<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>blog.arithm &#187; Web 2.0</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.arithm.com/category/web-20/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.arithm.com</link>
	<description>Software.  Politics.  Tinfoil hat conjecture.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:00:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>readonly versus disabled</title>
		<link>http://blog.arithm.com/2008/04/10/readonly-versus-disabled/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.arithm.com/2008/04/10/readonly-versus-disabled/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 04:03:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nurikabe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[css]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disabled]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[readonly]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.arithm.com/2008/04/10/readonly-versus-disabled/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I couldn&#8217;t seem to find a good breakdown on this anywhere and had to see what would happen trial and error. readonly="1" will show a standard form element, however it will not be editable. Data will, however, be submitted. disabled="1" will gray-out the form element. Data will not be submitted with the rest of the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I couldn&#8217;t seem to find a good breakdown on this anywhere and had to see what would happen trial and error.</p>
<ul>
<li><code>readonly="1"</code> will show a standard form element, however it will not be editable.  Data will, however, be submitted.</li>
<li><code>disabled="1"</code> will gray-out the form element.  Data will <strong>not</strong> be submitted with the rest of the form.</li>
</ul>
<p>At least, this is what Firefox does.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.arithm.com/2008/04/10/readonly-versus-disabled/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Silverlight&#8230; would appear to suck.</title>
		<link>http://blog.arithm.com/2007/11/20/silverlight-would-appear-to-suck/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.arithm.com/2007/11/20/silverlight-would-appear-to-suck/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 02:37:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>nurikabe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adobe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[macromedia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[silverlight]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[svg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[xaml]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.arithm.com/2007/11/20/silverlight-would-appear-to-suck/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maybe I&#8217;m completely missing the boat here, but Microsoft&#8217;s new Silverlight seems to be little more than a cheesy Flash knock-off, minus the standards, supporting technologies, install base, and developer community. What the heck is Microsoft thinking? Why didn&#8217;t they just buy Macromedia like the rumor mill has been threatening for the last half a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe I&#8217;m completely missing the boat here, but Microsoft&#8217;s new <a href="http://silverlight.net/">Silverlight</a> seems to be little more than a cheesy Flash knock-off, minus the standards, supporting technologies, install base, and developer community.</p>
<p>What the heck is Microsoft thinking?  Why didn&#8217;t they just buy Macromedia like the rumor mill has been threatening for the last half a dozen years?  For that matter, why didn&#8217;t they release it bundled with Vista so that there would at least be an instant user base?</p>
<p>Unless Redmond does something sneaky, like pushing out Silverlight in automatic service packs,  I just don&#8217;t see it achieving any market penetration for a long time.. if ever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.arithm.com/2007/11/20/silverlight-would-appear-to-suck/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

