Just got a long e-mail from Simon Robinson who is now the Managing Editor of APress's ASPToday.com site. Probably the best item in it was that the new version of this, due to go up “soon.” will have an RSS feed.
Ladies and Gents, start your aggregating.
If memory serves me right, I recently wanted to add the Technorati search to RSS Bandit. Here’s how I did that.
- Tools|Preferences|Web Search
- On the Add tab
- Set URL to: http://www.technorati.com/cosmos/search.html?rank=&type=&url="[PHRASE]" (the “[PHRASE]” is literally required)
- Set title and description as you like.
- Apply, Ok
In the bag tonight: I've got issues (as if you hadn't guessed)
Counts: Blogging: 7; Dev: 31; Otherwise: 18; SQL: 4; WILY: 3
Line of the night: Look man, nothing is free.
Daniela Florescu from BEA has put out a call for Whitepapers. I'd love to go, but its too far and too far out my job scope.
SQLJunkies own Michael Rys is on the program committee, so I bet we'll get some good blogs from there at least.
http://www-rocq.inria.fr/gemo/Gemo/Projects/XIME-P/
Nope, this isn't an "Onion" posting, either. It's been a slow news day, I guess.
In TV, the rating periods are known as "sweeps." It's easy to tell when it's sweeps: everything becomes racier (or raunchier, if you prefer.) There's more hype and even more screwy things go on. The sad thing is, this shallow tactic works. Pushing the envelop just enough can really boost ratings. But its a dangerous gambit. Push it just one bit too hard and THAWP, you'll get picketed, protested and worse, you'll lose viewers.
So when this item just popped up in my toast, my first reaction was: "yet more proof that the American elections are really just sweeps."
But that's not true. Instead of losing viewers, we're losing our rights. What's next? A ban on inner-racial marriages? Don't I recall an era in American history where such relationships were seen as a moral abomination? Why should that be treated any differently than same-gender marriages?
Marriage stopped being just a "scared institution" the moment it started to carry any weight in a secular institution -- namely the law. I just find it ironic that we now need a law that dictates back to "the Church" -- whatever faith that might be -- that says "you can't marry them, they don't fit our stereotype."
Understand that I'm a heterosexual male in a great relationship with a heterosexual female. My indignation about this isn't based on its morality (or lack there of) in the act of "gay marriage." My problem with this is that its just another case of trying to polarize the American public to vote one way or the other this fall based on just one issue. Frankly, this is just like reality TV. Most of us know so little about the real issues that we're left to "vote somebody off the island" because we don't like how they do their hair. Its too bad that its going to work.
The best solution would be to repeal of all of the laws that discriminate against non-marrieds, so we would all be treated as "equals under the law." Then the "gay marriage" battle would be left where it belongs -- in the Churches, not the Courthouses.
If you're itching to get going with XQuery and don't have the Yukon bits, here's an interesting stack to try. This is also one of the first public releases I've seen of such a stack that has last November's working draft explicitly integrated. Note that its Java based thing, so you might need to install Sun's VM.
http://www.ipsi.fraunhofer.de/oasys/projects/ipsi-xq/index_e.html