<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<opml version="2.0">
<head>
<title>30.opml</title>
<dateCreated>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT</dateCreated>
<dateModified>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT</dateModified>
<ownerName>Tom Morris</ownerName>
</head>
<body>
<outline text="RDF Convenience Class" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"><outline text="I was just looking through the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/&quot;&gt;RDF Primer&lt;/a&gt; (what used to be the Model and Syntax document). It's pretty good, actually. It doesn't use the convoluted XML syntax - instead it uses N-Triples. Whoever said the W3C weren't evolving?!&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/><outline text="Anyway, I had a thought arising out of yesterday's work on adding OpenIDs to FOAF documents. Wouldn't it be cool if RDF/XML had the 'class' attribute from HTML? It wouldn't contain any semantic value - but would simply be used to make manual parsing easier. If you are using a language framework which doesn't support the full set of SPARQL syntax (which is, to be frank, quite a lot of them), it'd be cool to be able to address chunks of the document through classes, like:&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/><outline text="&lt;code&gt;rdf.class['profile'][0].predicate&lt;/code&gt;&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/><outline text="How would this be useful? Well, in combination with rdfs:seeAlso, you could use it to selectively pull in other graphs. It'd almost become like the 'rel' attribute - specifying the relationship of the current document to another document, so you can more narrowly specify rdfs:seeAlso parsing. Save bandwidth and all that.&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/><outline text="Just an idea - probably no more than a passing fancy. If there was a way of boiling it down to 140 characters, I wouldn't have even bothered blogging it..." created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:51:49 GMT"/></outline><outline text="Old-fashioned fix for MacBook Pro annoyance" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"><outline text="I've been having problems with my &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.apple.com&quot;&gt;Apple&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/&quot; rel=&quot;tag&quot;&gt;MacBook Pro&lt;/a&gt;, regarding burning DVDs. I've been burning data DVDs mostly from the Finder's burning interface and having them time out. I thought I'd bought some duff, cheap DVDs ('Intenso' brand, on special offer in my local Maplins).&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="It became really irritating, and I have a stack of maybe 15 DVDs on my desk which I thought were coasters. I got an odd error while trying to burn some MP3s on to a DVD today, in iTunes. It said &quot;The attempt to burn a disk failed. The device failed to calibrate the laser power level for this media.&quot; I Googled the message, and found a fair few Macintosh forums discussing other people who had suffered this problem, and mostly they were saying it was because of unclean heads.&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="I tried a rash solution today. I borrowed from my dad a &quot;Premiere&quot;-brand CD laser lens cleaner. It's a disc that you put in your CD drive that has little brushes on it that clean the laser head, with a goofy-sounding woman telling you. I didn't think it would work, as the MacBook Pro has a slot-loading CD drive. It does now work. At least, the iTunes disc is now burning without any problem.&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="Phew. There's always this nagging fear when something goes wrong with my Mac that it'll cost me a bloody fortune to fix it. That's because AppleCare just &lt;em&gt;don't&lt;/em&gt; care about this kind of thing. Apple desperately need to improve their warranty repairs. If you buy a Mac, you pay &lt;acronym title=&quot;United Kingdom Pounds&quot;&gt;UKP&lt;/acronym&gt;100-200 for AppleCare and it doesn't actually cover many of the problems you'll have as a Mac user. Not that you should have problems, considering you are paying a premium for the bloody machine anyway. (This is less relevant to the desktop machines like the iMac, which I've never had any problems with - only laptops, which I always have problems with.)&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="I'm tempted to set up a blog called Apple Annoyances. There sure are a lot of 'em that I can reel off at the drop of a hat. Not nearly as many annoyances as I can list for my Windows box, but too many nonetheless. And a lot of them don't get addressed because (a) Mac users can get a bit too zealous when confronted with problems and (b) Apple have an incentive not to actually see problems that have arisen.&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/><outline text="An aside: I wonder if anyone has ripped the Laser Lens Cleaner discs and put them up on BitTorrent..." created="Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:54:11 GMT"/></outline></body>
</opml>
