Re: [CODE4LIB] Linux Public Computers - time and ticket reservation system

2008-12-30 Thread Shawn Boyette
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Darrell Eifert
deif...@hampton.lib.nh.us wrote:
  a small
 program to set folder permissions may be able to lock down a Gnome or KDE
 desktop to prevent users from changing icons, menus, or wallpaper.

Option 1: Why lockdown?. Simply make a snapshot of the desktop As You
Want It, and everytime someone logs in, overwrite the dotfiles with
the stock ones. Everyone gets the default desktop everytime they
login, no matter what. Unix is all text files; take advantage of it.

Option 2: Why lockdown? If you have persistent user identifiers of any
sort, *stash* the user's desktop at logout and *restore* it at login.
If someone horks things beyond repair, log 'em out, nuke their config
set, and they get the default on next login. Everybody gets *their*
desktop, everytime they login, no matter what. Unix is all text files;
take advantage of it.

-- 
Shawn Boyette (feeling contrarian)
sboye...@gmail.com


Re: [CODE4LIB] LOC Authority Data

2008-09-29 Thread Shawn Boyette
Individual facts or datum are not copyrightable, but collections of
facts -- particular expressions of data -- are. This is what makes
phone books, databases, and the like subject to copyright.

P.S. N.B. IANAL

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Jonathan Rochkind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Interestingly, outside the US it's somewhat more possible to claim copyright
 on factual data than inside the US, Europe for instance has types of IP
 and copyright protection for databases that the US does not.

 But basically, the answer is that nobody knows for sure, not even the
 lawyers.

 Jonathan

 Bryan Baldus wrote:

 On Tuesday, September 23, 2008 4:17 PM, Nate Vack wrote:


 Huh. They claim copyright of these records. I'd somehow thought:
 1: The federal government can't hold copyrights


 The page [1] states:

 Copyright
 Records in the MARC Distribution Services originating with the Library of
 Congress are copyrighted by the Library of Congress for use outside the
 United States. Subscribers are granted copyright permission to selectively
 redistribute records outside the United States; contact LC prior to any
 distribution.

 So, in the U.S., they are not copyrightable, but outside the U.S. some
 copyright claim might be justified.



 2: As purely factual data, catalog records are conceptually
 uncopyrightable


 For the most part, personally I would agree with this, at least for
 individual records (though some parts of the record, like the 520 summaries,
 might contain enough original creativity that could be considered
 copyrightable). Others might believe otherwise, at least as it pertains to
 the collection of the records as a whole--for example, OCLC's copyright
 claims on their database of records.

 ##

 On the Fred 2.0 records, aside from their age, I wish they were available
 in MARC 21 format rather than XML with NFC encoding. When I tried to use
 MarcEdit to convert the files from XML to MARC 21 (January 2007), I ran into
 issues with character encodings. The files also seemed to lack header lines
 like:
 ?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
 collection xmlns=http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim;

 [1] http://www.loc.gov/cds/mds.html#lcaf

 Thank you for your assistance,

 Bryan Baldus
 Cataloger
 Quality Books Inc.
 The Best of America's Independent Presses
 1-800-323-4241x402
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]



 --
 Jonathan Rochkind
 Digital Services Software Engineer
 The Sheridan Libraries
 Johns Hopkins University
 410.516.8886 rochkind (at) jhu.edu




-- 
Shawn Boyette
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [CODE4LIB] what's friendlier less powerful than phpMyAdmin?

2008-07-30 Thread Shawn Boyette
I don't think he was asking about *programmers* creating or modifying *schema*.

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Tim Spalding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 This gets religious quickly, but, in my experience, programmers who
 learn on a framework miss out on their understanding of database
 necessities. They may not matter much when you have a low-traffic,
 low-content situation, but as your traffic and data grow you're going
 to want an understanding of how MySQL optimizes queries, what's
 expensive and what's not, and so forth. Although anyone can learn
 anything, experience is the best teacher, and, in my experience,
 frameworks encourage you to avoid that experience.

 For example, the Ruby programmers I've worked with have been unaware
 that MySQL only uses one index per table per select, causing them to
 index far more than they need, how joins work across different MySQL
 data types, the advantages of ganging your inserts together, etc. This
 stuff adds up fast.

 Of course, the same arguments could be leveled against PHP in favor of
 C, against C in favor of assembly, etc.. Abstraction always has merits
 and demerits.

 Tim

 On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Cloutman, David
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 This is why most Web applications have to implement CRUD interfaces. PHP is 
 definitely for the uninitiated.

 Along the lines of CodeIgnitor, I would suggest using another framework 
 Symfony. It's a very powerful, yet easy to learn framework, and it will 
 autogenerate the CRUD for you. Really, some framework is probably the way to 
 go for this, regardless of which you choose.

 - David

 -Original Message-
 From: Code for Libraries on behalf of Ken Irwin
 Sent: Wed 7/30/2008 6:35 AM
 To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
 Subject: [CODE4LIB] what's friendlier  less powerful than phpMyAdmin?

 Hi folks,

 I have some straightforward MySQL data tables that I would like to be
 editable by some of my less-techy colleagues. I tend to think of
 phpMyAdmin as a perfectly serviceable and reasonably interface for
 updating database tables, but I'm told that it's kind of intimidating to
 the uninitiated.

 Are there alternatives that are meant for non-admin-types? I'd want
 something with read/write permissions, but that could be targeted at
 just a few tables, wouldn't have any of the more potent tools (drop,
 empty, etc.). In the ideal world, I might like something that would
 prevent users from doing things like accidentally changing primary key
 data and things like that.

 I've thought about writing something, but I suspect that would be
 reinventing the wheel. Any ideas?

 Thanks,
 Ken

 --
 Ken Irwin
 Reference Librarian
 Thomas Library, Wittenberg University


 Email Disclaimer: http://www.co.marin.ca.us/nav/misc/EmailDisclaimer.cfm




 --
 Check out my library at http://www.librarything.com/profile/timspalding




-- 
Shawn Boyette
[EMAIL PROTECTED]