 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / March 2006ideas or work plzzz
Hi all, i am planning to do a project on web personalisation through data mining .That is the web pages that redesign themselves for the taste of the user( optimistically). If ur website falls within this domain ur website could be built for free (for some bucks would be even more preferable. I never had a dislike for money ). It will be developed in XML using java technologies nd the client side could be in java script.Also the site could have the AJAX design pattern. If u have some ideas abt any websites that will be grt too pls share with me. I have already posted this but i find this quite annoying that the web masters themselves rnt quite interested.Pls share if u r quite serious. Ideas plzz i need them fast. Thank you nd have a good day, Shiv. > Hi all, > i am planning to do a project on web personalisation [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > if u r quite serious. Ideas plzz i need them fast. > Thank you nd have a good day, I don't understand what you are asking for. Design ideas for websites? Permission to modify websites maintained by other people? Clients for your business? (And if so, it's not even clear to me what service it is your business is providing). - Oliver "shiv" <eswar.com@gmail.com> wrote on 8 Mar 2006 05:21:55 -0800 in comp.lang.java.programmer: >if u r quite serious. Ideas plzz i need them fast. lrn2spl  SignatureCheck out QueryForm, a free, open source, Java/Swing-based front end for relational databases. http://qform.sourceforge.net If you're a musician, check out RPitch Relative Pitch Ear Training Software. http://rpitch.sourceforge.net > "shiv" <eswar.com@gmail.com> wrote on 8 Mar 2006 05:21:55 -0800 in > comp.lang.java.programmer: > >>if u r quite serious. Ideas plzz i need them fast. > > lrn2spl Exactly what I was thinking! I've noticed that people from India (or with Indian names) seem especially prone to shortening everything, like "you are" to "u r". I wish someone would tell them that this may be trendy but that it is not good communication. I'm fond of capitalizing sentences too but maybe I'm old-fashioned.... -- Rhino > I wish someone would tell them that this may be trendy but that it > is not good communication. As a non-native speaker it always surprises me. Here I sit and try very hard to make as few mistakes as possible (still too many), and on the other hand there are people out there who find it cool to butcher there language. /Thomas SignatureThe comp.lang.java.gui FAQ: ftp://ftp.cs.uu.nl/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS/computer-lang/java/gui/faq http://www.uni-giessen.de/faq/archiv/computer-lang.java.gui.faq/ On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 09:41:48 +0100, Thomas Weidenfeller <nobody@ericsson.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >As a non-native speaker it always surprises me. Here I sit and try very >hard to make as few mistakes as possible (still too many), and on the >other hand there are people out there who find it cool to butcher there >language. Oddly it is easier for computers and humans to accurately comprehend the speech of a non-native speaker. Even with the distorting accent, they tend to enunciate more clearly. I was watching a commercial for a Gravitar vehicle. It turned out it was actually a Grand Vitara slurred. I notice again in commercials the way t's are more and more frequency dropped "twenny" for twenty" or turned to d, "wadder" for "water". My Mom was a stickler. Dropping the R in February was a good way to get the strap. So it still jars my ears when people modify pronunciations. On the other hand, listen to early voice recordings made the 30s. People talked in such a stiff, wind-bag rhetorical sort of way. The "proper" way to speak now sounds stilted. Similarly consider how the Brits, whom we generally look upon as the pronunciation sticklers, have mangled words: strawbries for strawberries. Worster for Worcestershire Chumly for Cholmondley Sinjon for St. John I got an email the other day from a man claiming he was going to college next year then he was going to join the military. Yet my spelling and grammar were better than his by grade 5. The standards have plummeted. What will the world be like? Will the CEOS be using "ur" in their memos? I would have thought that spelling would be improving for two reasons: 1. constant feedback from spell checkers to tell you about the words you commonly get wrong. 2. looking things up in Google and coming up dry if your spelling is too far off. If you are just a bit off you get all the crud written by people who can't spell, often with no clue there is a world of good stuff awaiting those who can spell. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. > On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 09:41:48 +0100, Thomas Weidenfeller > <nobody@ericsson.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > the speech of a non-native speaker. Even with the distorting accent, > they tend to enunciate more clearly. Non-native speakers usually have trouble with sounds that don't exist in their native language though. For example, I'm told my pronounciation of the Japanese character \u30E9 is horrible; I'm told the correct pronounciation is somewhere between "RA" and "LA", but because this sound doesn't exist in English, I end up pronouncing the character either as "RA" or "LA". This is the converse of a Japanese person trying to speak English and pronouncing the "R" and L" sounds identically. [...] > Similarly consider how the Brits, whom we generally look upon as the > pronunciation sticklers, have mangled words: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > What will the world be like? Will the CEOS be using "ur" in their > memos? One (unlikely) solution would be to have English use a syllabary instead of an alphabet. With an alphabet, any number of characters can form a single syllable; "through" is considered to be a single syllable, for example, and yet is seven characters long! In a syllabary, each character represents exactly one syllable. So "U R" might indeed be a correct way of writing what is traditionally "you are" for some syllabary. Why is this a solution? Because of the one-to-one mapping between characters and syllables, this also means that for every sequence of syllables that can be uttered, there exists a unique spelling. If you type in the incorrect character, the pronounciation of the sequence is changed. This also solves the problem of wondering how to spell a word: if you can pronounce it, you can spell it. > I would have thought that spelling would be improving for two reasons: > 1. constant feedback from spell checkers to tell you about the words [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > by people who can't spell, often with no clue there is a world of good > stuff awaiting those who can spell. Google offers a "did you mean ____?" feature, which I sometimes use as a quick spell checker for words I'm unsure of. - Oliver > Google offers a "did you mean ____?" feature, which I sometimes use as a >quick spell checker for words I'm unsure of. it does not kick if for local desktop searches or if enough people spelled the word incorrectly. I have even seeded the glossary in a few spots with deliberate incorrect spellings as spider food. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. > Why is this a solution? Because of the one-to-one mapping between > characters and syllables, this also means that for every sequence of > syllables that can be uttered, there exists a unique spelling. Not such a good idea. Pronunciation differs over both time and space. E.g. most English people talk (in fact rather than theory) of a "bu'on", whereas I believe the same word is often pronounced "budon" in the US. So what you javax.swing.JButton be called ? Similar observations apply to vowels. E.g. there are at least two very different pronunciations of the word "vase". If the spelling worked in terms of some sort of "logical" syllables (where the underlying syllable was the considered to be same all over the world, but the pronunciation differed from place to place), then we'd have a situation at least as complicated[*] as the current one, and the logical syllables would have to be "just learned", just as English spelling is now. ([*] Arguably it would be exactly as complicated, since English has phonetic[**] spelling, it's just that pronunciations have drifted since word spelling became fixed.) ([**] Ignoring later imports from French, and other dilutions, distortions, and approximations.) -- chris >([*] Arguably it would be exactly as complicated, since English >has phonetic[**] spelling, it's just that pronunciations have >drifted since word spelling became fixed.) >([**] Ignoring later imports from French, and other dilutions, >distortions, and approximations.) (...) I will keep you, Suzy, busy, Make your head with heat grow dizzy. Tear in eye, your dress will tear. So shall I! Oh hear my prayer. Just compare heart, beard, and heard, Dies and diet, lord and word, Sword and sward, retain and Britain. (Mind the latter, how it's written.) Now I surely will not plague you With such words as plaque and ague. But be careful how you speak: Say break and steak, but bleak and streak; (...) http://bertel.lundhansen.dk/sprog/sprog.php?page=english_is_tough >> Why is this a solution? Because of the one-to-one mapping between >> characters and syllables, this also means that for every sequence of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > E.g. > there are at least two very different pronunciations of the word "vase". I'm thinking that possibly by having an explicit mapping from syllable to character, this would discourage "pronounciation drifting". As for "vase", I guess someone would just dictate a "proper" spelling for it in the new syllabary, which would in turn dictate a "proper" pronounciation. Even if we had two spellings for "vase" (one for each pronounciation), I believe it would be no worse than the situation of having two spellings for many other words as well (e.g. color/colour, meter/metre, etc.) while still solving the problem of "how do you spell this?"/"how do you pronounce this?" - Oliver > I'm thinking that possibly by having an explicit mapping from syllable > to character, this would discourage "pronounciation drifting". As for > "vase", I guess someone would just dictate a "proper" spelling for it in > the new syllabary, which would in turn dictate a "proper" pronunciation. Dear Gods, man ! It'd be a blood-bath. You think the odd flame-war over brace layout or top/bottom posting is vicious ? Wait till we try to standardise English pronunciation. The English-speaking world would implode in hatred and violence (cue: lurid pictures of massed Quebequois laughing hysterically as they annex the blasted remains of Northern America.) The real problem -- technically -- would be deciding which syllables were distinct. For instance in some English social groups "suit" is pronounced as a diphthong (start with something like "sute", and then add in the difference between "coo" and "queue". It may rhyme with "astute" -- depending on how you pronounce /that/ ;-). So, for them, that isn't the same syllable as the one in "sutra", although they /are/ the same for me. So do we have two logical syllables for this case or just one ? I remember missing a favourite TV program as a child visiting my grandparents. They asked me if I wanted to watch "Luke", but that sounded like some boring kids' drama show, and I'd never heard of it anyway, so I didn't bother. Too late I discovered that they were talking about the show that was spelled "Look". So again, should "Luke" and "look" share a logical syllable or not ? And how does the logical structure of the syllable list reflect the relationships between them: for many people "suit" and "Luke" share a vowel, for other people "suit" and "look" share, whilst for others there are three different vowels. > Even if we had two spellings for "vase" (one for each > pronounciation), I believe it would be no worse than the situation of > having two spellings for many other words as well (e.g. color/colour, > meter/metre, etc.) while still solving the problem of "how do you spell > this?"/"how do you pronounce this?" Interestingly, if perhaps a little ominously for your programme, in both the examples you mention, the confusion was /caused/[*] by spelling reform activists... ([*] at least in part -- AFAIK, the US adopted the spellings "meter" and "color" under the influence of that Webster fellow and his reformist dictionary.) One nice effect of your idea of splitting the word into two -- essentially creating two synonyms where there was only divergent pronunciation before -- is that could act as a nursery ground for the creation of new words. I have no doubt that the two "vase"s would diverge in meaning, perhaps referring to large vs. small, or formal vs. informal, and thus the vocabulary would be extended. -- chris >> I'm thinking that possibly by having an explicit mapping from >> syllable [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > as > they annex the blasted remains of Northern America.) Yes, I mentioned that my "solution" was "unlikely" to be implementable in practice. > The real problem -- technically -- would be deciding which syllables were > distinct. For instance in some English social groups "suit" is pronounced [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > people "suit" and "Luke" share a vowel, for other people "suit" and "look" > share, whilst for others there are three different vowels. Personally, I haven't really made a decision on that. If they made me "the King of English", then I guess I'd have to start making some decisions about which syllables are distinct, and which aren't. But I suspect they'd rather have a linguist (or a group of linguists) make these decisions, since they probably have a better understanding of what the formal term "syllable" means and how it might differ from a "phoneme", for example, whereas I don't. I'm not particularly "proud" of my way of pronouncing terms, and would not start a rebellion to fight the reform if it turns out the "official" pronounciation differs from mine. I'd be willing to learn a new set of pronounciations if it meant that English were easier to learn, leading to more people being able to communicate more effectively with each other, make it easier to share ideas, really have every part of the Internet accessible to everyone (as opposed to having certain portions naturally unaccessible because the viewer doesn't speak the language the content is written in, etc.) We don't have to use English as a base either; it's just that since the Internet seems to be so heavily English-based already, I figured this would be the path of least resistance. I know of Esperanto, an artificial language designed to be easy to learn to facilitate universal communication. I haven't learnt it because of the chicken and egg problem: almost no one else knows it, so I'd have no one to communicate with. >> Even if we had two spellings for "vase" (one for each >> pronounciation), I believe it would be no worse than the situation of [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > vs. small, or formal vs. informal, and thus the vocabulary would be > extended. An undoubtedly, people will use "vai-se" when they meant "vah-se", and the pedants will write posts complaining about how kids these days seem to take perverse pleasure in intentionally miss-pronouncing words. - Oliver > I know of Esperanto, an artificial language designed to be easy to learn >to facilitate universal communication. I haven't learnt it because of the >chicken and egg problem: almost no one else knows it, so I'd have no one to >communicate with. With the Internet you have all the people you want to talk to, even locally. The problem is you can't ask technical questions about Java in Esperanto. The real problem is the humiliation of dealing with people who talk many times faster than you can understand. See http://mindprod.com/esperanto/esperanto.html Esperanto is phonetic, but it has its pronunciation problems since everyone speaks it with a national accent that takes some getting used to. UTF-8 is a great boon to Esperanto. Formerly there was a major hurdle to deal with its accented letters on computer. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. > See http://mindprod.com/esperanto/esperanto.html Thanks for the link, it was very informative. At http://mindprod.com/esperanto/esperanto.html#TESTING, the characters that appear under the "Unicode UTF-8 Rendered Entity" column are different from the characters that appear under the "iso-8859-3 Rendered Entity" and "iso-8859-3 Rendered alt-key" columns. I suspect the characters I see under UTF-8 are correct (the first row appears to be a c with a circumflex in UTF-8, but like the characters AE in the iso-8859-3 column for me). It looks like later on in the document you use iso-8859-3, so I'm seeing the "wrong" characters, and it's somewhat confusing for me. Don't know if this is something "fixable", as I'm not sure if I'm using an especially "weird" computer, or if rather most people will be like me, and have UTF-8 fonts installed, but not Esperento fonts. Just letting you know about this. - Oliver > Thanks for the link, it was very informative. At >http://mindprod.com/esperanto/esperanto.html#TESTING, the characters that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >UTF-8 are correct (the first row appears to be a c with a circumflex in >UTF-8, but like the characters AE in the iso-8859-3 column for me). The document encoding applies to the whole document which I believe some browsers let you override.. Further IE has a bug that strongly discourages you from using iso-8859-3. iso-8859-1 with Unicode entities is the way to fly now. Formerly, you treated Esperanto as if it were Turkish. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. > Google offers a "did you mean ____?" feature, which I sometimes use as a > quick spell checker for words I'm unsure of. Firefox has a spell check extension for use while inputing into forms called RiteOfTounge. Opalinski opalpa@gmail.com http://www.geocities.com/opalpaweb/ > What will the world be like? Will the CEOS be using "ur" in their > memos? Perhaps I shouldn't admit it, but I routinely get instant messages from our CEO saying: "hi chris r u there?" Yet our CEO is generally a literate, well-educated, and fairly intelligent person, except when forming correct sentences in some instant messages. I think AOL has just managed to convince large numbers of people that intentional misspellings are the norm on the Internet. It's a misguided "When in Rome..." situation. Signaturewww.designacourse.com The Easiest Way To Train Anyone... Anywhere. Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer MindIQ Corporation >> What will the world be like? Will the CEOS be using "ur" in their >> memos? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > misspellings are the norm on the Internet. It's a misguided "When in > Rome..." situation. I think, over here at least, that it's SMS text messaging that is to blame. Tight restrictions on the length of the message and a ridiculously impractical input method have lead to the evolution of the highly abbreviated "text speak". Now that it's somewhat acceptable and understood on mobile phones it follows that lazy people, particularly those that are slow typists, are using it on the Internet as well. Dan. SignatureDaniel Dyer http://www.dandyer.co.uk On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 23:02:44 -0000, "Daniel Dyer" <dan@dannospamformepleasedyer.co.uk> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >I think, over here at least, that it's SMS text messaging that is to >blame. too bad newsreaders don't have standard plugins. We could write a dudespeak to English translator for outgoing messages. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. > too bad newsreaders don't have standard plugins. We could write a > dudespeak to English translator for outgoing messages. Sounds like an idea for a Firefox extension. Opalinski opalpa@gmail.com http://www.geocities.com/opalpaweb/ > I think, over here at least, that it's SMS text messaging that is to > blame. Tight restrictions on the length of the message and a > ridiculously impractical input method have lead to the evolution of the > highly abbreviated "text speak". Now that it's somewhat acceptable and > understood on mobile phones it follows that lazy people, particularly > those that are slow typists, are using it on the Internet as well. That was my thought as well, but then I realised that I'd seen far too much of this type of abbreviated typing even before mobile 'phone use became so pervasive that 14YOs had the things. Certainly that has made it worse, though. Luke > shortening everything, like "you > are" to "u r". I wish someone would tell them that this may be trendy but > that it is not good communication. It's not communication at all, at least not with me. I have no choice but to ignore posts that I can't read. -- chris > Hi all, > i am planning to do a project on web personalisation [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > script.Also the site could have the AJAX design pattern. > If u have some ideas abt IF you want anyone to take you seriously, learn to write real English. "u" and all that nonsense is an instant turnoff and it just looks plain lazy. Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.