of the rest of the world has been forced to experience war first hand. Perhaps that's why the rest of the world is unimpressed with this administration's gung-ho attitude, so typical of raw recruits and so uncharacteristic of adults who've peered into the abyss and lived to describe it..

I hate to diss fellow bloggers, but the warbloggers seem to have a paucity of combat experience. We would never entertain the views of programmers who've never hacked code, or historians who've never read history. Why would we listen carefully to warbloggers who've never watched tracers arcing toward their position?

Every warrior knows that perfect safety is a fool's paradise. The premise of the current war on terror is that we can entertain our way out of the terrorist threat. It's entertainment to feel an illusory omnipotence that will hunt down every evil-doer and infidel­a kind of adolescent road rage, really. The old heads in your squadron know to protect such greenhorns from their enthusiasms, at least until they learn or die. "There are old pilots and bold pilots. There are no old, bold pilots."

The more I think about it the more I tend to feel that GW Bush's reelection is in the bag. Posts like the one linked above from Britt Blaser cement this feeling. I deeply suspect that, from the perspective of the average "man on the street" in the US who felt rage at the events of September 11^th 2003, the US government has delivered in spades; retribution has been wreaked across two continents with minimal losses to US forces, the message has clearly been sent that if you screw with the US you get burned, and there have been no significant terror attacks on US soil despite several threats from terrorist organizations. This opinion is based on the general sentiments I get from reading open forums were people from diverse backgrounds discuss current affairs such as the Yahoo! Message Boards.

The position of this mythical "man on the street" is very difficut to assail even with well written posts such as that by Britt Blaser. No matter how much one disagrees with the decisions the current US adminsitration has made as part of its "War on Terror" it is hard to argue with the fact that so far it has seemed relatively successful in the ways that are immediately noticeable. The various counter arguments to this position I have seen online usually sound like Britt Blaser's, they tend to argue that the current course of action is wrong but do not provide alternatives or they claim that there will be negative consequences for the current course of actions but none of the consequences are immediate.  These arguments don't hold up well compared to the aforementioned successes of the "War on Terror". If people feel safer, regardless of whether they are actually safer or not then it is hard to convince them otherwise especially when there isn't any concrete way to justify that position one way or the other.