Attending An Event Apart Boston and going through the W3C’s Mobile Web Best Practices course has me looking more closely at how I mark up data.
The main cord that was struck, most directly in Luke Wroblewski’s Mobile First! talk, but echoed by most every speaker in Boston, is to design from the mobile version of your site first. This theme occurs in the Mobile Web course as well.
(more…)
On the CSS-d mailing list Gabriele posted a demo titled Pure CSS fisheye menu with icons. It’s a nifty little demo replicating the zooming dock feature you’ll find on Mac and Stardock’s Dock.
I decided to take it one step beyond and utilize CSS 3’s transform properties, resulting in my own Fisheye demo.
I cut out much of Gabriele’s code that handled the zooming and replaced it with Folgers Crystals transition and transform. (Although I kept pretty much everything else she built, including her icons. Thank you Gabriele for the inspiration.)
Specifically, on the navigation anchors we have transition: all .1s ease-in-out. In a nutshell, this says, “All transitions should take .1 seconds to complete and they should do it smoothly.” We also have transform-origin: 50% 0 which moves the center of action to the center top of the anchor box.
It isn’t until we get to the hover/active/focus states that things happen. Here we have transform: scale(1.5), which you’ve no doubt already concluded causes the element to grow by a factor of 1.5. An important thing to note about this, the transform is applied to the anchor element and therefore affect everything inside that anchor, be it a background image, text or foreground image.
Of course it isn’t quite that simple. Because this part of CSS 3 is under development, we need to utilize various vender prefixes. So to see it actually work you’ll need to add -moz-, -webkit- and -o- to the front of all the transform properties. Not surprising there is not support for Internet Explorer, but that’s OK, it doesn’t matter. Anyone using IE won’t know what they are missing. Go see for yourself.
And look for the Easter Egg… .
Wow, a new post. OK, it’s mostly to announce that I have moved my blog from there to here (no longer a page of my site, but front-and-center).
I’ve also cleaned up some things behind the scenes (not that you care, but hey, I did it). There is more cleaning to do, but it shouldn’t affect you in a negative way.
So, that’s it for now. Welcome to my new(ish) home. As always, I’m hoping to use it more…. Time will tell.
While in California a couple of weeks ago, we had a Chrylser 300 rental to get around in. Driving the car for a week did not put Chrysler into my list of potential car purchases.
From the outside the car looks OK. Its tall waistline/short windows give it a muscular, aggressive line seen throughout most of Chrysler’s lineup. The 300 is not the most attractive car, but it certainly isn’t an Aztek. If I was to put it to a 5 star rating, the 300 rolls in around a 3 ½ on purely exterior aesthetics.
The interior fairs about the same. The seats were comfortable and the dash was laid out fine. Given my height (6′ and a bit) and seating / steering position, part of the gauge cluster was hard to read. On the plus side, the fit and finish was nice and, with 32,000 miles on the car, it was free of squeaks and rattles. It wasn’t full-size car plush and fancy, just nice.
One word of caution about the seats: do not drop anything between the seats and the center console. The seat bracket mount is in an uncovered hole that, despite conventional physics, is far deeper than the floor pan should allow. I had the misfortune of dropping a small Barbie accessory (hey, I was traveling with my 4 year old) into the 3″ deep void. Happily I managed to retrieve the princess crown.
Ride was big-car cushy. A little bit more wallow than I car for, but very similar to Cadillacs and Lexuses that I have ridden in. Riding in the back seat was less comfortable. While there was enough room for me (on a 2 hour jaunt to Anaheim), the ride was much more jouncy than up front.
From the driver’s seat, however, the 300 has more blind spots that a macular degeneration conference. The short windows combined with overly thick pillars made changing lanes a crap shoot at best. After a couple of days of double-checking mirrors and craning my head around looking for traffic, I simply started to throw on a blinker, count to three and moved lanes. Sorry to those of you in San Diego that I cut off.
Getting around tight spots and parking was also a challenge. The short trunk is completely invisible from inside the car, and the hood only barely visible. After a couple of days I did begin to develop a feel for where the ends of the car were, but I was never supremely comfortable. (Nor, I should say, did I actually hit anything. Always good.) Rating: 2 ½ out of 5.
Here the 300 really fails to impress. The 6-cylinder engine sort of maybe felt powerful, but that didn’t actually translate into being powerful. Mashing the accelerator made noise and you wanted to believe that you were muscling away, but the not-vanishing landscape outside the windows told a different story.
But the real problem was the transmission. While cruising The 5 and The 15 (as they seem to say in San Diego) the 300’s transmission couldn’t decide which gear to use — it was forever hunting between 3rd and overdrive. The slightest elevation change caused it to drop out of OD. It would then decide no, it didn’t really need to and shift back up. Upon further reflection, maybe 3rd gear was better after all. And down again it would go.
If there is one continual knock on American cars (and by that I mean The Big Three) is quality. The transmission on the 300 we rented had a rather worrisome “ka-slump” that we could feel and hear when it changed from 1st to 2nd gear. And it got worse as the week wore on.
Yes, this was a rental car so we can expect some abuse. I’ll cut Chrysler some slack and I’ll call the 32,000 actual miles equivalent to 64,000 miles. And yet my Mazda has 147,000 miles of abusive driving and the transmission is still pretty slick. Likewise my wife’s 2005 Accord (American-made) with 50,000 miles has zero hiccups. (Full disclosure: her Accord does have a nagging tail light problem and a continually out dome light.)
Drive line rating: 1 out of 5.
The Chrysler 300 failed to impress any of the three people who drove it. Two of us (mother-in-law and myself) are in the market for a new car, and a week with the 300 did not put Chrysler to the top of either list.
Overall rating: 2 out of 5.
My daughter received a Banzai™ Wigglin’ Waterpillar™ for her birthday. I faithfully present to you the “Safety Checklist”:
Setup:
- Before set up: Check under and around Wigglin’ Waterpillar™ for sharp objects, rocks, sticks, lawn sprinklers or any other object that can cause injury or damage to the product. Set up on flat lawn surface, free of depressions or high spots.
- The product should be at least 10 feet (305 cm) away on all slides from trees, walls holes, garden equipment, pools and other objects.
- Connect a standard water hose (not included) to the attachment on the base of base.
[...]
After Use:
- Turn off water hose when product is not in use.
- Detach garden hose.
- Do not store Wigglin’ Waterpillar™ until all parts are completely dry, away from children, to prevent suffocation.
This is exactly how the instructions appeared. Any and all typos have been faithfully reproduced. I have only left out the “Use” section as it wasn’t very funny.
From today’s Rochester Post comes one of the strangest crime watch notices:
According to a police report, a tree was stolen from the backyard of a home ….
The tree may have been chopped down and taken away, the report states.
May have been chopped down? They aren’t sure? Who chops down a tree to steal it?
Today I had my first MRI and, frankly, that is one ridiculous device. If you are unfamiliar with an MRI, in a nutshell, it is a big noisy magnet that creates several slice images of the body part in question.
(more…)
How does a pickle live on the Earth?
How does an eyeball go for a walk?
How does a lightbulb eat?
While looking through our Atlas of the World this morning, I pointed out a beautiful satellite photo of Mt. Etna. “Look Olivia, this is a volcano,” said I. “What’s a volcano?” said she.
We then spent the next ½ hour on YouTube looking at volcano eruptions.
Having instant internet access and rich media sites helped her understand a volcano better than I was able to describe it, and we had a great bonding experience watching lava flow.
Thank you 21st century.
Do the U.S. automakers deserve a bail-out? No.
Should they get a bail-out? Yes.
Ford, Chrysler and GM have had plenty of time to retool and change their product line ups. They have refused to do so and now they are paying the price. Simply put, they don’t produce cars that many of us want. Trucks? Yes, they produce plenty of those and the rising gas prices have squashed sales. Since it takes the automakers years (on the order of 5) to develop a new car, they are stuck and in trouble.
This is the path they have chosen and should pay the price — Chapter 11.
However, the financial industry also created their own problems by funding, buying and selling bad mortgages. The housing bubble was not something that happened out of the blue, those in the mortgage industry knew what they were doing.
That is the path they chose and they were given $700 billion to fix it.
The precedent has been set: we are bailing out bad decisions by the banks; we should then bail out the bad decisions of the auto industry.
When we look at the possibility of nearly 3 million people out of work, we have to do something. Congress is right to demand a solid plan from the auto makers before any money is handed to over.
As for the CEOs, I have no sympathy for them. They shall not hurt no matter what happens. I only respect one of them: Mr. Mullaly at Ford. His salary is an obscene $22 million per year, however, this year he has waived that and is only being paid $1. When asked by Congress if they would do the same, Mr. Nardelli (Chrysler) and Mr. Wagoner (GM) said no. Gentlemen, that is the wrong message to send to those from whom you seek money.
In the end I think the auto industry will be much leaner, more efficient and cost-effective in the future. I just don’t know when that future will arrive.
