Wednesday, November 24, 2004

The Corporation

Just went to see 'The Corporation' in the Kino. I was looking forward to seeing it, as I had heard good things about it, and I did enjoy it.

But for me it was a little unfulfilling overall. It was packed with fascinating information and interesting anecdotes and horrifying facts, but the style seemed a little unfocussed. I say a little, because it got some great messages across, no doubt about it, and I love to see information like that made accessible. However, the overall message you come away with is 'corporations can be terrible things', which is the message you get from the trailer from the film.

When I thought about the film I had just watched I felt that the important issues were:

  • Current corporate path is unsustainable

  • People make up corporations

  • The people within the organisations can be the nicest people in the world.

  • Legally, those people are bound to act in ways, and do things, that they would never do as individuals because they are beholden to the shareholders and must turn a profit

  • Changes must be made in law if we are to see real change

  • Ordinary people can make change happen



If this was the central message, then I think it gets a little lost due to a rather scattered approach... a somewhat clearer structure to the film would have benefitted it greatly. Because of the huge amount of information presented it is impossible to retain all the facts and figures when you come out of a film like that, and so a clear, reinforced message is essential.

This great film could have been an absolutely amazing film if the meesage was clearer and if it gave a better indication of what we can do...

I like Michael Moore, he is one of the authors who got me interested in material like this. In his book 'Stupid White Men' I think it was, at the end of each chapter he gave a list of things you could do to implement change. That was an element I think was missing from this film.

What an amazing film it would have been if it could have directed us to actions we could take to implement changes in the laws regarding corporations.

Regardless of these criticisms, it was an entertaining film, packed with interesting material. Go see it!

cover of the corporationClick to buy on AmazonThis is the book, written by the co-author of the film, Joel Bakan.



cover of Stupid White MenClick to buy on AmazonYou've probably read this one by now, it was everywhere when it came out. It was the book that started me reading about politics etc... it's a great introduction to how screwed up the world is!



Odd Comic

Browsing around, I came accross this weird comic.
Hover mouse over the speech bubbles for translation... if you dare.

Thursday, November 18, 2004

CSS image rollovers

When doing some design work recently, I found myself wanting to include an image rollover. So I did what I used to do before I started focussing on web standards and css - I inserted a rollover using Dreamweaver. Then I looked at the source code and I thought "oh my god. That looks ugly." Dreamweaver had inserted a huge amount of javascript (see source code of this page) and the link code changed from this:

<a href="whatever.htm"><img src="rollwithit_js.gif" width="311" height="113" /></a>

to this:
<a href="whatever.htm" onMouseOut="MM_swapImgRestore()" onMouseOver="MM_swapImage('Image1','','rollwithit_js_2.gif',1)"><img name="Image1" border="0" src="rollwithit_js.gif" width="311" height="113" /></a>

Yuk.

Now, I'm sure there is probably a neater way to do this with JS, but my first thought was about an article I had noticed on ALA about CSS rollovers. So I did a search and dug out the article. It only works for very simple rollovers, but that was all I needed. And with a bit of imagination you can get some pretty nice effects.

Except there was a problem. It worked very nicely in Internet Explorer, but not very nicely in Firefox. Now I know most people still browse with IE, but I browse with Firefox, so if nothing else I want my sites to work for me!

Screenshot of initial image:

Screenshot of IE rollover state:

Screenshot of Firefox rollover state:


So I asked around and Lee Hosty provided the CSS code needed to turn this into a cross browser solution. Lee pointed out that applying the hover style to the image would work nicely. Except that Internet Explorer doesn't support hover very well on much other than links. So Lee wrote some CSS which would work around the various issues.
Lee makes use of the Internet Explorer "Star html selector bug" to apply styles in Internet Explorer only. So he applies the hover to the image for most browsers and then uses the bug to apply the original ALA solution for Internet Explorer only.

<style type="text/css">

img {
border: 0;
}

a.roll img {
background-color: #EEEEEE;
}

a.roll img:hover {
background-color: #CCCCCC;
}

* html a.roll {
background-color: #EEEEEE;
}

* html a.roll img {
background-color: transparent;
}

* html a.roll:hover {
background-color: #CCCCCC;
}

</style>


Which means my link code can now look like this:

<a href="whatever.htm" class="roll"><img src="rollwithit_js.gif" class="roll" width="311" height="113" /></a>


Original ALA solution example
Lee's solution example

I love it.

Many thanks to Lee Hosty for this lovely solution.
Thanks also to the Open mailing list which has allowed people like Lee Hosty and Jon Hanna to provide me with help!

Wired News: Vote Recount to Settle Doubts?

Wired News: Vote Recount to Settle Doubts?: "New Hampshire wards used optical-scan equipment made by Diebold Election Systems and Election Systems & Software. About 62 percent of the wards with anomalous results used Diebold machines.

'Which is pretty high,' Briggs said. 'Especially in comparison to hand-counted paper ballots, which accounted for only 27 percent of the out-of-trend wards.'

[..] But Briggs stressed that there was nothing to indicate fraud.

[...] Unlike states and counties using paperless touch-screen voting machines, New Hampshire passed a law in 1994 requiring all voting machines to produce a paper trail, so the paper can easily be used to verify the vote results."

If the recount shows up any anomolies recounts in other states may follow.

Thursday, November 11, 2004

Weebls Stuff - Toons

Wednesday, November 10, 2004

from a table to css

Stopdesign | Weblogs.com List

I found this article interesting... I'm sure the solution given will come in handy some day...

Monday, November 08, 2004

Accessible standard compliant pop up windows??

A lot of people these days will tell you pop ups are evil. Of course, there are many different types of pop ups, some of them more evil than others. Pop ups that spawn on the closing of a window, or the loading of a page for example are utterly evil - for example when you're on a page with nekkid ladies and you close the page quickly, trying to hide the evidence, only to find 200 windows popping up all over your desktop with unimaginable sexual deviancy depicted in every one: who in their right mind will argue the case for those kinds of pop ups?

And it's not just pop ups we're talking about really, it's opening new windows. For example when people link to other sites they often open the links in a new window thinking that it keeps the visitor on their site. But Jakob Neilsen points out that:

'the strategy is self-defeating since it disables the Back button which is the normal way users return to previous sites. Users often don't notice that a new window has opened, especially if they are using a small monitor where the windows are maximized to fill up the screen. So a user who tries to return to the origin will be confused by a grayed out Back button. '



Since my father started computing I can tell you first hand that this is true. But are pop ups a necessary evil?

I have come to believe that we need to keep the web as simple as possible. This means making an attempt to have things behave the way users come to expect them to behave. Links should open in the same browser window. If someone wants to open the link in a new window they should right click, or on a mac press that maccy button that does the same thing. 'But they don't know how to do that...' I hear you cry. Well let them learn. Teach them. If you believe they don't know how to do that then tell them. On your page. Besides, if they don't know how to do that, what are the chances they will know what the hell is going on when they can't use the back button to get back to your site?

And then on the other hand I found myself deliberating over an issue on the Fota site and couldn't see a better solution than pop ups. After a lot of research and a lot of deliberating I decided pop ups, if used correctly and carefully, didn't have to be evil. If you could have a pop up that would allow for browsing without javascript and didn't break the right click and conformed to web standards and you notified the user that the link would open in a new window and you implemented it with extreme caution, I felt that would be ok.

I wanted to have pages with small images on them, with the option of enlarging the images. I had wondered about putting straight links to the images and creating a page for every image. Creating a page per image seemed like overkill and straight links meant the user would be clicking back and forth a lot. I felt the images were back up material, users would probably want to view them in reference to the textual content on the page and I wanted to make that as easy as possible.

The first thing I considered was using the target attribute of the a tag to open a new window, however HTML 4.0 Strict and XHTML 1.0 Strict no longer include the target attribute of the <a> tag which means that according to W3C recommendations you can't open a new window from a link using html alone and my site was XHTML 1.0 Strict. If you wish to open a new window, while conforming to either of those standards, you need to introduce javascript. This article on sitepoint.com talks you through opening new windows while trying to conform to those standards.

However, I found that this solution didn't really work for me because using target="_blank" opened a window that would very possibly obscure the original window completely. I myself browse with the browser maximised so when I open a new browser instance it is set to open maximised and obscures other windows. I didn't want this to happen because of the confusion it could create for users who would not realise a new window had opened. I wanted more control over the window I was opening so I could open a smaller window which would pop up very obviously over the original window.

Now I have done this often in the past using scripts found on the web or scripts inherent in WYSIWYG's such as Dreamweaver. However all of the scripts I had used previously were pretty nasty. They were nasty because they don't work for people who are not browsing with javascript functionality and they do not work for people, like me, who often right click and open in new window or new tab. I like to browse with Firefox and use tabbed browsing to open relevant links - recently pop up scripts had been really annoying me as they make it impossible to choose how you want to open the link. The reason is that they often have a null link or a piece of javascript in the href itself. I really didn't want to implement a solution that I personally found really annoying when browsing so I wondered if there was a better option.

I seemed to remember seeing an article on accessible pop ups on A List Apart, so I started there. However I found the solution to be over complex. My javascript skills are non-existent to basic and anyway I felt there must be a simpler, cleaner solution. I list this article here because it talks through some of the issues with pop ups very coherently and the discussion on the article is also interesting from a research point of view.

Eventually I found an article on quirksmode that I really liked - it seemed like a nice clean and simple solution to my problem. I use the solution from that article, with a change suggested by Jon Hanna , which was to use class instead of type in the a tag. In the original article the type attribute is used with a custom value - I was a little confused about the author's comments on XHTML compliance so I sought help. Jon pointed out that rel, rev or class could also be used and would all probably be better options if going for XHTML compliance as they can have custom values. I opted for class as I felt that while using this method is still essentially a misuse of the attribute, of all the options it is the least objectionable. The code had to be altered slightly, and Jon was kind enough to provide the alterations. Without changing getAttribute('class') to className the solution didn't work in Internet Exporer for some reason.

function popupcode()
{
var x = document.getElementsByTagName('a');
for (var i=0;i< x.length;i++)
{
if (x[i].className == 'popup1')
{
x[i].onclick = function () {
return popup1(this.href)
}
x[i].title += ' (Popup1)';
}
}
}

window.onload = popupcode;


function popup1(url)
{
newwindow=window.open(url,'name','height=450,
width=450, resizable=yes, scrollbars=yes, status=yes');
if (window.focus) {newwindow.focus()}
return false;
}


My links then look like this:
<a href="mypicture.jpg" class="popup1">link text</a>

I am very happy with this solution, I have the javascript in an external file, referenced in each page that needs the pop up code
<script type="text/javascript" src="scripts.js">
</script>
and all I have to do to have a link open in a pop up is include in the a tag the class='popup1'. Lovely.
On top of that it still works if you don't have javascript, and works for right clicking and tabbed browsing and because it also names the window it focuses correctly and won't result in loads and loads of pop up windows.

The last piece of the puzzle for me was to let the user know that the links would open in a new window. I originally had text saying 'Click to enlarge in a new window' but I realised that if you were browsing without javascript this wasn't actually true, so I used javascript to write the part about the new window.
Click to enlarge<script type="text/javascript"><!--
document.write(' in new window');
//-->< /script>
That way those browsing without javascript simply see 'Click to enlarge', and others see 'Click to enlarge in a new window'.

One last thing to note is that according to the sitepoint article window.open() sometimes results in the referring window not being properly reported. Since all my links are within the same site it doesn't really bother me, but if you were opening other external sites that would probably be an issue.

Many thanks to Jon Hanna without whom I might never have got this solution to a point I was completely happy with it.

Friday, November 05, 2004

17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists

17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists...by Michael Moore: "15. Should Bush decide to show up to work and take this country down a very dark road, it is also just as likely that either of the following two scenarios will happen: a) Now that he doesn't ever need to pander to the Christian conservatives again to get elected, someone may whisper in his ear that he should spend these last four years building 'a legacy' so that history will render a kinder verdict on him and thus he will not push for too aggressive a right-wing agenda; or b) He will become so cocky and arrogant -- and thus, reckless -- that he will commit a blunder of such major proportions that even his own party will have to remove him from office."

Well, if you ever read my blog before you probably guessed I'm not over the moon about the US election results. Michael Moore provides some small comfort to those in anguish. ;)

Tuesday, November 02, 2004

Bush on jumping to conlusions

Céifin - insights and initiatives for a changing society

Céifin - insights and initiatives for a changing society

I hadn't come across this crowd before, I only heard of them because it was on the radio this morning that John Pilger was going to be in Ennis for " Imagining the Future, the 7th annual Céifin conference".
Some details of the conference are here because their own site leaves a lot to be desired.
Anyway, even if I don't make the conference I have asked to be put on their mailing list. I really like the idea of the organisation, I just wonder about the fact I haven't heard of them before...

Monday, November 01, 2004

US Election Cartoon

WorkingForChange-This Modern World: Channel surfing

A little too realistic to be funny? :p

Corporate takeover of Iraq

Guerrilla News Network: Palast - New documents detail the corporate takeover of Iraq

This article by Greg Palast confirms what a lot of us knew/feared already with some fascinating insights into the politics being played out. Here are a couple of extracts:

"And when it comes to oil, the Plan leaves nothing to chance - or to the Iraqis. Beginning on page 73, the secret drafters emphasized that Iraq would have to 'privatize' (i.e., sell off) its 'oil and supporting industries.' The Plan makes it clear that - even if we didn't go in for the oil - we certainly won't leave without it."

"One thing stood in the way of rewriting Iraq's laws and selling off Iraq's assets: the Iraqis. An insider working on the plans put it coldly: 'They have [Deputy Defense Secretary Paul] Wolfowitz coming out saying it's going to be a democratic country - but we're going to do something that 99 percent of the people of Iraq wouldn't vote for.' "

"Order number 37, 'Tax Strategy for 2003,' was Norquist's dream come true: taxes capped at 15 percent on corporate and individual income (as suggested in the Economy Plan, page 8). The U.S. Congress had rejected a similar flat-tax plan for America, but in Iraq, with an electorate of one - Jerry Bremer - the public's will was not an issue.

The making of the terror myth

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | The making of the terror myth:

Very interesting review of a three part series on BBC which I don't have :(
So if anyone has it taped let me know!
The series looks at terrorism as a tool of politics and debunks many widely believed myths fed to us by our governments.

Small extract I found interesting below:

"The Power of Nightmares seeks to overturn much of what is widely believed about Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. The latter, it argues, is not an organised international network. It does not have members or a leader. It does not have 'sleeper cells'. It does not have an overall strategy. In fact, it barely exists at all, except as an idea about cleansing a corrupt world through religious violence.

Curtis' evidence for these assertions is not easily dismissed. He tells the story of Islamism, or the desire to establish Islam as an unbreakable political framework, as half a century of mostly failed, short-lived revolutions and spectacular but politically ineffective terrorism. Curtis points out that al-Qaida did not even have a name until early 2001, when the American government decided to prosecute Bin Laden in his absence and had to use anti-Mafia laws that required the existence of a named criminal organisation."