madbernard: a long angled pier (Default)
It takes a lot of time to figure out what's up with licensing code that you build, but a couple weeks ago I had the time to look it over, and I made this set of slides for a 5-minute talk on the subject.

The tl;dr is that all licenses descend from your ability to copyright stuff that you make. Copyright means that you can set the terms by which distribution happens there after, and so you can set Occupy-esque terms like "if you build from this, you have to show your source code and let other people freely build from your thing, too"...

Those terms above are the basic idea of free ("libre") software/"copyleft"/the GPL. Copyleft is a play on words from copyright, indicating that it means to be the opposite of the copyright, using its powers of control to ensure the thing will forever be freely available. The GPL has been tested in courts in the US and EU, and found to be solid.

My main concern with copyleft was, how much can you use it while keeping your thing separate? It seems like the answer is, if you're using, say, a MySQL database, no worries; but if you change the MySQL source code, that change must be liberated. I'm still not 100% sure of where the lines are, but then again, free software has proven itself as a working way of getting software distributed.

Open source licensed code, on the other hand, can be used by software businesses because an open source license doesn't require that you share source code. That, and the clarity and brevity of the writing, is why the MIT license has overtaken the GPL as most widely-used, I suspect.

There are more links in the slides to other discussions, and if anyone has opinions I'd love to hear them in the comments!
madbernard: a long angled pier (Default)
I made a presentation on Basics of Web Accessibility to give to the 70-some people currently studying at Hack Reactor Remote with me! You can look at the slides here:

The presentation went well, and I hope I left people with some good thoughts about the wealth of different people out there who could use our things on the web, and how to build for those people.

The next day, coding away on a clone, my pair and I came to the point where we had to build a login form, and I realized that since I had literally just given the talk, I would have to walk the walk... I say on the slides, "Labels: if you do them right, clicking the word will tick the box (or whatever)". There are two ways to do this right, and over last week and next I've used both of them. Here they are:
<label for="login">Type your handle here!</login>
<input id="login" type="text"></input>

<label>Type your handle here!<input type="text"></input></label>
In the first, you have an "id" attribute on the labelled element, and the label's "for" attribute points to it. In the second, the <label> and </label> tags wrap the input element. I like the first better, since I can then lay out my code however I like; but the second is still there, for cases where everything's all in one place and it won't be messy to nest the tags but it would be messy to have a bunch of attributes.

The result, though, where you wave your hand, vaguely clicking in the area, and you get the cursor focused in the box... That's what the web oughtta be!

May 2016

8910 11121314


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 22nd, 2017 06:56 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios