Romanian calligraphy is a unique amalgam of Cyrillic, Blackletter, and Glagolitic influences on the Latin alphabet. Florinf over at Typophile is working on two nifty new faces, Arhaic Geo and Arhaic Cali, inspired by old Romanian calligraphic samples:
Pot, meet kettle
There’s a serious case of pot-kettle-black-itis in this article by the New York Times — the home of the obnoxious, pointless, “free registration required” landing page — decrying “private beta” sites that aren’t open to everyone, everywhere, right now.
How to bypass the DiggBar if you’re not quite as badass as Daring Fireball
In retaliation for Digg’s naughty framing and link and Google-juice hijacking in their new DiggBar, John Gruber outlines how to block all users who come to his site via Digg by checking referrers. But what if, instead of being a high-traffic, high-respect, badass like him, you’re some sorry chump with a total of eleven points on Digg? Throwing up a giant middle finger isn’t going to hurt Digg (they aren’t even going to notice) and even has the possibility of hurting your own traffic. So you throw in a framekiller. Works like a charm.
The next big thing, part 3: Taking the relational out of relational databases
Part of an ongoing series.
The relational database is an extremely powerful tool. But sometimes data isn’t very relational, and sometimes transactional, relational, integrity is not as important as it is for, say, a bank. This is one reason why so many sites can get away with mySQL backed by myISAM tables — they’re fine if you’re read-heavy and data integrity is not mission-critical.
Some new projects have sprung up which provide key-value stores or simpler kinds of databases without all the overhead and inflexibility of a relational database.
On the other hand, sometimes data is way more interrelated than a traditional relational database is prepared to handle. Sometimes different kinds of items (i.e. rows) in a database can be related to many other kinds of items in that database, and sometimes end users can create not just new items or new relationships, but new kinds of relationships between items. This type of database is called a graph database, and there are also projects pushing the boundaries of relational in this completely opposite direction.
Pretty much everywhere I interviewed back in February 2008 was either building their own graph database, working on an existing one, or repurposing a relational database (or, in one case, a search backend), to kinda, sorta behave like one. The w3c, not one to be left behind when there’s a specification to be written, is even working on a SQL-inspired query language intended to search them1.
Most applications have some combination of totally un-relational data that can go in a key-value store, some strictly relational data that belongs in a SQL database, and some flexible, highly relational data that belongs in a graph database.
What will happen when these alternative databases start giving traditional relational databases a run for their money? Well, sharding, caching, and normalization all start to sound a lot more complex when the data is in a few different kinds of databases — but then again, maybe optimization won’t be as necessary if a single SQL database isn’t doing all the heavy lifting. Object-relational mappers (and the web frameworks that use them) might need to talk to, and abstract away from, different kinds of databases2.
And the different types of data won’t always be easily separated along table boundaries. Maybe these different types of databases will talk to each other, or maybe they will mature into über-databases that understand lots of different types of data relationships.
But the monolithic, strictly relational, master SQL database is eventually going to go the way of Cobol3.
- Of course, if it’s anything like other technologies designed by the w3c, it’s a steaming pile. [↩]
- Some can already handle talking to multiple SQL databases, and of course there’s two-phase commit. [↩]
- Or Kobol. [↩]
In with the FLUFL…
The next big thing, part 2: Taking the web out of web applications
Part of an ongoing series.
A web application is just a stateless1 application that responds to various requests by performing actions and providing resources. There’s no fundamental reason an application must only communicate over HTTP. Web applications are going to start adding alternative methods of interaction, and I think the first common one will be email.
Perhaps an example will best illustrate this:
Like many web forums, posts to Mosuki‘s discussion forums get mailed out in email. But, unlike any other web forums I know of, they also behave like mailing lists. All the emails have a reply-to header with an email address that identifies the message, the recipient, and the action to be taken if that email address is used. In this case, the contents of a reply email are posted to the forum exactly as if a reply had been posted via the website.
In other words, the action “post a message” can be accessed via a web page and a browser or via a reply-to header and your mail client.
There are other examples of this separation between input/output channels and the application logic. The most obvious is Twitter, which of course can be interacted with via HTTP or SMS2. And the Son of Sam project intends to let you “use modern concepts like handlers, requests, responses, state machines” to interact with email.
Confirm a Facebook friend request, RSVP to an Evite, revert a Wikipedia edit, or reassign a bug report, just by replying to an email or sending an SMS.
There are a number of technical issues inherent a system like this. An application’s framework has to handle multiple input channels, and massage email bodies, HTTP requests, and other input into a least common denominator “request.” Authenticating a user via email, an intrinsically forgeable medium, and protecting against spam, are non-trivial challenges. And a suite of templates suddenly gets a lot more complex when it has to provide views for multiple types of interfaces3 .
This blurring of the line between email, HTTP, SMS, and other communications is not new, strictly speaking. But I think it will become commonplace and even expected. Rather than writing a modern (MVC, stateless, REST-ful, &c.) web application, people will be writing modern (MVC, stateless, REST-ful, blah, blah, blah) applications that have web interfaces, email interfaces, and whatever other interfaces they need.
Stay tuned for the next installment of The next big thing: Taking the relational out of relational databases.
- More or less stateless, that is, authentication tokens like cookies notwithstanding. [↩]
- As well as more standalone apps than you can shake a stick at. [↩]
- Generating text and HTML responses for email that look good and work well in the top 75% of desktop and web email clients is a lot harder than testing a site’s HTML in Firefox, IE, Safari and Opera. [↩]
Why do Unix groups still require re-logging in to register changes?
Summon the Fail Whale
A Geometric Glagolitic Sans
Check out Kalin Varbanov‘s Glagolitic Alphabet Anatomy, a geometric, sans-serif re-imagining of Glagolitic, one of the oldest Slavic alphabets.
Darwin: 0; Dvorak: 1
Evolving a better keyboard layout:
…the evolutionary algorithm couldn’t produce a layout that could beat the Dvorak layout that gets seeded into the final all-star round.
The Dvorak keyboard layout must be an example of intelligent design.