Sam made this cool double helix out of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomag Geomags] the other night, as we were sitting around the office.

[img[/img/misc/geomag-helix1-t.jpg]]

[img[/img/misc/geomag-helix2-t.jpg]]

[img[/img/misc/geomag-helix3-t.jpg]]

My ideal philosophy for Web application design is as follows:

The entire application exists on a single page, which loads once after the user logs in. All HTML is sent to the client at this point. All further interaction between the user (client) and the server is in the form of JSON data which is sent back and forth. This data generally doesn’t contain HTML or any specific formatting information; that was already sent over either in the form of HTML templates, or else rendered dynamically by Javascript code, which constructs specific widgets. For example, a textual screen with fields in specific places is sent as an HTML template, and the data for the template’s fields are sent as a separate JSON data block. Javascript on the client side is responsible for rendering the template and putting it up on screen. Certain fields in the template may reference sub-templates or more advanced widgets, such as sortable data tables, and the data, which was received through JSON, is rendered into the appropriate presentation and inserted into the template as needed.

As the user navigates from screen to screen, the hash portion of the URL is updated, enabling the browser’s Back button and bookmark functionality.

For an application with many screens, where loading all screens at the beginning before showing anything to the user would cause too much of a wait, the application can load sets of screens in the background once the initial set of screens is loaded and displayed.

A screen template may include more than just HTML with fields denoted; it may include Javascript code which is specific to rendering that screen. The code can then be eval’ed in order to add the requisite functions to the app’s codebase.

As a user is editing data, the browser should frequently send save-state information to the server, so as to prevent data loss in the event of a browser crash or connection-lost condition. On subsequent login, the user’s data should always be recoverable.

On the server side, the server is very data-centric and knows very little about the application’s UI structure. It just handles requests for data, and responds with it, given that the authenticated user has the relevant permissions. It has handlers which can respond with many forms of data. The server’s handlers are flexible and can respond to a single request which requires data gathered from many sources: this way, the UI’s data needs don’t need to be tied too closely to the handlers which satisfy them. In fact the term //source// would be better than //handler//. A true handler, on the other hand, may handle requests to update data.

To be continued…

My personal philosophy is, if I’m going to get somewhere by car, I’d rather be the one driving it.

It’s nice, then, that my passengers always thank me for driving, which is something I would have wanted to do anyway.

Sign on the door of my local 24 Hour Fitness: “The women’s locker room will be closed from 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM on Friday, March 7. During this time, there will be men in the women’s locker room.”

My first thought: Hmm, men get to use the women’s locker room? Hardly seems fair to the women, but I don’t make the rules around here. Might be interesting, I’ve never seen the inside of the women’s locker room before.

My second thought: Oh, right.

[

//U2 3D// is a concert, which was filmed simultaneously with a large number of (eleven?) IMAX cameras (across several actual concerts) and spliced together in the studio. Very well done, considering that almost no material other than the concert itself was used, with the exception of some lines or text rendered onto the image in two or three places. Sound quality was not that sharp, although probably equivalent to the level of fidelity an audience member would have heard through any venue’s sound system. I say this because during the credits, the studio-mastered music had a completely different balance and quality of sound. Interesting that a consistent and continuous mix was made even though several concerts were collapsed into one. (Were they all at the same venue?)

Tickets to the movie were slightly over $20 though, which is a bit outrageous for what is still just a movie, 3D IMAX or not. And this was short — a little over an hour, if I recall correctly. But still, cheaper (and less hearing-damaging) than being at an actual concert, with varied and versatile views (close-ups of the band members playing, instruments, facial expressions, the crowd, stage lights and effects, and so on). Visually, the best part was a 3-D rendered line-drawing animation right before the credits, though. I wish the film had had more of a big creative music video feel, than simply having been footage, no matter how well shot and cut together.

But the band’s simple message of peace and religious tolerance was moving. At one point almost every single person in the audience held up a cell phone, which got me thinking about how incredible it is, in our age, that so many people, no matter where they are across the globe, are just a phone call away. Almost every single person in the audience, linked through this little electronic device. How is it that cell phone towers can so easily handle the load of tens of thousands of devices in the same area, when usually the devices are not nearly that concentrated?

Just a shot away.

[ Title: Zodiac
Author: Neil Stephenson
Reviews: [http://www.amazon.com/dp/0802143156 Amazon]

Neil Stephenson has matured as a writer, and it didn’t take much effort to realize that this book predates //Snow Crash//, but is obviously better than //The Big U//, at least according to the impression I get of his first book. Still, as a Stephenson aficionado I feel obligated to read all his works, starting from the earliest, so //The Big U// it is. (It’s a good thing I’m not an Isaac Asimov aficionado.)

Next book I read, I’m going to keep a stack of Post-It-Notes handy so that I can tag and later list out all the typos I find. Because //Zodiac// sure was full of them. The writing style decayed a bit towards the last several chapters. I have no complaints about the story, though, as implausible as it may seem, which would have (and still would) make a great movie.

I worked for a company which in turn worked for Warner Bros. for two years during the heyday of the HD DVD / Blu-Ray format war, and I haven’t yet read a better article summarizing the battle as [http://blogs.msdn.com/andypennell/archive/2008/03/07/what-did-you-do-in-the-format-war-daddy.aspx this entry in Andy Pennell's blog]. Andy worked on the team which implemented HDi, the interactive layer for HD DVD, technology which we used to implement cool high-resolution animated menus and applications / picture-in-picture features. HDi is based largely on web-standard technologies (mainly XML and JavaScript), and all that JS is a big reason why I find myself at everybody’s favorite search engine, working on front-end, JavaScript-driven user interface functionality.

I commented on [http://personal.fuyuko.net/2008/02/blu-ray-is-winnerbye-bye-hd-dvd.html an entry in Fuyuko's blog] last month, writing the following:

: I programmed HD DVD stuff for a couple years (so it’s safe to say I’m a little biased, but trying to be objective here)… basically the Blu Ray win sucks (slightly) for consumers, too! (1) Blu Ray has region codes, but HD DVD doesn’t. Blu Ray has more complex/draconian copy protection. (2) There’s a free SDK from Microsoft online for creating interactive HDi apps (as of years ago), but for Blu Ray currently (or at least as of last year) the only way to go is a $60,000 authoring package from Sony. (3) The HD DVD specification was complete several years back, and all players conform to it; Blu Ray is still evolving as far as I know, so older players aren’t necessarily going to be compatible with the newest content. Also, there was no requirement for players to have an Ethernet port, so old players can’t necessarily have their firmware updated, either.

: It’s good that the “format war” is over (’cause now it’s safe to go out and buy a player), but anyone who thinks the result had anything to do with consumer choice is wrong.

Andy’s blog entry linked above relates pretty clearly the general demeanor of the format war, and why it wasn’t anything like VHS vs. Betamax all over again. It’s true that at the end of the day, technology still improves at its typical pace, and that Blu-Ray is far superior to DVD in most ways, but when we look at what //could// have been, clearly consumers are the biggest losers. But consumers were very careful to not get involved in the fighting, opting instead to let “the market” fight it out and choose a format before they did. (The market being, whom? Other consumers who were also sitting on the fence? Technology reviewers who were sitting on the fence? Nobody wanted to argue the case for one side, to recommend that consumers purchase one format or the other and to lay out the reasons, for fear of being wrong — when that’s just what consumers count on technology experts and pundits for.) I guess nobody felt strongly about region codes, player updateability and backwards compatibility, availability of authoring tools, standards maturity, interactive features when movies were compared side by side, interface (i.e., menus, applications) appearance when movies were compared side by side, and so on… and so fear (of taking sides) generally ruled the day, and Sony got to bully some studios and stores around, and in the end successfully bullied the market into submission.