Coughlan

Gabora

“an associative mode of perceiving metaphoric connections between correlating items in memory, and an analytic mode that is conducive to understanding cause and effect relationships”

Becoming sensitized to these epistemological differences enables us to discern which aspects of creative work is emphasized more than others and see how hierarchies of knowledge get constructed.

tools for ideation are frequently distinct from tools for implementation, often lacking the capability to seamlessly transfer data between them

This perpetuates seeing the “support staff” as merely a resource (rather than central to the creative process), whose work can be replaced.

This emphasis on “acting through the interface” [19] sees technology as acting as an extension of the artist or designer using the tool.

The third wave or the third paradigm [70] shares many of the same assumptions as the second wave – i.e. the centrality of the physical world in our construction of meaning – with a stronger focus on the various abilities of the human body.

The shift in perspective toward the social in psychology covered in the previous embodied action view of creativity resembles an analogous trend in HCI’s “second wave theories”.

The tool-mediated expert activity view of creative work focuses on supporting (expert) creative practices through tools. Activity theory

Since the 1980s, creativity research in psychology has moved away from “univariate, positivist research paradigms” to “more complex, constructivistic, systems-oriented research models” [56].

In other words, moment-to-moment creative actions draw from a large pool of embodied resources, relying on tacit analysis of the fit between the resource and the situation at any given moment.

In addition to the primacy of interacting with the physical world through our bodies, the embodied view of creative work also highlights the role of the body in partnership with the dynamic situation, i.e. the moment-to-moment actions people take in response to different contingencies.

Creative work as reflective practice focuses on the “importance of physical and artifact-centered action in the world to aid thought”

That view of creativity neglects the role the body and the physical world play during the creative process as well as the social context in which creativity takes place.

They do not subscribe to the thinking that “geniuses use cognitive processes that are radically different from those employed by most individuals and that may not be accessible to the methods of cognitive science”

“Most opinion among design methodologists and among designers holds that the act of designing itself is not and will not ever be a scientific activity; that is, that designing is itself a nonscientific or a-scientific activity”.

Proponents of this movement stood on the spectrum with regards to how close they placed design next to science. On the looser end, design is viewed simply as “systematic design”, or, “the procedures of designing organized in a systematic way”

In other words, creative work is about “devis[ing] courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones”

a precise definition will adequately circumscribe creative work, marking out the part(s) of creative process or levels of expertise technology should support

Identifying this vagueness, Remy et al. [112] point out that creativity can simultaneously refer to the “creativity of the outcome”, “the usability of the tool itself”, or “the productivity of the process [as mediated through] CST”.

Simply put, creativity is a noun performing the work of an adjective.

When evaluating computer-mediated creative work, should we ask if technology is enhancing the creative person(s) –perhaps pointing toward an adoption of CST definitions such as “[computational techniques that] mak[e] people more creative more often” [124]– or should we examine how technology is facilitating the creative activity –thus suggesting the need to develop evaluation metrics for CST that are comparable to usability principles

what we're looking at is developing these really these seawater farming units that can turn this land into into sea water farms 00:16:15 will be grow these these crops

the modern textual archive format

An object in object-oriented language is essentially a record that contains procedures specialized to handle that record; and object types are an elaboration of record types. Indeed, in most object-oriented languages, records are just special cases of objects, and are known as plain old data structures (PODSs), to contrast with objects that use OO features.

This analysis will result in the form of a new knowledge-based multilingual terminological resource which is designed in order to meet the FAIR principles for Open Science and will serve, in the future, as a prototype for the development of a new software for the simplified rewriting of international legal texts relating to human rights.

The common aim of lawmakers is to achieve effective legislative texts, namely tests that with the synergy of the other actors in the legislative pro‐ cess can produce the desired regulatory results. However, the process for achieving this common goal is not identical. Broadly speaking, civil and common law countries differ in their approaches.

I thought him very plain at first, but I do not think him so plain now

// Native const datePattern = /^(\d{2})-(\d{2})-(\d{4})$/; const [, month, day, year] = datePattern.exec('12-25-1995'); new Date(`${month}, ${day} ${year}`);

The consumer component will barely change from our last example. The only difference is the way we'll get a reference to our store (since now the store is exported from the JS module):

Now your whole WS logic can be encapsulated in your JS module. That makes for good separation of concern.

Stores are the idiomatic Svelte way when you need to import "reactivity" from your normal JS sources.

Ideally, GitHub would understand rich formats

One part of React that I've always championed is how it's just JavaScript. I like that in React you don't use a distinct template syntax and instead embed JavaScript, compared to Svelte's templating language

I will always find React's approach easier - at least in my head - and I think more friendly to people familiar with JavaScript who are learning a library.

Another important MicroJS attribute is independence. Ember, Backbone—even Bootstrap to a degree–have hard dependencies on other libraries. For example, all three rely on jQuery. A good MicroJS library stands by itself with no dependencies. There are exceptions to the rule, but in general, any dependency is another small MicrojJS library.

D3 now passes events directly to listeners, replacing the d3.event global and bringing D3 inline with vanilla JavaScript and most other frameworks.

Last week, I shared how to check if an input is empty with CSS. Today, let’s talk about the same thing, but with JavaScript.

You can do and impressive amount of form validation with just HTML attributes. You can make the user experience pretty clean and clear with CSS selectors.

the client form validation is the one I like a lot, because, for example, by adding required attribute to an input, I don’t need to write any additional JavaScript to warn a user, when the user submits a form without filling out the required fields

function isObject(o) { return o instanceof Object && o.constructor === Object; }

An array is from a logical point of view not an object - although JavaScript handles and reports them as such. In practice however, it is not helpful to see them equal, because they are not.

Arrays are definitely objects. Not sure why you think objects can't have a length property nor methods like push, Object.create(Array.prototype) is a trivial counterexample of a non-array object which has these. What makes arrays special is that they are exotic objects with a custom [[DefineOwnProperty]] essential internal method, but they are still objects.

arrays are not objects from a logical point of view. I'm speaking about program logic. It is sometimes necessary to check if an array is a "real" array and definitely not an "real" object. That's what Array.isArray() is for. Imagine you have a function which accepts an object or an array of objects.

function isObject (item) { return (typeof item === "object" && !Array.isArray(item) && item !== null); }

while Fascism died in 1945 with the collapse of the Axis powers

that first began in the United States

But the people do not directly exercise their sovereignty, for instance, by voting directly in popular assemblies.

The first was the sundering of civil from religious law with the advent and widespread adoption of Christianity.

to write the document which we have today.

The second momentous change was the emergence of multiple denominations within Christianity that undid Christian unity and in turn greatly undermined political unity.

My frustration is mainly from Svelte's choices that are very un-JavaScript-like. It doesn't have to be "like React/Vue". React is React because it doesn't restrict what you can do with JavaScript for the most part. It's just common FP practice to fold/map.

Remember that "JavaScript" does not mean that the DOM API, AJAX, HTML5 <canvas> (and so on) are available - it just means the JavaScript scripting language is being used - that's it.

You can set options.params to a POJO as shown above, or to an instance of the JavaScript's built-in URLSearchParams class. const params = new URLSearchParams([['answer', 42]]); const res = await axios.get('https://httpbin.org/get', { params });

Checking if an object is a POJO can be somewhat tricky and depends on whether you consider objects created using Object.create(null) to be POJOs. The safest way is using the Object.getPrototypeOf() function and comparing the object's prototype.

The intuition behind POJOs is that a POJO is an object that only contains data, as opposed to methods or internal state. Most JavaScript codebases consider objects created using curly braces {} to be POJOs. However, more strict codebases sometimes create POJOs by calling Object.create(null) to avoid inheriting from the built-in Object class.

If the react cargo cult didn't have the JSX cowpath paved for them and acclimated to describing their app interface with vanilla javascript, they'd cargo cult around that. It's really about the path of least resistance and familiarity.

Why not just use that instead of inventing a syntax that's not part of ECMAScript?

One of the arguments that's frequently deployed in favour of JSX-based frameworks over template-based ones is that JSX allows you to use existing language constructs:

clean and understandable markup template without the help of 3rd party

I really do not like writing templates in a file, such as #each , #if. I do not like to prefer using new approaches for which i can do it with purely in JavaScript.

This starter takes advantage of Typescript and Emotion. This is a personal choice, and I'd encourage you to give it a shot. If you're interested in using plain ES6 and regular scss styling, see release v1 of this library.

Its superior not because its faster, nor because there are shortcuts for you to do things, but because you can make shortcuts to do things.

Your task list is a plain text file, not some proprietary format owned by a company or locked to a specific application.

A simple and timeless format Plain text is the simplest file format there is. It will always be accessible, by some kind of application, forever.

Plaintext files are tiny, simple, quick to work with, editable by tons of great programs, searchable by all modern operating systems, easy to back up, perfect for versioning, trivial to sync between devices, and are amazingly flexible in their uses and formats.

In this system, plaintext files are used for most of the backbone of your organizational system.

made to work alongside the various plain-text, Dropbox syncing mobile notes apps such as Denote for Android and Jottings for iPhone from an app for the Ubuntu desktop. Plain text notes anywhere you want. Easily synced between your desktop and phone. Notes, plain and simple.

Future proofs your journal entries by saving them as plain text and organizing them as you go. This means you can read or create entries when you don’t have DayJournal.

It’s flexible in precisely the way so many modern apps aren’t, and if you like tweaking things until they’re just right, I can’t recommend it enough.

And if all else fails, you can just use a text editor.

The file contents should be human-readable without requiring any tools other than a plain text viewer or editor.

A user can manipulate the file contents in a plain text editor in sensible, expected ways. For example, a text editor that can sort lines alphabetically should be able to sort your task list in a meaningful way.

Plain text is software and operating system agnostic. It's searchable, portable, lightweight, and easily manipulated. It's unstructured. It works when someone else's web server is down or your Outlook .PST file is corrupt. There's no exporting and importing, no databases or tags or flags or stars or prioritizing or insert company name here-induced rules on what you can and can't do with it.

We found that a plain language summary gives readers an instant overview of an article, making it easier to understand and also easier to find.

Translation apps continue to leave much to be desired.