I think this may be a woosh moment where they're saying the Microsoft version should be called LSW because it's for Windows. Probably sounds more obvious with a more sarcastic tone
The concept of a "subsystem" in Windows has evolved since the operating system's inception when Windows NT was designed to support multiple operating system environments through distinct subsystems. Win32 subsystem, which features case-insensitive filenames and device files in every directory, and the POSIX subsystem, which supports case-sensitive filenames and centralized device files: Windows subsystem, the Subsystem for Unix-based Applications (SUA), and the Native subsystem for kernel-mode code were the main subsystems at first.
/SUBSYSTEM linker switch was used to specify the target subsystem at compile time, enabling applications to be compiled for different environments such as console applications, EFI boot environments, or native system processes.
In this nomenclature, WSL follows the original naming conventions (although SUA should have been called WSUA).
Except WSL doesn't actually use any of the nt subsystem machinery in either of its incarnations.
And also, it doesn't really follow that nomenclature. Those all follow "user code target" Subsystem. Windows Subsystem, OS/2 Subsystem, Posix Subsystem, etc.
Is it just me or is this an awful “article”? It mention deregulation but doesn’t point to what specific regulations have been removed. I took a Delta flight 2 weeks ago (one that supposedly had implemented all of these draconian rollbacks) and had the same experience I’ve had for the past 10 years:
- price of the ticket was as advertised
- a checked bag was an option at the same price it has always been.
- I was able to assign a seat next to my husband without additional fees.
Now while this flight was not cancelled, I’ve had to reschedule some flights with Delta due to illness previously and they just gave me a 100% credit for the cost of the flight that was easy to use.
The only contrast for cancellation I know is the nightmare of Air Canada. In the past I’ve had flights get cancelled and only got “vouchers” that could only be used by calling a specific number that took 1 hour+ and were not applicable for taxes (you know half the cost of a Canadian Airline Ticket), and would be lost of not fully used in one purchases
Air Canada vouchers also expire in one year. I had the misfortune of having a flight cancelled at the beginning of COVID. They never refunded me, because apparently you had to go fill a form to apply for a refund within a few days of cancellation. Air Canada is the worst.
> but if you use external CSS, it’s quite common for the request to fail resulting in an unstyled page
That’s a pretty crazy statement. How often do you see loading a CSS stylesheet fail to load? Most sites are completely unusable without their stylesheets and I don’t recall the last time I saw a stylesheet fail to load.
> How often do you see loading a CSS stylesheet fail to load?
I wouldn't say often, but it certianly happens often enough that I make sure my own designs work well enough (the content is visible at least, even if it is hellish ugly) if external resources like that fail to load.
The most frequent cause is a site that is overloaded due to a hug from HN or similar, the main request going through OK but some of the subsequent ones timing out. It is getting less common with servers that support HTTP2/HTTP3 so pipeline better, as the usual failure point in these cases is in opening a connection not while reading the response (or the server generating that response).
It can also happen if static content is served from a different place, and that is down but the host serving the main content is not.
That checks out, I feel like the place I've seen it the most is on Github, which also seems to be the site I use regularly that has the most frequent outages (which also aren't quite at the level I'd call them common, but still _somewhat_ common_ compared to everything else I use anywhere close to daily)
Stacking modals is no good for sure, but just because a form is part of a modal doesn’t mean it should never be able to use a tooltip, dropdown, or popover.
I mean the court is ordering them to retain user conversations at least until resolution of the court case (in case there is copyrighted responses being generated?).
With regards to color on the web, semantic tokens refer to css variables that are named in a way that describes their use, ie:
* bg-brand (this would be used whenever you need your brand color as a background)
* text-danger (likely a red text color)
* icon-warning-hover (likely a dark yellow-orange that's slightly different from icon-warning)
Generally speaking, there are three "levels" of tokens: primitive, semantic, and component. Primitive tokens describe the value. In the case of color, this might be a color ramp. IE red/100, red/200, red/300. Semantic tokens reference primitive tokens. IE bg-brand might have its value set to blue/300. This layer is sometimes called a "reference" layer because of this, but I'm not a fan of that nomenclature since the component layer also references the semantic layer. The component layer is one that describes where in a component the token should be used, ie button-bg or button-text. I highly, HIGHLY recommend against using a component layer though in all but the most extreme multi-brand situation. If you aren't unilever, you should never use component tokens.
Nathan is talking about naming schemes within each tier I mentioned, not different tiers. That blog is detailing naming schemes for the semantic and component layer.
The primitive/semantic/component set of tiers are a general practice. Naming within them heavily differs (and should!). The names you use for the individual tokens depend on goals and intent - ie Google’s material’s semantic layer uses a naming schema that’s designed for colorful variety of themes (albeit at the expense of clarity of how they should be used), whereas Apple uses a far more simplified naming schema since the design of their apps has far fewer design differences.
You have to give an iframe a specific height in pixels. There is no “make this iframe the height its content wants to be (like normal HTML).
This leads to two options:
- your page has nested vertical scroll bars (awful UX)
- you have to write JavaScript inside and outside the frame to constantly measure and communicate how tall the frame wants to be.
I guess, the best you could do is emulating a frameset layout with a fixed navigation and a display frame for the actual content. (By setting the overflow to `hidden` you can get rid of the outer scrollbars.)
No matter your size unless you have a trivial amount of data, if you expose a full SQL query language you can be hit be a DOS attack pretty trivially.
This ignores that row level security is also not enough on its own to implement an even moderately capable level of access controls.
reply