Re: [Re: [OODL: No business purposes]]
Enter the wonderful world of temp files :) Anthony, my thought exactly, though there will be problems if we wanted to merge a temp file's contents back into the standie. We might have to live w/o it, that is place a 'data' file next to the application that contains additional blocks. That is, we might need a feature to override blocks in one file with those from another. This shouldn't be much of a problem, but won't look that elegant. Which OS's are like this? I know Unices are not, as long as you have write permission. I'm not sure exactly. Scott mentioned this problem as a reason why MC can't save changes to standalones on Mac; they wanted all versions to behave the same on all platforms. IMO he also counted unix among the platforms that didn't allow this, but I'm not sure. Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
Re: [Re: [OODL: No business purposes]]
Regarding icons, I have started drawing them and shall limit my palette to less then 256 colors - in fact my preference is for the quickdraw eight because most people do not have such refined color accuity (believe it or not the french are significantly color blind - like 10% of the population. Paris is an annoying shade of green. And it rains like in london... too much inbreeding) Eric, that's sad. I'm not the one to use a gadzillion of colors in one icon, but it looks certainly better if you use different shades of the same color to give it a more three-dimensional look. I always liked Apple's "icon colors" palette, but AFAIK it contains some colors that don't scale well to PCs if they don't have true color. We should choose a default font. Helvetica is readable but I think it prints better than it looks on screen. MS Sans Serif? I don't think that many people have this font. You have to remember, it needs to be a font present on all platforms, since we can't require people to buy a font just to use OC. I have started drawing icons. I have a few done as CICN and ICON resources. But if I understand correctly it is actually better that I draw them as picts. Not a problem, but it does seem 'strange'. I intend to post them as an attachment (sorry) in a later letter. Please not that with six arrows, and ten pixel sizes you wind up with a few hundred icons pretty quickly. The icons will be formatted in PICT unless there is a problem with that? I shall use the extension .PNG but I am clueless about which extension to use, so tell me otherwise if necessary. Oh, I'v also developed some graphics for cursors, and even a toolbar... Will submit today or tomorrow as an attachment. Do *not* use ".PNG" as a suffix for a Pict file. That would be as if you gave it the suffix ".GIF" -- many e-mail programs would mix it up. Also, I think it would be smarter to put them up as GIF or JPG or PNG on a web site than attaching them to this list, as many people here might not want to have the whole collection here right now. If you don't have your own web space, I'd suggest you ask Alain to give you access to the server so you can upload the images there. Then just give us the URL and anyone interested can look. If it matters(?) i would be content if we just make a player which allows writing of stacks. If we get to the point of standalones, well and good, but i sort of think that would be competing with metaCard - why bite a hand that feeds? If our player is less than 1 meg that increases portability. I for one am looking at my nice metaCard 2.3 meg standalone and wondering, hmm, how can I put it on a 1.44 meg disk? If it were hypercard i'd just res edit out the resources I do not need - but i cant because its all data fork! Do I use a hex editor? does it remain executable? Probably not. MetaCard aims at programmers more than at "the rest of us". Also, although I am thankful to MC, we wanted to create a HyperCard clone, which just has to include standalones. There are some difficulties regarding standalones since on many platforms programs can't change their file while they're running, which is reauired to save changes to a standalone stack, but I think in the long term we have to support them. Finally, I do think there's room for both MC and OpenCard. So, I would like our player to be less than one meg so that it could be easily distributed, i.e. on one disk, or at least less than 1.44 meg compacted. We'd all like this. I hope we succeed in creating such a small program. If we don't, people can still re-compile OC with a few features left away. Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
Re: [Re: [OODL: No business purposes]]
At 11:21 PM +0100 on 11/15/99, M. Uli Kusterer wrote: There are some difficulties regarding standalones since on many platforms programs can't change their file while they're running, which is reauired to save changes to a standalone stack, but I think in the long term we have to support them. Enter the wonderful world of temp files :) Which OS's are like this? I know Unices are not, as long as you have write permission.
Re: [Re: [OODL: No business purposes]]
At 9:36 AM -0700 on 11/15/99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The icons will be formatted in PICT unless there is a problem with that? I shall use the extension .PNG but I am clueless about which extension to use, so tell me otherwise if necessary. PICT is fine, but use the extension ".pct". ".PNG" means its a PNG file, not a PICT file. So, I would like our player to be less than one meg so that it could be easily distributed, i.e. on one disk, or at least less than 1.44 meg compacted. I plan to keep it FAR under 1 meg... no reason we need that much.
Re: [Re: [OODL: No business purposes]]
Personally I would appreciate _any help from Scott or MC and would be willing to draft whatever would be useful to help this project. On that point your 'lite' license appears to be the same as your 'heavy' license. If you wish I can draw up a license for the 'lite' version that would limit its use. Also the 'splash dialogue' could be (slightly) improved. Helvetica doesn't bother me, and the dialogue's are ok. I shall start on standard icons of 16x16, 32x3È, and 64x64 using a macintosh and storing them both as resources and as bitmaps (pict format). Eric, just a side note: It might make things even easier if you used the 216 web colors palette as the range of colors to use for your items. This way we make sure it displays acceptable on many machines, not just on those with "real color". I would also like to thank MC for making their software available, as the colorization routines are superior to addColor, and because it is cross platform. Built-in color is generally superior to a plug-in that "tacks on" color to a B/W product. Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
Re: [Re: [OODL: No business purposes]]
Rob Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A colleague of mine is an accountant that has recently incorporated his business. He knows all of the ins and outs of the process. And he would be willing to help me if I asked him. Alain, et al: I also formed a for-profit corporation this year. But, at least in California, non-profit corporations are governed by a different set of laws; so I'm not sure how applicable the experience is. I am on the Board of Directors of a non-profit corporation, and might be able to get some insight from original baord members or the foundation's account or attorney. Eric: again, _if we can actually get the help, ok, but its probably simply added complexity. The cost may also be prohibitive. RC: For me incorporating was a must because (a) I will be marketing a product worldwide (or potentially more dangerous...through distributors I may have little control over) so I must limit liability, and (b) it will be easier for me to liquidate or generate equity income if I wish to in the future. I don't see either (a) or (b) as critical to this project: if we are non-profit and our product is free and the license disclaims any liability, potential liability is nil on a practical basis. But "practically nil" is not the same as "nonexistent". Eric: Exactly, we are not planning to sell the business or even the wares, distribution will be via the internet, and the product is not dangerous. Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Re: [Re: [OODL: No business purposes]]
Major premise: I am not the lawyer of any individual or this group, as I am not licensed to practice law. I have to remind you of that because in this posting I am going to be discussing possible relations/liability issues between MC, Scott Raney, and the persons discussing establishing an 'openKard' partnership. Scott raises his concern that liability could be imputed (= legally assigned) to the MetaCard corporation. In practice he does not want to be a partner for this reason. This is perfectly understandable. On the up side: no risk of liability to Scott or MC. On the down side: the only duty between Scott and the partnership is 'ordinary'. The reduced fiduciary duty can be corrected with a properly drafted contract - i.e. the eventual license we would ask from MC or Scott. I'm sorry to have to be objective, but Scott is right. There is a (miniscule) potential liability, and given the 'deep pockets' mentality of lawyers (starting to understand why I don't want to practice?) he's right: a shark (read parasitical unproductive shyster) would see MC as a target. Oh, did you know a lawyer cannot disparage the legal profession? It's true, you cannot both be a lawyer and say that the legal system is twisted, perverse, and injust. Plus you have to swear to uphold and defend the U.S. constitution. Suffice it to say, i just want to teach and if possible contribute something useful. So, like i said, everything i say is true, but given that there will be no fiduciary duty between Scott or MC and the partnership be aware that in doubt you should ask for qualified legal counsel (yes, i am unqualified, six years of law school, and i'm unqualified...because i do not want any part of it) Personally I would appreciate _any help from Scott or MC and would be willing to draft whatever would be useful to help this project. On that point your 'lite' license appears to be the same as your 'heavy' license. If you wish I can draw up a license for the 'lite' version that would limit its use. Also the 'splash dialogue' could be (slightly) improved. Helvetica doesn't bother me, and the dialogue's are ok. I shall start on standard icons of 16x16, 32x3é, and 64x64 using a macintosh and storing them both as resources and as bitmaps (pict format). I would also like to thank MC for making their software available, as the colorization routines are superior to addColor, and because it is cross platform. Sincerly, Eric Engle Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Re: [OODL: No business purposes]
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sorry to have to be objective, but Scott is right. There is a (miniscule) potential liability, and given the 'deep pockets' mentality of lawyers (starting to understand why I don't want to practice?) he's right: a shark (read parasitical unproductive shyster) would see MC as a target. Unfortunately we've had to embrace Grove's law when it comes to lawyers: Only the paranoid survive ;-) Personally I would appreciate _any help from Scott or MC and would be willing to draft whatever would be useful to help this project. On that point your 'lite' license appears to be the same as your 'heavy' license. If you wish I can draw up a license for the 'lite' version that would limit its use. No, I think that's the point. The free Starter Kit can be used to produce commercial applications just like the regular license. The only difference is that there is a *technical* limitation on setting scripts in the Starter Kit (10 effective statements) that doesn't apply with the regular license (even the 64K limit has been removed for the 2.3 release). And the only thing you can't distribute if you get the regular license is the licensed Home stack or the license key (both of which have your name in it, to help discourage you from doing this ;-) Also the 'splash dialogue' could be (slightly) improved. Helvetica doesn't bother me, and the dialogue's are ok. I shall start on standard icons of 16x16, 32x3é, and 64x64 using a macintosh and storing them both as resources and as bitmaps (pict format). Anyone can start on the UI at any time. Pretty much all the cosmetic stuff can be done with just the Starter Kit. It's just wiring it together and creating advanced features that you'd need to write longer scripts for. And from another message: Anthony: Or would it be Scott's decision? Alain: While Scott is quite open to just about anything that is reasonable (non-restrictive), I imagine that he might want to have a say in this matter. This doesn't resolve the objective versus subjective issue, however. (e.g. who will set the criteria to evaluate a candidate's merit?) While I'm sure this is one of the areas I'd like to kibbitz in, I think the basic plan is that since you all are going to all the trouble to establish an organization and defining license terms, we can trust you not to "soil your own nest" as it were by letting people become partners in the organization who are more trouble than they're worth. And if they're of value to the organization, they should have a MetaCard license to work with in case they want to develop or debug the UI. And from yet another message: Alain: Unless we make our licence GPL-like for OpenKard and its derivatives. Alain: Although I have written about this often and recently, it bears recalling once more that I do NOT consider software created with the OpenKard authoring system to be derivative works, and thus would NOT be have to be open source (e.g. commercial interest ). If it were otherwise, all documents typed with MicroSoft Word would be the intellectual property of MicroSoft (for example). *You* might think this, but I think you might be the only one. Certainly anyone with a technical appreciation for the subject wouldn't make this mistake. For example, your comparison with Word is bogus: there could be no restriction on distributing stacks by themselves, but distributing stacks that anyone could *use* would require distributing executable code, and that code would fall under GPL. By your analogy it would be perfectly OK to distribute a copy of Word with your document just in case the recipient couldn't view it with whatever software they happened to already have installed. I did think of one way you could be right, though, and that would be if OC wrote out MetaCard stacks, in which case people could distribute their application with the MetaCard Starter Kit (which, unbelievable as it sounds, has fewer restrictions on distribution than any GPL software does). But this doesn't sound like such a good idea to me. Regards, Scott Scott Raney [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.metacard.com MetaCard: You know, there's an easier way to do that...
Re: [OODL: No business purposes]
A colleague of mine is an accountant that has recently incorporated his business. He knows all of the ins and outs of the process. And he would be willing to help me if I asked him. Alain, et al: I also formed a for-profit corporation this year. But, at least in California, non-profit corporations are governed by a different set of laws; so I'm not sure how applicable the experience is. I am on the Board of Directors of a non-profit corporation, and might be able to get some insight from original baord members or the foundation's account or attorney. I'm inclined to follow Eric's partnership approach, or at least look very carefully at the consequences of incorporation. I don't know about non-profit; but a new for-profit corporation expecting to generate less than $1 mil in first-year income pays a $100 filing fee $300 franchise fee to file articles of incorporation in California, AND must prepay $500 in estimated taxes 3 1/2 months into its first income year. Thereafter there is a minimum tax of $800 annually. After nearly two decades of operating a sole proprietorship I feel like I'm confined to a "business straight jacket" when conducting corporate affairs. We're talking formal meeting notice, written minutes and authorization of most decisions, strict separation of corporate personal funds, filings to the Secretary of State whenever corporate offices move or corporate officers change, etc. (It has forced me to keep a better set of books, which is probably a plus.) For me incorporating was a must because (a) I will be marketing a product worldwide (or potentially more dangerous...through distributors I may have little control over) so I must limit liability, and (b) it will be easier for me to liquidate or generate equity income if I wish to in the future. I don't see either (a) or (b) as critical to this project: if we are non-profit and our product is free and the license disclaims any liability, potential liability is nil on a practical basis. But "practically nil" is not the same as "nonexistent". That's why we have attorneys and insurance companies, eh Eric? Rob Cozens, CCW http://www.serendipitysoftware.com/who.html "And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three; Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee." from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631)
Re: [OODL: No business purposes]
On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 Alain Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) Eric: 3) so that metaCard can enter into a contract with us for use of their engine. Alain: The contract will be with Scott Raney as an individual, not with his company MetaCard. Minor correction here: The MetaCard license grant to the "OpenCard" group would be from MetaCard Corporation, not me. Alain may have been confused by an off-line conversation we had about my personal participation in this matter. If I choose to become a partner in the organization (and assuming I was invited in ;-) it would be as an individual, not as a representative of MetaCard Corporation. While the potential liability in being a member of the organization is small, it's not something I'd be willing or able to bind the company to (joint and several liability being what it is, MetaCard Corporation would probably end up paying the tab if the organization was ever sued). But just to keep things simple, I think I'd prefer not to be a partner, so long as that doesn't restrict me from kibbitzing on various issues from time to time. Regards, Scott Scott Raney [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.metacard.com MetaCard: You know, there's an easier way to do that...
Re: [Re: [Re: [Re: [Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: no profit, plus forking]]]]
Is the font New York available on winDoze? I agree, courier is an excellent choice for the font. We should use fonts which are standard and readily available on both platforms - helvetica is not unreadable in bold format at 12 points and up. I suppose palatino is also unavailable... what fonts are available cross platform? because, yeah, helvetica 12 standard is unreadable. WARNING: RANT FOLLOWS! Rant on vectorial drawing systems: VECTOR GRAPHIX SUCK!!! suck, i say, suck. In fact, they suck raw eggs. I _hate vectorial drawing. DO you know WHY? It is imprecise. Try to adjust a vectorial drawing by one pixel. Try. And watch me laugh ... and scream... The _only advantages of vectorial drawing are: 1) lower storage capacity - which is solved with gif and jpeg 2) easy transformation (shrink/grow) - which has also been solved, at least in 2d 3) the potential for 3d representations - which i have yet to see in a bit map format - but which i do expect to see because: a) memory is growing all the time, whether ram or hard disk storage space b) bit maps are fare more precise both in drawing and in placing. Try to draw a vectorial line exactly n-pixels from another vectorial object. Try. eahahaharharhahh!!! ps - bit maps are why the mac dominated and continues to dominate the art world (and will continue thanks to DVD and pixlar). The mac classic, despite a miniscule screen offered: sharp contrast and precision - you _know where that pixel is wysiwyg - you draw a picture in macpaint on a classix and print it and pixel by pixel, its _exactly the same. Thus, i _still own copies of MacPaint, MacPaint II, and even MacDrawPro - which by the way has some decent - and _only decent vectorial artwork. Oh, check out the addcolor bitmap color drawing tools - they are quite nice. Last reason why bitmap rules, ok: scanning. So... if we could have a drawing editor oriented towards the bitmap drawing programs listed above rather than _any vectorial system I would be much happier (though I admit vectorial works -sort of- for placing buttons and fields. It is still imprecise, i.e. one pixel realignments are simply painful). ENd of RANT Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Re: [Forking for Business [was Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: no profit, plus forking]]
DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we'd have to say that you can use the source for any purpose OUTSIDE of the partnership -- a fork (of organization, not code). Eric: That is my understanding, but if I am wrong please correct me - that we do not envision restricting use or sale of source code by third parties. I realise this is a license issue rather than a partnership issue but it is relevant in so far as: if you tell me 'hey we want no commercial use' then I can draw up the partnership to reflect this. Or if you say "well actually some of us do want to fork into a commercial venture if that is ok with the rest of you" which can also influence the document i draw up for your consideration. So, please speak up, because I want to draft only once and rewrite only once - so i must know, with as much precision as possible exactly what is desired. Thank you! Eric Engle Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Re: [OODL: No business purposes]
Alain: We cannot collectively do anything commercial, but partners can form commercial ventures on their own. That's is what you are suggesting, right? Eric: Yes Alain: Will these commercial ventures contribute anything to the coffers of the group so that we can become self-financing? Eric: Forking/Splitting/Spin Offs. I used these terms to indicate the development of businesses, later, using different forms of organization, based upon whatever openKard develops or does. Alain: Forking means that a (rebel) subgroup is branching off from the main group that maintains the Standard Distribution, at the code level and/or at the organizational level. They become a separate group and cannot use our names or our reputation in the furtherance of their goals. Alain: Spinoffs are more like ventures that sell products and services related to the Standard Distribution and/or the products that this authoring tool will allow people to develop. Eric: There are essentially 3 business activites we are looking at: Writing Software Writing guides to software Other end user support Alain: I am sure we could dream up a few more, like: Value-added solutions authored with OpenKard ; Specific software tools developed (components) ; Value-added resale of OpenKard on CDROM ; Eric: The partnership agreement I suggest would allow all three activities to be undertaken, but would require a different entity to do so. Alain: OK. Eric: My first draft would not include anything that makes founding other partnerships that sell copies of OC impossible. Alain: OK. Alain: How about my suggestion that resale by our group could help finance our activities? Eric: Resale of what? Alain: Value-added resale of OpenKard source code, to avoid download-times and so on. Just like RedHat does with open source Perl. Eric: Software? Support? Alain: Yes. Yes. Eric: The business entity in part or in its entirety? Alain: No. Eric: I really would recommend using two different 'vehicles' - one with no business purpose to develop the ware and get things rolling, and then later another which can do whatever you want. Alain: Doctor knows best! Alain: Why a partnership: Eric: 1) 'coz ya can't screw yer partner - you owe each other a duty of loyalty. Alain: OK, but I am not sure what that implies. Eric: 2) 'coz the law _can imply a partnership - and in law you are always better to have things in writing and express rather than implied. Alain: Good one. I forgot about that. Eric: 3) so that metaCard can enter into a contract with us for use of their engine. Alain: The contract will be with Scott Raney as an individual, not with his company MetaCard. Eric: 4) money (business purpose) is not the only reason for entering into a partnership, i.e. charitable partnerships exist. Alain: Granted. Eric: 5) the risk of liability - in any business venture is: torts (literally 'wrongs') and contracts: Fortunately these types of liability can be limited and are limited to Acts Pursued In The Scope Of The Business. So we limit the business scope. Alain: OK, except for the financing dilemna that it raises. Eric: Why partnerships are risky: Because your partner cannot screw you but can be, well, wrong. With your money. Oh well, you picked him. Alain: I have only met two listers in person. Everyone else is relatively anonymous. And I didn't pick them either. (no offense intended whatsoever) Eric: Because you are personally liable - i.e. you can be sued for your personal posessions and are not limited in liability to the partnership and its property. Alain: Ouch! Eric: Why corporations can limit liability: In a corporation, the corporation is only liable to the extent of the property held by the corporation Alain: This is precisely my point. Eric: (though the individuals still could be sued in fact if they were personally negligent - so it would only protect you from a stupid associate and not your own misjudgment). Alain: That's fair. Non-risky. Eric: So, why not use a corporation? Expense - they cost around 300$ filing fee and about $1000 for lawyers fee. Alain: We could raise that much couldn't we? Eric: Sure you can write it up and file it yourself. Good luck. It is not impossible for a lay person (non lawyer) to set up their own corporation. But it is not easy. Alain: A colleague of mine is an accountant that has recently incorporated his business. He knows all of the ins and outs of the process. And he would be willing to help me if I asked him. Eric: As you can see, drafting a corporation is a hassle. Especially once you consider things like, later sale, ownership, control, change of direction, annual meeting, minutes, stock certificates. Alain: This is indeed a little bit worrisome. The whole bureaucracy of it all. Eric: SO, that is why i think a corporation, for practical purposes is definitely not the way to go. Alain: What do you think now? Eric: It is less expensive, less hassle... Alain: Yes but
Re: [Re: [Re: [Re: [Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: no profit,plus forking]]]]
It is imprecise. Try to adjust a vectorial drawing by one pixel. Try. And watch me laugh ... and scream... Eric, this depends wholly on the implementation. Claris' products are very inaccurate because they do constant conversion between units, which causes things to move around from time to time. Also, many editing modes are implemented inaccurate. 1) lower storage capacity - which is solved with gif and jpeg Depends on the image you're trying to draw. 2) easy transformation (shrink/grow) - which has also been solved, at least in 2d I tend to disagree. Try to scale a 3x3 pixel triangle to 30x30 and you'll see the advantage of Vector over bitmap. b) bit maps are fare more precise both in drawing and in placing. Try to draw a vectorial line exactly n-pixels from another vectorial object. Try. Again, this is a misperception based on inaccurate editing tools. ps - bit maps are why the mac dominated and continues to dominate the art world (and will continue thanks to DVD and pixlar). The mac classic, despite a miniscule screen offered: sharp contrast and precision - you _know where that pixel is wysiwyg - you draw a picture in macpaint on a classix and print it and pixel by pixel, its _exactly the same. I have to disappoint you. The Mac is mostly object-oriented drawing (=vector) on the inside. The Mac's built-in graphics format, PICT, is a vector format. Last reason why bitmap rules, ok: scanning. You have to use both bitmap and vector where appropriate. E.g. for scripted graphics vector is much more convenient (see the SuperCard or Serf example projects for proof). You can still use "bitmap" objects if you need the advantages of bitmaps. It's a combination that's so cool (that's why SuperPaint had such a huge following). So... if we could have a drawing editor oriented towards the bitmap drawing programs listed above rather than _any vectorial system I would be much happier (though I admit vectorial works -sort of- for placing buttons and fields. It is still imprecise, i.e. one pixel realignments are simply painful). How are they painful? Just select the button and drag in one pixel to the left. There's not much difference between that and using the "select" tool to move a graphic one pixel. I don't get your point, it appears. Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
Re: OODL: No business purposes
Alain, you mis-attributed the following comments made by Eric to me. Uli: Really, once you open up business purposes you open up potential liability for contracts entered into by your partners. True, partners owe each other a fiduciary duty ... sorta like marriage, you have to watch out for your partners interests as well as your own. Alain: Why a partnership in the first place? Who are the signatories at this time? Partnerships are only necessary when money is involved, aren't they? I have always been told that partnerships are the most risky type of business association to enter into to. Why not incorporation instead? (e.g. very limited liability) Uli: The liability is prevented by 'nipping' any commercial object in the bud. Alain: Is the following a tautology ? ** no commercial interest = no liability ** Alain: How will we finance ourselves? Even non-profit organizations need some kind of revenue to maintain their activities (cost-recovery). __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
Re: [Re: [Re: [Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: no profit, plus forking]]]
In explaining the low quality graphics, i expect that the authors of MC are used to vectorial drawing rather than bitmap. Personally, for anything detailed bitmaps are better, unless your doing transformations. Since MC does not support "doMenu" as extensively as HC i do not forsee working on the menus till spring. I will produce between 20 and 100 basic icons (arrows, applications, sound volume, obvious stuff) in a bitmap format. Once i figure out how to get to the tool palette (thanks for the hint that it is a substack of home) i shall indeed, do a bit of surgery on our unfortunate hand icon (perhaps it is a cousin of Thing?) I personally prefer Chicago 12 for dialogues and the default font for buttons - if it would be compatible with pc. What is the default font on pc dialogues? on pc buttons? If the interface looks mac or pc is ok by me but it does need improvement. Oh, i favor monaco or geneva for the default script editor - again, are they supported in the pc environment? Regarding MCs background/grouping system, it sure is different. I hope to be able to figure it out - i can ungroup my imported HC background but then how to regroup it? shall figure it out... oh yeah, the free hand tool looks like indochina... for those who know where it is, 'nuff said. Yeah, i agree back it all up and then hack away... I will at least do the browse cursor - the arrow cursor is big, but its nicely done and i don't see it needing changed. The other palette tool icons are 'acceptable'. Really, bet ya that the icons were done in a vectorial environment, shrunk (as bitmaps?) and the result... well, the farmers in wisconsin would be impressed... Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Forking for Business [was Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: noprofit, plus forking]
At 4:10 PM +0100 on 11/8/99, M. Uli Kusterer wrote: I guess this sounds like we'll *have to* say "no business purpose". As long as this can't be misinterpreted to force us not to sell anything OpenCard, even under a different name. I think we'd have to say that you can use the source for any purpose OUTSIDE of the partnership -- a fork (of organization, not code).
Re: [Re: [Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: no profit, plusforking]]
Granted, I work at an art school so i may be a little critical but the hypercard icons while only BW are actually nicer than the MC icons. Eric, honestly spoken, I would have expected a loud yell about MC's interface from an art school person. I have arts major course and it hurts my eyes. Text in buttons is vertically centered the wrong way (too close to the bottom), most buttons waste space, it just doesn't look Mac-like enough for me. Using 9pt Geneva is surely useless these days, but at least Chicago 12 (or Charcoal, or Espy) could be expected. Also, what feature is where is pretty un-intuitive. If you need some help, I can assist you, as I have already hacked around in MC a bit. They dialogue boxes are rather huge, and black on grey is a bad scheme. It's not quite optimal. For check boxes it's acceptable if it's a lighter shade of gray, and it's a bold font, like Chicago, but Helvetica is unreadable. So, at least from an aesthetic/artistic perspective, i guess i volunteer to start doing some artsy craftsy stuff - would that be useful or desirable? I am assuming i can edit dialogue boxes using resEdit (which i am not sure of since all MC dialogue boxes and palettes are in fact stacks). I can also edit the cursor icons (and then save the documents as picts which i assume can be exported to ibm pc format). MetaCard's editor is all MetaCard stacks. They're mostly substacks of the Home stack and the Help stack. You'll notice that editing substacks is pretty awkward. Those background "groups" are also hard to work with. my suggestion is that you re-arrange the menus and dialogs. I used to send lots of messages to Scott, maybe I can dig them up again. Its funny because the color palettes and functionality of buttons and fields are definitely superior to mac - the dialogues are a little boxy, the cursors a little bulky - but those icons are, well, impossible. Yeah. Especially the tool palette icons look like the drawings I did on my first day with a Mac -- in HyperCard, using a mouse and the freehand tool. Please let me know if i should start working on the following resources: icons cursors dialogue boxes I'd also ask you to change the menus. The best way to do this would be to make a backup of the home and help stacks (just in case). Then you should copy the home stack, rename it and edit the things in there. I might still have a sample stack that demonstrates the basics of an MC editor stack, I'll look for it. if such be the case I can expect to have produced a couple hundred icons and a dozen cursors in a month or so: the dialogue boxes i can't say because i do not know if they are stored as resources (i hope) or stacks (oh well i wanted to learn their user interface and stack architecture anyway...) I think we won't need 100 icons. We should focus on the ones actually used in the user interface. An icon library can be added later. Oh, i expect to have a draft of the partnership agreement before the end of november and am indeed only waiting for commentary upon what has been suggested so as to avoid duplication of effort. Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
Re: [Re: [Re: [Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: no profit, plusforking]]]
Since MC does not support "doMenu" as extensively as HC i do not forsee working on the menus till spring. Look for the "menuPick" message. MC has all its menus in popup-buttons (you can show them using the "editMenus" property), since other platforms don't have a global menu bar. I will produce between 20 and 100 basic icons (arrows, applications, sound volume, obvious stuff) in a bitmap format. Once i figure out how to get to the tool palette (thanks for the hint that it is a substack of home) i shall indeed, do a bit of surgery on our unfortunate hand icon (perhaps it is a cousin of Thing?) The cursors are also just graphics, as are the icons. There are sub-stacks of home that contain them. I personally prefer Chicago 12 for dialogues and the default font for buttons - if it would be compatible with pc. What is the default font on pc dialogues? on pc buttons? Chicago is a Mac-only font. That's why MetaCard chose Helvetica. It's the only font that looks pretty much the same on Mac, Unix and Windows. But my personal opinion is making everything Macintosh for now. MC can still use Helvetica Bold or Arial Black or whatever on Win and Unix. If the interface looks mac or pc is ok by me but it does need improvement. Of course I'd prefer Mac to Windows, but as long as it looks halfway decent I don't mind. The worst thing aren't the icons or the buttons, it's the arrangement of menus and dialog boxes, combined with use of many tricks like MetaCharacters. Oh, i favor monaco or geneva for the default script editor - again, are they supported in the pc environment? Both no. I'd suggest Courier, as it's one of the few fonts that's available with most computers, whether Mac or Windows. Regarding MCs background/grouping system, it sure is different. I hope to be able to figure it out - i can ungroup my imported HC background but then how to regroup it? shall figure it out... You needn't ungroup it to edit it. Use the "Edit Groups" command (may even be called Edit Background). My suggestion would be orienting the editor more towards ClarisDraw or other vector draw programs, with a whiff of SuperCard and HyperCard here and there. Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
Re: [Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: no profit, plus forking]
"M. Uli Kusterer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With no business purpose partners and associates are effectively prevented from entering into contracts in the name of the partnerhip in pursuit of its business purpose. With limited business purpose there is the potential that partner A enters into contract with third party B thus binding the partnership and all its members. I guess this sounds like we'll *have to* say "no business purpose". As long as this can't be misinterpreted to force us not to sell anything OpenCard, even under a different name. You get around the "no business purpose" (necessary to prevent liability) by later forming other partnerships among yourselves. That is, by 'forking'. Naturally, 'spin off' associations would have a profit motivation. How you wish to do this may be a subject you wish to raise and discuss before i draw up a first draft of a partnership agreement. Really, once you open up business purposes you open up potential liability for contracts entered into by your partners. True, partners owe each other a fiduciary duty (which is a higher level of duty than 'ordinary care' - sorta like marriage, you have to watch out for your partners interests as well as your own). The liability is prevented by 'nipping' any commercial object in the bud. Again, thank you for correcting my misperceptions about MC not being involved. If i (finally?) understand properly, they let us use MC to develop some graphics for them (e.g. icons, dialogue boxes, and a tool palette) and they get to distribute the interface developed in exchange for a license for a certain number of our developers. If that is the case let me know - cause other than cheesy icons and a sort of ok tool palette, i think their gui is ok. And i actually enjoy drawing icons... and will happily start - would that be useful? Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Re: [Re: OODL: Re: Business purposes: no profit, plus forking]
You get around the "no business purpose" (necessary to prevent liability) by later forming other partnerships among yourselves. That is, by 'forking'. Naturally, 'spin off' associations would have a profit motivation. How you wish to do this may be a subject you wish to raise and discuss before i draw up a first draft of a partnership agreement. Eric, I think as long as your first draft doesn't include anything that makes founding other partnerships that sell copies of OC impossible, I don't see a problem. Really, once you open up business purposes you open up potential liability for contracts entered into by your partners. True, partners owe each other a fiduciary duty (which is a higher level of duty than 'ordinary care' - sorta like marriage, you have to watch out for your partners interests as well as your own). The liability is prevented by 'nipping' any commercial object in the bud. That's why our partnership should be "no business", then. Right? Again, thank you for correcting my misperceptions about MC not being involved. If i (finally?) understand properly, they let us use MC to develop some graphics for them (e.g. icons, dialogue boxes, and a tool palette) and they get to distribute the interface developed in exchange for a license for a certain number of our developers. If that is the case let me know - cause other than cheesy icons and a sort of ok tool palette, i think their gui is ok. And i actually enjoy drawing icons... and will happily start - would that be useful? There are more problems. For example, the menu editor requires you to enter a menu item's name with metacharacters if you want a shortcut or styles. Here a real editor would be cool. Also, the arrangement of the menu items is pretty counter-productive. Too many frequently-used things are hidden away behind three clicks, instead of being placed in a menu, while other commands are in the menu even though they're used only once at the beginning of creating a stack. It misses a hierarchic view of all stacks and substacks etc. and in my book it uses too much screen space. Also, some parts (like the script editor) don't ask you whether you wish to save often enough. There are lots of subtle things wrong there, which you notice once you try creating a real project with it. Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
Re: [Re: [OODL: No business purposes]]
check for existing temp file, create temp file [no temp races, please] copy stack to temp file use temp file on quit: exec copy-back-stack NuCard is now no longer running; copy-back-stack is copy back the temp file exit Anthony, you're talking about a hack like SuperCard's "Bridger" application, right? A program that is started when OpenCard quits and then copies back the stack? Well, basically I like this, although it's a rather crude hack. But the temp file should still only override existing blocks. This way we don't have to copy the whole stack into the standalone, but only the parts that actually changed. Else we'll get a major slowdown. You can do it on the Mac -- I think Scott's just scared of messing up and destroying the executable, crashing the mac, and making the user unhappy. No! You didn't read what I wrote. Go re-read it. Bad boy. g Let me re-phrase that: It isn't possible on Windows, and at least some Unixes. Scott had two options: Allow it on the platforms that support it and don't allow it on platforms that don't, thus creating differences between MC versions on different platforms, or make all standalones read-only, thus keeping MC consistent across all platforms but not providing this feature to Mac users and others that could've had it. He chose the second. We could use the third, which is adding a crude hack to work around this problem. I like crude hacks! :-) Cheers, -- M. Uli Kusterer http://www.weblayout.com/witness 'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...' --- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: --- Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
