21 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
  2. Sep 2020
    1. Svelte will not offer a generic way to support style customizing via contextual class overrides (as we'd do it in plain HTML). Instead we'll invent something new that is entirely different. If a child component is provided and does not anticipate some contextual usage scenario (style wise) you'd need to copy it or hack around that via :global hacks.
    2. Web developers are well aware of the mess you can get into with global CSS, and the action of writing <Child class="foo"/> and <div class={_class}>` (or similar) in the child component is an explicit indication that, while taking advantage of all the greatness of style encapsulation by default, in this case you have decided that you want a very specific and controlled "leak", of one class, from one component instance to one component instance.
    1. Please focus on explaining the motivation so that if this RFC is not accepted, the motivation could be used to develop alternative solutions. In other words, enumerate the constraints you are trying to solve without coupling them too closely to the solution you have in mind.
    2. Please provide specific examples. If you say "this would be more flexible" then give an example of something that becomes easier. If you say "this would be make it easier to do X" then give an example of what that looks like today and what's hard about it.
  3. May 2020
    1. The element dem in epidemic, endemic, and pandemic comes from the ancient Greek word demos, which meant people or district:

      Interesting how a word (pandemic) that literally means "all people" has ended up (only) meaning a disease that effects all people. Yet nowhere in the word does it say anything about a disease.

    1. Words like hundreds or millions may seem specific, but they sound like a marketer exaggerating the truth. Use specific numbers to draw attention and increase credibility.
    2. ask yourself for each sentence: what does this mean? If you can’t come up with a specific answer immediately, then cut or rephrase until your text is concrete and meaningful.
    1. Taxonomy, in a broad sense the science of classification, but more strictly the classification of living and extinct organisms—i.e., biological classification.

      I don't think the "but more strictly" part is strictly accurate.

      Wikipedia authors confirm what I already believed to be true: that the general sense of the word is just as valid/extant/used/common as the sense that is specific to biology:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(general) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(biology)

    1. "linked data" can and should be a very general term referring to any structured data that is interlinked/interconnected.

      It looks like most of this article describes it in that general sense, but sometimes it talks about URIs and such as if they are a necessary attribute of linked data, when that would only apply to Web-connected linked data. What about, for example, linked data that links to each other through some other convention such as just a "type" and "ID"? Maybe that shouldn't be considered linked data if it is too locally scoped? But that topic and distinction should be explored/discussed further...

      I love its application to web technologies, but I wish there were a distinct term for that application ("linked web data"?) so it could be clearer from reading the word whether you meant general case or not. May not be a problem in practice. We shall see.

      Granted/hopefully most use of linked data is in the context of the Web, so that the links are universal / globally scoped, etc.

    1. as IT staff - who craft and maintain those screens - we lack concrete requirements as to what actually needs to be changed or added at our existing user "touch points" to achieve and demonstrate compliance.
    1. generic-sounding term may be interpreted as something more specific than intended: I want to be able to use "data interchange" in the most general sense. But if people interpret it to mean this specific standard/protocol/whatever, I may be misunderstood.

      The definition given here

      is the concept of businesses electronically communicating information that was traditionally communicated on paper, such as purchase orders and invoices.

      limits it to things that were previously communicated on paper. But what about things for which paper was never used, like the interchange of consent and consent receipts for GDPR/privacy law compliance, etc.?

      The term should be allowed to be used just as well for newer technologies/processes that had no previous roots in paper technologies.

    1. Like #2, vague descriptors like "often" raise questions in buyers’ minds. Always be as specific as possible -- "40% of our customer base," or "Almost every prospect in your industry I’ve spoken with in the last quarter", for example.
  4. Mar 2020
    1. in which case the consent must be given on the basis of sufficiently precise information, including information on the lack of protection in the third country
  5. Feb 2020
    1. Make a proposal If you need to decide something as a team, make a concrete proposal instead of calling a meeting to get everyone's input. Having a proposal will be a much more effective use of everyone's time. Every meeting should be a review of a proposal.
    2. Say, "you didn't respond to my feedback about the design" instead of "you never listen"