Your search for returned 5755 results.

Monday 27 August 2018

Applications sous OS X

Vous regrettez amèrement l'option « N'importe où » vous autorisant à installer/lancer sur votre OS X des applications sans contrôle de leur origine ?


Une simple ligne de commande peut vous aider :

sudo spctl --master-disable

Après avoir quitté et relancé les préférences, votre option préférée sera de nouveau là :


Pour revenir à l'état antérieur, une autre ligne de commande :

sudo spctl --master-enable

Saturday 28 July 2018

Gerv, oh Gerv :-(

Gervase Markham

Thursday 7 June 2018

Browser detection inside a WebExtension

Just for the record, if you really need to know about the browser container of your WebExtension, do NOT rely on StackOverflow answers... Most of them are based, directly or not, on the User Agent string. So spoofable, so unreliable. Some will recommend to rely on a given API, implemented by Firefox and not Edge, or Chrome and not the others. In general valid for a limited time only... You can't even rely on chrome, browser or msBrowser since there are polyfills for that to make WebExtensions cross-browser.

So the best and cleanest way is probably to rely on chrome.extension.getURL("/") . It can start with "moz", "chrome" or "ms-browser". Unlikely to change in the near future. Simple to code, works in both content and background.

My pleasure :-)

Wednesday 2 May 2018

Nominating Florian Rivoal for a seat at the W3C Advisory Board

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is at crossroads. There are multiple reasons for that:

  • it's slow, extremely slow. Its Process, that rules the daily life of the Membership, cannot be changed fast even in front of a major hickup. It's not an exaggeration to say that important problems do take years to fix, even when there is an clear, critical and immediate issue.
  • it's opaque and weirdly managed. Elections at the Advisory Board (AB) and the Technical Architecture Group (TAG) are the only elections I know where the scores of the candidates remain secret after the end of the election. Even the candidates, successful or not, don't know their scores. It's the only organization I know where votes of the Membership can be biaised by changes to the requests during the course of a vote... It's the only Standards Committee I know where the management regularly interferes with the local Process. The finances of the W3C are also opaque, with a Staff that has seen a salary freeze for many years now, a non-incorporated structure (even as a Foundation) and extremely complicated relationships between the MIT-based foot of W3C and its european or asian feet.
  • it's unable to acknowledge the fact that some crucial parts of the Open Web Platform (OWP) it voluntarily abandoned long ago are now gone. html, DOM and other major layers of the OWP are now in the smart hands of the WHATWG. As an example, nobody really cares about the W3C versions of html and DOM because they're not what's implemented, because they diverge from implementations; it's just not usable in a real production environment. A clear side-effect is a counter-productive state of war with WHATWG that affects everyone and everything.
  • the merger with IDPF, mostly done behind curtains and with little interaction with the Membership, is suboptimal, to say the least. The former IDPF has recreated its ivory tower inside the W3C. The original Charters of the Publishing Groups were not conformant to W3C Process; the spirit of these Groups itself is not conformant the W3C spirit and usual way of producing Standards. As I said above, W3C is at crossroads but it has experience and expertise about delivering Standards to billions of people, like it or not.
  • the W3C Director, our Maaaaaster, is mostly gone. He's on a sabbatical now but he's been mostly absent from W3C daily activities for the last decade. Decisions, technical or process-wise, are always made « in the name of the Director », but the Director does not show up any more if you except big events like Plenary Meetings. In my 7.5 years tenure as CSS WG Co-chair, not a single spec transition conference call was held by the Director (and the CSS WG is one of the major groups of the W3C). The W3C is unable to acknowledge that absence and materialize it in its Process.
  • a part of Standardization relies on some absolutely crucial Invited Experts that invest their own budget for us. Even the attendance cost to the Plenary Meetings can be too much for some of them. We started discussing a sponsoring scheme for Invited Experts a decade ago and we're still nowhere at all.

So I think the reasons why I ran myself in the past for a seat at the W3C Advisory Board still stand. The W3C needs reforms, and probably a management change. But I wrote here a while ago, « I am now 50 years old, I have been contributing to W3C for, er, almost 22 years and that's why I will not run any more. We need younger people, we need different perspectives, we need different ways of doing, we need different futures. We need a Consortium of 2017, we still have a Consortium of 2000, we still have the people of 2000. »

I pinged Florian Rivoal about all of that. Florian is a extremely talented, multicultural, brilliant french engineer (but he also holds a MBA from INSEAD, often ranked #1 MBA in the whole world) based in Japan. He has been a crucial contributor to the CSS Working Group, the Publishign activity and many other areas of the daily W3C activities as a Avisory Committee representative for his various past employers. I do trust him, I like his vision, I like his diplomatic talent, appreciate that he deeply and truely cares for the future of the World Wide Web and the future of the W3C, and I love his technical expertise.

After a short chat, I told Florian that I wanted to nominate him for a seat at the W3C Advisory Board. After some thoughts, Florian accepted. Kodansha (one of the largest publishing company in Japan) has agreed to sponsor his participation to the AB.

You can read his official candidacy in french, english, japanese, chinese and korean. If your employer is a W3C Member and you're the AC-rep of your employer, please consider giving your vote to Florian, Florian would be a great addition to the W3C Advisory Board. And if you're not the AC-rep but your employer is a W3C Member, please consider telling your AC-rep about Florian's candidacy with a recommendation to vote for him.

Thank you.

Thursday 1 February 2018

LibreOffice and EPUB

LibeOffice 6.0 is now available. And it's through the inevitable Korben I discovered this morning it has a builtin EPUB export. So let's take a closer look at that new beast and evaluate how it deals with that painful task. Conformant EPUB? And which version of EPUB? Reusable XHTML and CSS? We'll see.

After installation (on a Mac), I created a new trivial text document; it contains a paragraph, a level 1 header, an image, a table, and a unordered list of three items. I did not touch at all fonts, styles, margins, etc.

Trivial text document in LibreOffice 6.0

Then I discovered LibreOffice now has two new menu items: File > Export As... > Export directly as EPUB and File > Export As... > Export as EPUB... .

Export directly as EPUB

It directly opens a filepicker to select a destination *.epub file. Let's unzip the saved package and take a look at its guts:

  • the mimetype file is correctly placed as first file in the package and it's correctly stored without compression
  • other files are correctly stored using Deflate
  • the META-INF/container.xml is stored in last position in the zip, which is probably a mistake
  • the OPF file says it's a EPUB 3.0 package and its metadata are clean ; AFAICT, the OPF file is conformant to the spec
  • XML and XHTML files in the package are serialized without carriage returns (if you except one after the XML prolog) or indentation...
  • a NCX is present
  • the Navigation Document (called toc.xhtml) and the NCX live side by side in a OEBPS folder (sigh)
  • there is a  empty OEBPS/styles/stylesheet.css file
  • the content files are in a OEBPS/sections folder
  • that folder contains 2 files (!) section001.xhtml and section002.xhtml
  • looking at these files, LibreOffice seems to have split the original document at section breaks, hence the two sections found in the EPUB package
  • there is no title element in these files
  • there is clearly a problem with exported CSS styles, the body of each generated document having no margins, paddings. And since there is no CSS-reset either...
  • the set of LibreOffice styles (the leftmost dropdown in the toolbar) are not exported to CSS; the whole export relies on CSS inline styles (style attributes) and not on classes
  • the original document uses the "Liberation Serif" font, that is not registered under that name into the OS X fontbook (old issue well known in the OOXML world...). The final rendition in a browser is then buggy, font-wise. The font-family declarations in the document don't use a fallback to serif.
  • there is a very weird font-effect: outline property serialized on all paragraphs in table cells
  • strangely again, all these paragraphs have text-decoration: overline; text-shadow: 1px 1px 1px #666666; while the original text is not overlined nor shadowed
  • when a paragraph (a p in terms of OOXML) contains one single run of text (a r in OOXML), the output could be optimized getting rid of a span and adding its inline styles to the parent paragraph. The output is too verbose and will trigger issues in html editors, Wysiwyg or not.
  • the margin values in the document use a mix of inches and pixels, which is kind of weird
  • the image in the original document is lost in the EPUB package
  • headers are not generated as h1, h2, ... but as p elements with styles.
  • the EPUB version does not correctly deal with the unordered list and all list items become regular paragraphs. No ol or ul, bullet, no counter, no list-style-type. Semantics is lost.

Firefox Quantum viewing the resulting section002.xhtml file. You can clearly see where the html+CSS export is buggy:

Firefox Quantum viewing the resulting section002.xhtml file

How iBooks sees that EPUB:

how iBooks sees that EPUB

Export as EPUB...

Aaah, that one is quite different since it first opens the following dialog:

Export as EPUB... dialog

The dialog offers the following choices:

  1. export as EPUB2 or EPUB3 (nice!)
  2. Split at Page Breaks or Headings (very nice feature but why not also a "Don't split" option?)

and validating the dialog goes to the aforementioned *.epub filepicker.


This is an excellent start, really, and splitting the document at headers or page breaks is an excellent idea. Unfortunately, there are too many holes in the xhtml+CSS export at this time to make it really usable unless your document has almost unstyled paragraphs only. Some generated styles (overline?!?) are not present in the original document, it generates only paragraphs and tables losing the header or list semantics, the LibreOffice styles are not serialized in a CSS stylesheet (bug?) and more. This will help some individuals but I am not sure it will help EPUB publication chains, at least for now.

Update: Wow. I added an extra test: I compared the result of "Export to XHTML" and the XHTML inside a "Export to EPUB". In the former, styles are correctly exported as a stylesheet, classes are correctly used, h1 and ol/li are correctly used, the image is preserved, and the general rendering is MUCH better. So the Export to EPUB has one of the two following problems: it reuses the "Export to XHTML" code and splitting introduced a lot of bugs, OR it has its own export-to-xhtml code and it's a mistake since the existing one does quite a decent job...

Second update: LibreOffice's trunk does a significantly better job: stylesheet is correctly generated, xhtml files are CR'd and indented correctly, images are preserved.

Thursday 18 January 2018

Announcing WebBook Level 1, a new Web-based format for electronic books

TL;DR: the title says it all, and it's available there.

Eons ago, at a time BlueGriffon was only a Wysiwyg editor for the Web, my friend Mohamed Zergaoui asked why I was not turning BlueGriffon into an EPUB editor... I had been observing the electronic book market since the early days of Cytale and its Cybook but I was not involved into it on a daily basis. That seemed not only an excellent idea, but also a fairly workable one. EPUB is based on flavors of HTML so I would not have to reinvent the wheel.

I started diving into the EPUB specs the very same day, EPUB 2.0.1 (released in 2009) at that time. I immediately discovered a technology that was not far away from the Web but that was also clearly not the Web. In particular, I immediately saw that two crucial features were missing: it was impossible to aggregate a set of Web pages into a EPUB book through a trivial zip, and it was impossible to unzip a EPUB book and make it trivially readable inside a Web browser even with graceful degradation.

When the IDPF started working on EPUB 3.0 (with its 3.0.1 revision) and 3.1, I said this was coming too fast, and that the lack of Test Suites with interoperable implementations as we often have in W3C exit criteria was a critical issue. More importantly, the market was, in my opinion, not ready to absorb so quickly two major and one minor revisions of EPUB given the huge cost on both publishing chains and existing ebook bases. I also thought - and said - the EPUB 3.x specifications were suffering from clear technical issues, including the two missing features quoted above.

Today, times have changed and the Standards Committee that oversaw the future of EPUB, the IDPF, has now merged with the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). As Jeff Jaffe, CEO of the W3C, said at that time,

Working together, Publishing@W3C will bring exciting new capabilities and features to the future of publishing, authoring and reading using Web technologies

Since the beginning of 2017, and with a steep acceleration during spring 2017, the Publishing@W3C activity has restarted work on the EPUB 3.x line and the future EPUB 4 line, creating a EPUB 3 Community Group (CG) for the former and a Publishing Working Group (WG) for the latter. If I had some reservations about the work division between these two entities, the whole thing seemed to be a very good idea. In fact, I started advocating for the merger between IDPF and W3C back in 2012, at a moment only a handful of people were willing to listen. It seemed to me that Publishing was a underrated first-class user of Web technologies and EPUB's growth was suffering from two critical ailments:

  1. IDPF members were not at W3C so they could not confront their technical choices to browser vendors and the Web industry. It also meant they were inventing new solutions in a silo without bringing them to W3C standardization tables and too often without even knowing if the rendering engine vendors would implement them.
  2. on another hand, W3C members had too little knowledge of the Publishing activity, that was historically quite skeptical about the Web... Working Groups at W3C were lacking ebook expertise and were therefore designing things without having ebooks in mind.

I was then particularly happy when the merger I advocated for was announced.

As I recently wrote on Medium, I am not any more. I am not convinced by the current approach implemented by Publishing@W3C on many counts:

  • the organization of the Publishing@W3C activity, with a Publishing Business Group (BG) formally ruling (see Process section, second paragraph) the EPUB3 CG and a Steering Committee (see Process section, first paragraph) recreated the former IDPF structure inside W3C.  The BG Charter even says that it « advises W3C on the direction of current and future publishing activity work » as if the IDPF and W3C did not merge and as if W3C was still only a Liaison. It also says « the initial members of the Steering Committee shall be the individuals who served on IDPF’s Board of Directors immediately prior to the effective date of the Combination of IDPF with W3C », maintaining the silo we wanted to eliminate.
  • the EPUB3 Community Group faces a major technical challenge, recently highlighted by representatives of the Japanese Publishing Industry: EPUB 3.1 represents too much of a technical change compared to EPUB 3.0.1 and is not implementable at a reasonable cost in a reasonable timeframe for them. Since EPUB 3 is recommended by the Japanese Government as the official ebook format in Japan, that's a bit of a blocker for EPUB 3.1 and its successors. The EPUB3 CG is then actively discussing a potential rescindment of EPUB 3.1, an extraction of the good bits we want to preserve, and the release of a EPUB 3.0.2 specification based on 3.0.1 plus those good bits. In short, the EPUB 3.1 line, that saw important clarifying changes from 3.0.1, is dead.
  • the Publishing Working Group is working on a collection of specifications known as Web Publications (WP), Packaged Web Publications (PWP), and EPUB 4. What these specifications represent is extremely complicated to describe. With a daily observation of the activities of the Working Group, I still can't firmly say what they're up to, even if I am already convinced that some technological choices (for instance JSON-LD for manifests) are highly questionable and do not « lead Publishing to its full Web potential », to paraphrase the famous W3C motto. It must also be said that the EPUB 3.1 hiatus in the EPUB3 CG shakes the EPUB 4 plan to the ground, since it's now extremely clear the ebook market is not ready at all to move to yet another EPUB version, potentially incompatible with EPUB 3.x (for the record, backwards-compatibility in the EPUB world is a myth).
  • the original sins of EPUB quoted above, including the two missing major features quoted in the second paragraph of the present article, are a minor requirement only. Editability of EPUB, one of the greatest flaws of that ecosystem, is still not a first-class requirement if not a requirement at all. Convergence with the Web is severely encumbered by personal agendas and technical choices made by one implementation vendor for its own sake; the whole W3C process based on consensus is worked around not because there is no consensus (the WG minutes show consensus all the time) but mostly beacause the rendering engine vendors are still not in the loop and their potential crucial contributions are sadly missed. And they are not in the loop because they don't understand a strategy that seems decorrelated from the Web; the financial impact of any commitment to the Publishing@W3C is then a understandable no-go.
  • the original design choices of EPUB, using painful-to-edit-or-render XML dialects, were also an original sin. We're about to make the same mistake, again and again, either retaining things that partly block the software ecosystem or imagining new silos that won't be editable nor grokable by a Web Browser. Simplicity, Web-centricity and mainstream implementations are not in sight.

Since the whole organization of Publishing @W3C is governed by the merger agreement between IDPF and W3C, I do not expect to change anyone's mind with the present article. I only felt the need to express my opinion, in both public and private fora. Unsurprisingly, the feedback to my private warnings was fairly negative. In short, it works as expected and I should stop spitting in the soup. Well, if that works as expected, the expectations were pretty low, sorry to say, and were not worth a merger between two Standard Bodies.

I have then decided to work on a different format for electronic books, called WebBook. A format strictly based on Web technologies and when I say "Web technologies", I mean the most basic ones: html, CSS, JavaScript, SVG and friends; the class of specifications all Web authors use and master on a daily basis. Not all details are decided or even ironed, the proposal is still a work in progress at this point, but I know where I want to go to.

I will of course happily accept all feedback. If people like my idea, great! If people disagree with it, too bad for me but fine! At least during the early moments of my proposal, and because my guts tell me my goals are A Good Thing™️, I'm running this as a Benevolent Dictator, not as a consensus-based effort. Convince me and your suggestions will make it in.

I have started from a list of requirements, something that was never done that way in the EPUB world:

  1. one URL is enough to retrieve a remote WebBook instance, there is no need to download every resource composing that instance

  2. the contents of a WebBook instance can be placed inside a Web site’s directory and are directly readable by a Web browser using the URL for that directory

  3. the contents of a WebBook instance can be placed inside a local directory and are directly readable by a Web browser opening its index.html or index.xhtml topmost file

  4. each individual resource in a WebBook instance, on a Web site or on a local disk, is directly readable by a Web browser

  5. any html document can be used as content document inside a WebBook instance, without restriction

  6. any stylesheet, replaced resource (images, audio, video, etc.) or additional resource useable by a html document (JavaScript, manifests, etc.) can be used inside the navigation document or the content documents of a WebBook instance, without restriction

  7. the navigation document and the content documents inside a WebBook instance can be created and edited by any html editor

  8. the metadata, table of contents contained in the navigation document of a WebBook instance can be created and edited by any html editor

  9. the WebBook specification is backwards-compatible

  10. the WebBook specification is forwards-compatible, at the potential cost of graceful degradation of some content

  11. WebBook instances can be recognized without having to detect their MIME type

  12. it’s possible to deliver electronic books in a form that is compatible with both WebBook and EPUB 3.0.1

I also made a strong design choice: the Level 1 of the specification will not be a fit-all-cases document. WebBook will start small, simple and extensible, and each use case will be evaluated individually, sequentially and will result in light extensions at a speed the Publishing industry can bear with. So don't tell me WebBook Level 1 doesn't support a given type of ebook or is not at parity level with EPUB 3.x. It's on purpose.

With that said, the WebBook Level 1 is available here and, again, I am happily accepting Issues and PR on github. You'll find in the spec references to:

  • « Moby Dick » released as a WebBook instance
  • « Moby Dick » released as a EPUB3-compatible WebBook instance
  • a script usable with Node.js to automagically convert a EPUB3 package into a EPUB3-compatible WebBook

My EPUB Editor BlueGriffon is already modified to deal with WebBook. The next public version will allow users to create EPUB3-compatible WebBooks.

I hope this proposal will show stakeholders of the Publishing@W3C activity another path to greater convergence with the Web is possible. Should this proposal be considered by them, I will of course happily contribute to the debate, and hopefully the solution.

Thursday 11 January 2018

Web. Period.

Well. I have published something on Medium. #epub #web #future #eprdctn

Monday 25 December 2017

En vrac de Noël

  • le monde du livre électronique basé sur EPUB est au bord de l'implosion. EPUB, sous les auspices de l'IDPF qui a depuis fusionné avec le W3C, a réussi à lister à peu près tout ce qu'il ne fallait pas faire dans un Standard de ce type :
    • références normatives vers des documents non stables
    • extensions propriétaires non implémentées par les navigateurs
    • mécanismes presque impossibles à implémenter dans des éditeurs de contenu (dans le monde du Livre Électronique, une erreur stratégique gravissime)
    • des versions sorties trop vite, trop rapprochées les unes des autres et surtout sans rapports d'implémentation obligatoires
    • des versions successives cassant à chaque fois la compatibilité ascendante
    • j'en passe et des meilleures

    et c'est en train de pêter : l'industrie japonaise de l'édition a des tonnes et des tonnes d'EPUB 3.0.1 qu'ils ne peuvent ni ne souhaitent faire migrer vers EPUB 3.1. Tout d'abord, 3.0.1 est le format de livre électronique officiellement recommandé par le fameux MITI, le ministère de la technologie du gouvernement japonais. Ensuite, toute migration a un coût et l'absence de rétro-compatibilité fait exploser ce coût. Enfin, les liseuses ne sont pas (encore) conformes à 3.1 et cela ne présente donc aucun intérêt. Certains, dont votre serviteur, avaient pourtant prévenu que « trop tôt, trop vite, trop mal, sans implémentations validantes » risquait d'aboutir à un fiasco industriel. Nous y sommes désormais. Les Japonais demandent un 3.0.2 et jetteraient 3.1 à la poubelle si cela était possible. Bien évidemment, on avait pour construire 3.1 viré de 3.0.1 toutes les horreurs qu'on n'aurait jamais du y mettre. Relancer EPUB sur une 3.0.2 nous ramènerait à des emmerdes quasi-insolubles.

    Je crois qu'EPUB est désormais une impasse. Il faut tuer EPUB pour revenir à des fondamentaux intégralement basés sur les Standards du Web : un zip, un fichier index.html et des documents html voire tout format restitué en natif par un navigateur. Du CSS, du JS. Aucune autre contrainte.

  • Depuis un mois, le nombre de spams me proposant d'investir dans du bitcoin a explosé. Ma patience avec. Le bitcoin, c'est un « ratio "cours sur bénéfices " (...) supérieur à celui des actions de la crise de 1929 et de la bulle internet ». De toute manière, « en dix ans, personne n'a encore trouvé d'usage pour la blockchain ».
  • Hier, j'ai craqué. Au 117ème site Web me proposant de m'abonner à ses notifications, et donc au 117ème popup "This Web site wants to send you notifications" dans Firefox, j'ai ouvert l'URL about:config et changé la préférence dom.webnotifications.enabled de true à false. Vous devriez faire pareil... Il y a des Standards du Web qui partent d'une bonne intention, d'une bonne idée générale mais qui finissent par être une vraie PITA pour les usagers.
  • Je suis en train de lutter dans le CSS WG contre un changement de fonctionnement de la shorthand border. Avant le passage de border-image en Candidate Recommandation, border permettait d'assigner les propriétés border-*-style, border-*-width et border-*-color et celles-là seulement. Depuis ce passage, elle assigne également à leurs valeurs initiales les sous-propriétés de border-image. En clair et en décodé : avant le changement, si vous fixiez le cadre d'un élément à red solid thin côté par côté, vous aboutissiez à border: thin solid red dans votre feuille de styles. C'est fini. Pour obtenir cela, il vous faudrait aussi mettre les propriétés border-image-* à leur valeur initiale, ce que personne ne fait puisque border-image est quasiment inutilisé sur le Web. On a cassé la bijection en permettant à border de remettre à zéro des propriétés qu'elle ne peut assigner, et on a par là changé un comportement du Web vieux de plus de vingt ans...
  • Je suis passé dans l'émission SuperFail de Guillaume Erner sur France Culture, à propos de SAIP.
  • Je suis également passé dans son émission Les Matins de France Culture à propos de la panne logicielle de la SNCF.
  • L'attitude du Gouvernement vis-à-vis du Conseil National du Numérique ne cesse, depuis le 11 décembre, de me scotcher. C'est un fiasco phénoménal et je me demande franchement qui va désormais oser prendre le risque de diriger une telle instance depuis son "rappel à l'ordre"... Soyons clairs, je n'apprécie pas Rokhaya Diallo ; mais elle avait été choisie par Marie Ekeland et validée par le Gouvernement. Le revirement sur l'aile de ce dernier est donc lamentable et surtout contre-productif. Même la "vieille politique" n'aurait pas osé agir aussi stupidement. Quant aux arguments exposés par Mounir, le ci-devant Secrétaire d’État au Numérique, ils ont été pour le moins laborieux. Comment se saborder en deux temps et trois mouvements... Je ne suis pas certain que le Secrétariat d'État au Numérique ne soit pas l'heureux gagnant d'un passage de témoin lors du prochain remaniement.
  • Star Wars 8, c'est quand même assez mauvais. Le scénario est indigne, Adam Driver est mauvais, Marc Hamill a raison de critiquer le rôle de Luke, la poursuite spatiale est risible, il y a bien trop de choses qui in fine laissent un sentiment soit de déjà-vu, soit de mauvais, soit d'inachevé, soit de carrément pas démarré.
  • Apple qui bride ses vieux iPhones quand leur batterie vieillit sans avertir les usagers. Mais comment est-il encore possible de faire des erreurs pareilles...

Tuesday 19 December 2017

Qui arrêtera les logiciels fous de l'État ?

Je l'avoue, j'ai sans vergogne piqué le titre d'un article du Point Éco, parce que la question posée est excellente. Elle rejoint parfaitement mon propos lors de mon passage récent sur France Culture dans l'émission matinale de Guillaume Erner. Avant de lire la suite, prenez quelques minutes pour lire cet article de Libération également.

Ça y est, vous êtes prêts ? Bien. Alors voilà : contrairement à ce que raconte l'article du Point, je ne crois pas du tout que « faire appel à des start-ups » sera la solution qui permettra à l'État de cesser de dépenser entre 10 et 50 voire 100 fois (excusez du peu...) trop pour ses logiciels. Et encore, quand ils marchent, parce qu'il arrive souvent qu'ils ne fonctionnent jamais correctement voire jamais tout court.

La solution est un changement de perspective : il faut que l'État passe du « Not Invented Here » au « Invented Here ». En clair, il est temps d'arrêter de se reposer essentiellement sur des ressources externes (SSII) atrocement coûteuses mais surtout non fiables ni dans l'immédiateté ni dans la durée. L'État doit au contraire renforcer très nettement ses capacités internes de développement informatique. L'économie réalisée sur les prestations (SIRHEN ? Un demi-milliard d'euros et ce n'est toujours pas fini. LOUVOIS ? Un autre demi-milliard d'euros en tout et ça ne marche pas du tout) permettra de staffer non pas des fonctionnaires mais des contractuels de qualité payés au prix du marché. Même avec un tel recrutement contractuel et même en n'arnaquant pas l'État, la structure réalisera des gains substantiels permettant de continuer les embauches et assurer l'expansion. De toute manière, les dépenses actuelles sont telles qu'on ne peut que faire nettement mieux et donc économiser vraiment énormément. Évidemment, la structure en question devra être strictement interne à l'État, elle ne peut entrer en concurrence avec les ESNs (anciennes SSII) sur le marché global.

Internaliser évitera de perdre les développeurs et leurs compétences, assurera la pérennité et surtout la disponibilité de l'expertise, réduira très fortement les coûts et enfin améliorera drastiquement la qualité. Seule une structure pérenne, avec des gens de haut niveau payés à hauteur de leur haut niveau, peut aujourd'hui stopper la gabegie hallucinante à laquelle nous assistons. C'est parfaitement faisable et c'est faisable vite si on le veut. À bons lecteurs...

Thursday 7 December 2017

Open Office XML shading patterns for JavaScript

Working on Open Office XML and html these days, I ended up reading and implementing section 17.18.78 of the ISO/IEC 29500 spec. It's the one dedicated to shading patterns. In words we're used to, predefined background images serving as pattern masks. It's not a too long list but the PNG or data URLs were not available as public resource, and I found that rather painful. I am then making my own implementation, in JavaScript, of ST_Shd public. Feel free to use it under MPL 2.0 if you need it.

Thursday 23 November 2017

XUL, Mac Touchbar, BlueGriffon

The title of this article says it all. First attempt, works fine, trivial to add to any XUL window. This is a code I wrote for Postbox, used here with permission.

BlueGriffon with Mac Touchbar

Thursday 16 November 2017

BlueGriffon 3.0

I am insanely happy (and a bit proud too, ahem) to let you know that BlueGriffon 3.0 is now available. As I wrote earlier on this blog, implementing Responsive Design in a Wysiwyg editor supposed to handle all html documents whatever their original source has been a tremendous amount of work and something really painful to implement. Responsive Design in BlueGriffon is a commercial feature available to holders of a Basic or a EPUB license.

BlueGriffon Responsive Design

/* Enjoy! */

Friday 3 November 2017

Responsive Design in BlueGriffon

After nearly two years of failed attempts and revamped algos, it's finally time to shout that Wysiwyg Responsive Design in BlueGriffon is ready to ship, and that deserves a major version number for BlueGriffon :-) It was really, really painful and hard to implement given the fact BlueGriffon is and must remain a Wysiwyg editor able to edit any arbitrary document, whatever its source. It means being always able to add styles as requested by the user : « I want this element to be bold when the viewport's width is between 400 and 500px and I don't care if it's simple or hard because the Media Queries in that document are a real mess, just do it ». Most editors can't do that. They let you create and edit only "Mobile First" or only "Desktop First" media queries, or they're a source editor. With BlueGriffon, even a site that is pure Media Queries' hell like http://cnn.com can be modified...

Responsive Design will be available soon at no extra cost to Basic and EPUB license holders.

/* Enjoy! */

Wednesday 18 October 2017

OS X High Sierra installer hell (OSInstall.mpkg missing or corrupted)

Dear Apple, this is the fourth time in a row one of your system upgrades on iOS or OS X make me loose a day or two - when it does not make me loose a lot of data - and I am fed up with it. My last experience with your High Sierra upgrade is truly shocking:

  • this morning, I decided to finally upgrade my eligible MacBookPro to High Sierra
  • I did it the right way, and everything initially seemed to work fine
  • then suddenly the installer stopped, announcing that "mac OS could not be installed on your computer" because "file OSInstall.mpkg was missing or damaged". Uuuuh???? What the hell?!? I was really scared since my backup missed two days of data, some of them being extremely important to me.
  • I tried the Recovery mode to install, no result
  • I tried to locate the missing file somewhere else in the installer's filesystem, no result
  • I tried the Disk Utility and it was worse since the app was struck with a spinning wheel...
  • I tried disk utils in the Terminal but my HD was gone. Just gone. Awful. I was so shaken I had to stay away from the computer for a few minutes.
  • then I discovered there are literally thousands of Mac users complaining about High Sierra's installer bricking their Mac with the same error... We're not speaking of a beta here, we're not speaking of something released yesterday. How can this remain broken?
  • fortunately, we have a few other Macs at home so I downloaded High Sierra from another one, downloaded the excellent and free Disk Creator to create a bootable USB version of the High Sierra installer
  • the install from that USB stick seemed to work and my data is still there, wooooof.

So for the visitor hitting this article and willing to upgrade a Mac to High Sierra, these are my VERY strong recommendations:

  1. full Time Machine backup first. Full. Mandatory. More than ever with the filesystem change. Make 100% sure your backup ended correctly and is usable. Do it, whatever the time cost.
  2. download High Sierra from the App Store but do NOT install; hit Cmd-Q to close the installer.
  3. download Disk Creator (link above) and create a bootable USB version of the High Sierra installer (located in your /Applications folder). Of course, you need a USB key...
  4. shut down your Mac ; insert your bootable USB key and reboot while pressing the Alt/Option key. At prompt, use the arrows and the CR key to select the USB bootable installer.
  5. install High Sierra on your disk that way and if it fails, use the Time Machine backup you fortunately did at step 1.

My Mac went bricked at 10am. All in all, it took me 6 hours and 36 minutes to find how to get it fixed, stop being scared of launching that process that could wipe all my HD out, and do it. Let's be very clear : this is totally unacceptable. The High Sierra installer is still broken and thousands of people are hit by that breakage.

On another hand, last Windows10 upgrade was so smooth it felt old-days-Apple, ahem.

I had to recommend my less geeky dad, kids, friends to avoid High Sierra's installer if I am not around. Wake up Apple, you're reaching unacceptable limits here. Your hardware starts sucking (incredibly noisy and ugly keyboard, bad touchpad design, useless and expensive touchbar, USB-C hell, no more SD slot) and some of your software are now below expectations. Wake up. Now!

Tuesday 18 July 2017

A month with a new MacBookPro

I have been using a 2017 MacBookPro with touchbar for a month now and I can start giving some impressions about it:

  • loving the dark grey color
  • thinner, lighter; that's cool
  • better screen, that's cool too
  • USB-C is at the same time very nice and a true PITA. I need an adapter for so many of my USB devices it's awful. It's just ridiculous there is not 1 USB3. I can't even connect my iPhone without an adapter. Thinner for thinner is pointless in that case.
  • I just hate the noise of the new keyboard, INCREDIBLY noisier than the old MBP one, a huge negative point during conference calls. All in all, the old MBP keyboard seems to me ten times superior and less error-prone.
  • the Touchbar is cool - and I implemented touchbar support in Postbox - but after a month of usage, I clearly see it as a useless gadget. It's too easy to have a finger hover over the ESC key and I erroneously sent an email before finishing it because a finger hovered over the "Send mail" key of the Touchbar for Apple Mail. All in all, I sincerely regret the real KEYS of the old MBP. The Touchbar is not worth the price difference and not worth the hassle. Please also note the Touchbar is 100% unusable in a sunny environment since you don't even see what's on the Touchbar... Well done. Oh, and I suppose it sucks more power too.
  • I have extremely mixed feelings about the larger touchpad... The right-click is painful to get, the left-click is too often unreliable, the touchpad is too tall and I am deeply missing the wider gap between the keyboard and the touchpad to let my thumbs on it. Because of that, I am too often hitting the touchpad when I am typing. All in all, I think this is the worst touchpad made by Apple, by far.
  • the power adapter is such a regression I could cry. The "wings" of the power adapter are gone, the longer power chord is now a costly option, the incredibly great MagSafe is gone.
  • I do regret the SD/SDHC port, the DisplayPort port, all these things that now require an adapter. The new MBP is adapter's hell.
  • I noticed some static electricity on the MBP's shell when the battery is charging. Weird.

Monday 29 May 2017

Je ne sais pas ce qu'on fume à la Direction de la SNCF mais c'est du lourd....

Attention les yeux, bullshit force vingt-douze sur l'échelle de Le Lay (qui spécifie la dispo de temps de cerveau pour la pub Coca-Cola) et donc un TotalementCrétin de platine bien mérité pour la SNCF. Source du document: Guillaume Launay, journal Libération, sur twitter.


Saturday 27 May 2017

La dernière campagne Coca-Cola

Ma compagne et moi sommes tombés sur la dernière campagne de pub du géant Coca-Cola hier soir. Et elle a immédiatement tiqué, à juste titre... La campagne promeut une nouvelle canette, plus petite, avec le slogan suivant :

mini can, mini kif

Je serais à la place du patron de Coca-Cola France, je crois que je passerais un savon monumental, une remontée de bretelles historique, non seulement au publicitaire qui a trouvé ce slogan mais au décideur chez Coca-Cola France qui l'a accepté. Le consommateur ne veut pas d'un « mini kif » en achetant une « mini can », il veut rêver d'un « maxi kif », bien sûr. Le slogan actuel me dit que pour une mini-canette, je ne vais avoir qu'un mini-plaisir. Mais quel est l'abruti qui a pondu ça ? Le slogan aurait évidemment dû être « mini can, maxi kif ».

À bons lecteurs...

Monday 15 May 2017

W3C Advisory Board elections

The W3C Advisory Board (AB) election 2017 just started, and I am not running this time. I have said multiple times the way people are elected is far too conservative, giving a high premium to "big names" or representatives of "big companies" on one hand, tending to preserve a status-quo in terms of AB membership on the other. Newcomers and/or representative of smaller companies have almost zero chance to be elected. Even with the recent voting system changes, the problem remains.

Let me repeat here my proposal for both AB and TAG: two consecutive mandates only; after two consecutive mandates, elected members cannot run again for re-election at least during at least one year.

But let's focus on current candidates. Or to be more precise, on their electoral program:

  1. Mike Champion (Microsoft), who has been on the AB for years, has a clear program that takes 2/3rds of his AB nominee statement.
    1. increase speed on standards
    2. bridge the gap existing between "fast" implementors and "slow" standards
    3. better position W3C internally
    4. better position W3C externally
    5. help the Web community
  2. Rick Johnson (VitalSource Technologies | Ingram Content Group) does not have a detailed program. He wants to help the Publishing side of W3C.
  3. Charles McCathie Nevile (Yandex) wants
    1. more pragmatism
    2. to take "into account the broad diversity of its membership both in areas of interest and in size and power" but he has "been on the AB longer than any current participant, including the staff", which does not promote diversity at all
  4. Natasha Rooney (GSMA) has a short statement with no program at all.
  5. Chris Wilson (Google Inc.), who has also been elected to the AB twice already, wants :
    1. to engage better developers and vendors
    2. to focus better W3C resources, with more agility and efficiency
    3. to streamline process and policies to let us increase speed and quality
  6. Zhang Yan (China Mobile Communications Corporation) does not really have a clear program besides "focus on WEB technology for 5G, AI and the Internet of things and so on"
  7. Judy Zhu (Alibaba (China) Co., Ltd.) wants:
    1. to make W3C more globalized (good luck on that one...)
    2. to make W3C Process more usable/effective/efficient
    3. increase W3C/industries collaboration (but isn't it a industrial consortium already?)
    4. increase agility
    5. focus more on security and privacy

If I except the mentions of agility and Process, let me express a gut feeling: this is terribly depressing. Candidacy statements from ten years ago look exactly the same. They quote the same goals. They're even phrased the same way... But in the meantime, we have major topics on the meta-radar (non-exhaustive list):

  • the way the W3C Process is discussed, shaped and amended is so incredibly long it's ridiculous. Every single major topic Members raised in the last ten years took at least 2 years (if not six years) to solve, leaving Groups in a shameful mess. The Process is NOT a Technical Report that requires time, stability and implementations. It's our Law, that impacts our daily life as Members. When an issue is raised, it's because it's a problem right now and people raising the issue expect to see the issue solved in less than "years", far less than years.
  • no mention at all of finances! The finances of the W3C are almost a taboo, that only a few well-known zealots like yours truly discuss, but they feed all W3C activities. After years of instability, and even danger, can the W3C afford keeping its current width without cutting some activities and limiting its scope? Can the W3C avoid new revenue streams? Which ones?
  • similarly, no mention of transparency! I am not speaking of openness of our technical processes here, I am very clearly and specifically speaking of the transparency of the management of the Consortium itself. The way W3C is managed is far too vertical and it starts being a real problem, and a real burden. We need changes there. Now.
  • the role of the Director, another taboo inside W3C, must be discussed. It is time to acknowledge the fact the Director is not at the W3C any more. It's time to stop signing all emails "in the name of the Director', handle all transition conference calls "in the name of the Director" but almost never "with the Director". I'm not even sure we need another Director. It's time to acknowledge the fact Tim should become Honorary Director - with or without veto right - and distribute his duties to others.
  • we need a feedback loop and very serious evaluation of the recent reorganization of the W3C. My opinion is as follows: nobody knows who to contact and it's a mess of epic magnitude. The Functional leaders centralize input and then re-dispatch it to others, de facto resurrecting Activities and adding delays to everything. The reorg is IMHO a failure, and a rather expensive one in terms of effectiveness.
  • W3C is still not a legal entity, and it does not start being a burden... it's been a burden for eons. The whole architecture of W3C, with regional feet and a too powerful MIT, is a scandalous reminiscence of the past.
  • our election system for AB and TAG is too conservative. People stay there for ages, while all our technical world seems to be reshaped every twelve months. My conclusion is simple, and more or less matches what Mike Champion said : the Consortium is not tailored any more to match its technical requirements. Where we diverge: I understand Mike prefers evolution to revolution, I think evolution is not enough any more and revolution is not avoidable any more. We probably need to rethink the W3C from the ground up.
  • Incubation has been added to W3C Process in a way that is perceived by some as a true scandal. I am not opposed at all to Incubation, but W3C has shown a lack of caution, wisdom, consensus and obedience to its own Process that is flabbergasting. W3M acts fast when it need to remind a Member about the Process, but W3M itself seems to work around the Process all the time. The way Charters under review are modified during the Charter Review itself is the blatant example of that situation.

Given how far the candidacy statements are from what I think are the real and urgent issues of the W3C, I'm not even sure I am willing to vote... I will eventually cast a ballot, sure, but I stand by my opinion above: this is depressing.

I am now 50 years old, I have been contributing to W3C for, er, almost 22 years and that's why I will not run any more. We need younger people, we need different perspectives, we need different ways of doing, we need different futures. We need a Consortium of 2017, we still have a Consortium of 2000, we still have the people of 2000. If I was 20 today, born with the Web as a daily fact, how would I react looking at W3C? I think I would say « oh that old-school organization... » and that alone explains this whole article.

Conclusion for all W3C AB candidates: if you want my vote, you'll have to explain better, much better, where you stand in front of these issues. What do you propose, how do you suggest to implement it, what's your vision for W3C 2020. Thanks.

Wednesday 10 May 2017

Numérique 2017-2022

Notre bon Tristan (je feede mon propre Tristan-Nitot-Tracker...), mon poteau, mon fournisseur attitré de Lindt et grand piqueur de pizza devant l'éternel, nous a déclenché une de ces tempêtes internetesques dont il a le secret :

Il a évidemment reçu des tétraflopées de réponses, qui méritent que l'on s'y intéresse. Bon, il est clair que certaines sont semi-sérieuses, voire volontairement déconnantes à pleins tubes. Mais pas toutes, loin de là... (Nota bene : il est évident que j'ai raté de nombreuses réponses, je ne prétends pas être exhaustif ci-dessous mais j'ai récupéré tout ce que j'ai vu passer en réponse directe à Tristan).

  • @EMegamanu: Imposer aux GAFAM de rendre le nuage !
  • @fabi1cazenave: interdire l’indentation à coups de tabulations. Notre civilisation pourrait ne pas s’en remettre. Faut que ça cesse.
  • @fabricedesre:  Et créer un nouveau fichier de Fichés-T. Le rediriger sur /dev/null tous les mois.
  • @DavidBruant: Faire que l'état soit actionnaire d'entreprises du numérique pour peser dans les décisions (et prendre une part du gateau)
  • @DavidBruant: Créer des bourses d'encouragement à l'entrepreunariat faciles d'accès mais avec un VRAI suivi
  • @DavidBruant: Obliger les collectivites a mettre des clauses open data dans leurs DSP
  • @DavidBruant: Wifi gratuit et libre dans tous les lieux publics (les terroristes peuvent déjà aller a McDo, faut arreter l'hypocrisie de la sécurité)
  • @DavidBruant: Les boites noires... need i say more ?
  • @DavidBruant: Donner plus de moyens à @BetaGouv
  • @DavidBruant: Inciter chaque collectivité publique à gerer une instance mastodon pour leur usage interne et avec les citoyens
  • @btreguier: Clairement, pour l'instant, c'est la #crypto qui est en ligne de mire (et la #privacy avec, bien entendu).
  • @jeancreed1:  crypto....
  • @Modj0r:  Couverture haut debit / THD du territoire, privacy
  • @Dam_ned: du open hardware européen avec @fairphone ?
  • @Dam_ned: j'ai l'impression qu'il y a moyen de bien les sensibiliser â l'intérêt de la crypto et aux risque de backdoor #MacronLeak
  • @GeoffreyDorne: Privacy by design :) :) :) :)
  • @rmostz: La diffusion gratuite de surveillance:)) à tous les écoliers collégiens et lycéens serait un bon début pour une réflexion générale
  • xibe: Sinon, je dirai :
    - Net Neutrality
    - Renforcer CNIL et vie priv.
    - Logiciels libres dans l'admin.
    - data-gouv-fr ++
    - Educa° au chiffrement
  • @revolunet: Libre + privacy
  • @borisschapira: Empowerment, pour que les autres sujets puissent être discutés par la société civile.
  • @goetsu: Accessibilité, qualité et rationalisation des services publics numériques
  • @tapoueh: Éducation et innovation : faire payer leurs impôts aux GAFA et autres, en France pour leur activité locale. Du coup budget pour les deux...
  • @edasfr: Du long terme et du structurel : éducation, empowerment et bidouille ; neutralité, respect de la vie privée, logiciel libre pour le public
  • @MartinSorel: Neutralité du net, éducation au numérique, privacy. Et un rôle auprès des autres ministères  pour intervenir sur des sujets comme le TES
  • @Projet_Arcadie: Open-data sur les formations politiques + publications sur les mandataires financiers + open-data sur les associations politiques
  • @TouitTouit: Les allocutions présidentielles en Gif.
  • @Modj0r: Bcp de sujets critiques (Neutralité, opendata etc..). Mais si la population n'a pas/difficillement acces au net, l'interet en reste limité.
  • @goetsu: Médiation numérique aussi parce tout demateriaiser c est top mais encore faut il avoir accès et comprendre le numérique
  • @martin1975: Clause Molière dans les start-ups (oups !)
  • @abelar_s: encore un cadeau du contribuable à certains paniers percés ? Je préfère une ouverture de la commande publique aux PME
  • @Nico3333fr: Libre, chiffrement, qualité web et accessibilité (et éducation !).
  • @LibrementVotre: éducation au numérique (vie privée, algos, netiquette, rsx sociaux), code public = code libre, promotion de l'auto-hebergement.
  • @LibrementVotre: et interdire le mot digital pour parler du numérique et le comic sans ms
  • @AlainOscarNeo: L'opendata car pour prendre des décisions, tout débute par le rassemblement de faits. C'est le début de tout le reste.
  • @glazou: je ne varie pas : lancer un ecosystème PME dans le logiciel. Faible investissement, vaste bassin d'emploi et valeurs
  • @erwanaliasr1: Casser le contrat openbar de Microsoft. Du libre pour garder la maîtrise. dans les écoles aussi pour éviter le gavage apple/Microsoft.
  • @yannick_loiseau: licence globale, manuels scolaires libres, @openscience , obligation de logiciels/formats libres pour l'administration
  • @yannick_loiseau: suppression des machines de vote
  • @ennaelle: enfin LibreOffice en pare-feu souverain dans toutes les écoles ?
  • @stephanepechard: Tout a été dit ou presque, mais mettre Surveillance:// (et d'autres) au programme du BAC me paraitrait judicieux.
  • @grumagol: Former les enseignants au numérique (enjeux, privacy citoyenté, économie) pas seulement à pisser du code. Le rendre interdisciplinaire.
  • @david_billard: Éducation 1er : à l'école mais aussi dans les administrations et les entreprises, afin d'avoir un minimum d'hygiene et de jugeote numérique
  • @mnt_io: crypto, privacy et innovation (via libre). Ah, et education, mais pour les dirigeants…
  • @yannick_loiseau: ah, et donner un vrai pouvoir à la cnil, cnnum, etc. Pas que consultatif
  • @grumagol: Opendata par défaut sur les données public dans des formats numérique.
  • @Tedesign: Et lancer un grand chantier public sur l’IA dans le fonctionnement de l’état avec pour obj de tout basculer avant 5 ans.
  • @RedFox_Fr: Relancer le projet d'OS souverain, accompagné bien sûr du Cloud souverain
  • @RedFox_Fr: Plus sérieusement, faire un audit sur les projets dev en naufrage (logiciel paye fonctionnaire, logiciel paye armée)...
  • @minirop: Ne plus utiliser d'anglicismes/buzzwords du genre "digital". (oui "buzzword" en est un mais ça passe car péjoratif ici)
  • @simonand re: Defense de la vie privée / Open Data / Obligation de formats libres / Neutralité.. pour commencer :)
  • @Simounet: Obligation d’utiliser des logiciels open source pour les entreprises publiques. Tout code créé pour elles doit également l’être.
  • @erwanquelin: L'interdiction du port de la cravate dans l'IT, et dans la vie en générale...
  • @ThierryLaude: Revenir sur la proposition du programme d'"En Marche" pour généraliser les votes électroniques avant 2022? On compte sur vous. ...
  • @ThierryLaude: Pas de machine de vote éléctronique ... sauf à l'AN et au Sénat, pour 1 meilleur contrôle citoyen du travail parlementaire et + d'efficience
  • @BDelSolParis: Diffuser concrètement la philosophie du #libre et de l'opensource au-delà des cercles scientifiques et techniques pour changer la société
  • @ThierryLaude: Enjeu capital: appréhender le bouleversement sociétal stimuler les Initiatives pour l'IA en open source, non brevetabilité, formations, RU
  • @AlainOscarNeo: Mais arrêtez avec la fiscalité des GAFA !! Toutes les multinationales font la même chose ! Il faut faire l'ACCIS ec.europa.eu/taxation_custo…
  • @Tilidia: Privacy, sans aucun doute. Sans cela (droit fondamental) pas de crédibilité pour le reste
  • @yvg: 1. Vie privée/Crypt 2. Modernisation de l'administration: Soft Libre / Open Data, Identité et démarches numérique. L'innovation suivra.
  • @yvg: Pour l'éducation, un gros travail sur l'égalité des chances et la diversité pour former plus de gens plus rapidement aux nouveaux métiers.
  • @jponge: le transfert recherche/université, il y a un potentiel et des talents inexploités dans nos labos publics.
  • @yvg: Ah et la neutralité du net inscrite dans la Loi bien entendu.
  • @alixcaz: 1. #crypto sanctuariser, promouvoir, développer
    2. #libre sanctuariser les 4 libertés (not. DRM, brevets), priorité ds commande publique
  • @ThierryStoehr: Utilisation de standard ouvert (art.4 LCEN) +RGI +RGAA+logicicels libres Vraie information-formation citoyens au numérique (théorie+pratique)
  • @jponge: Pour aller plus loin : il faut créer des startups (technologiques) issues des labos vs des startups business sans techno
  • @ugobourdon: Logiciel libre partout, tout le temps pour l'état. Combattre l'idée de pptée intellectuelle autant que possible. Nous laissez faire le reste
  • @lud0bar: 1/ Gérer les identités avec un outil type blockchain. 2/ Intensifier un plan fibre sous la houlette de @Billaut
  • @lud0bar: 3/ Introduire des normes de sécurité logicielles associées au logo CE
  • @dascritch: éducation et surtout un controle sur la sécurité et la vie privée des grandes entreprises, notamment banques et presse
  • @garfieldair: Suppression de la hadopi *yeux ronds*
  • @lud0bar: 4/ Faire ré-émerger une offre complète "souveraine" de cloud permettant maitrise DNS, hébergement et CDN.
  • @lud0bar: Il faudrait trouver un moyen pour que l'identité numérique soit consolidée par plusieurs systèmes et non monolithique #TES
  • @j_bg: #OpenData #standards pour toutes les données de l'Etat afin d'encourager #innovation, et en plus c coute pas cher ;-)
  • @j_bg: Et un service de comptabilité nationale en ligne ! Pq ca n'existe pas encore ? input number du CA chaque mois et hop ! #StartUpNation
  • @koalie: Financer le @w3c, consortium international (dont l'hôte européen est français) œuvrant pour la standardisation du Web.
  • @AlainOscarNeo: Refaire un corps d'enseignant informaticien au sens large ?
  • @clochix: Apprentissage de GNU/Emacs dès la maternelle, obligation faite à tous les sites de fonctionner dans w3m, ajout de RMS au programme de philo.

(Nota bene : si un de tweets ci-dessus apparait intempestivement modifié, c'est la faute à mon chat qui a réussi à taper sur le clavier plusieurs caractères ET Cmd-Q pour quitter l'éditeur, perdant ainsi la Undo Stack... Ce chat devient trop doué en geekeries !)

Soyons clairs, j'ai adoré lire tout ça. J'ai bien ri des quelques pépites humoristiques présentes. Mais il faut revenir aux fondamentaux : on parle des Grands Projets à lancer, continuer ou imaginer dans un cadre économique déficient, au sein d'une société fracturée, concernant des citoyens dont une partie ne joint plus les deux bouts et dont même les étudiants songent plus que de normale à l'expatriation.

De mon point de vue, le futur Ministère devrait donc s'attacher à des choses plus « meta » que nombre des points ci-dessus :

  1. L'objectif numéro 1 du gouvernement est la recréation de conditions économiques favorables à la croissance et l'amélioration des conditions de vie des Français. Il faut donc de l'emploi. Comme on a peu, voire très peu de vraies entreprises de technologie dans le Numérique, il faut favoriser la création d'entreprises dans le domaine. C'est la clé de voute de tout le reste.
  2. Pour cela, il nous faut des technologues, des purs, des vrais, des durs, des pros. Nos formations en Numérique (je hais ce mot...) sont peut-être bonnes voire très bonnes, mais elles sont inconnues au niveau mondial (sauf en imagerie numérique), et même au niveau européen. Une remise à plat, voire une modernisation, est nécessaire.
  3. Pour cela aussi, et je suis ici totalement d'accord avec un des tweets ci-dessus, il faut plus, beaucoup plus, focaliser sur l'extraction des projets universitaires/recherche vers l'entreprenariat. L'investissement dans la technologie étant le parent pauvre du VC en France, il faut changer la donne. Je l'ai dit et je le repète : Le Bon Coin (l'ami @xibe me rappelle qu'il appartient au groupe norvégien Shibsted) c'est très bien, mais ce n'est pas avec ce type de produit qu'on fera des GAFA. Seule une technologie sous-jacente de pointe le permet.
  4. Enfin il faut des sous, mais en fait on les a déjà, et ils sont même déjà planifiés dans le programme d'Emmanuel Macron. La lutte contre l'optimisation fiscale (non limitée aux entreprises du numérique, hein), superbement lancée par exemple par l'Italie, devrait exploser les compteurs.
  5. Il faut être moderne, pro-actif et penser différemment, non pas accompagner les changements sociétaux mais carrément les anticiper, voire les faire émerger. L'absence quasi-complète de la France sur la scène de la Standardisation Internationale de l'Internet d'une part et du Web d'autre part en est le symptôme flagrant. Je suis en cela d'accord avec @koalie ci-dessus : la France est absente des grands combats de demain dans le domaine. Je suis également d'accord avec le focus sur la Neutralité du Net, un élément désormais fondamental de la démocratie. Nous n'avons heureusement pas de FoxNews en France, et tout doit être fait pour que l'accès à l'Information ne puisse dépendre du fournisseur d'accès ni du contenu accédé. Les récents évènements de la campagne présidentielle le démontrent aisément. La protection de la vie privée est impérative, et elle a été récemment mise à mal. Je repense évidemment aux déclarations du Premier Ministre Norvégien après la tuerie d'Utøya : « Nous allons répondre à la terreur par plus de démocratie, plus d’ouverture et de tolérance ». Et bien sûr, il faut que le déploiement de la Fibre partout, je dis bien partout, dans le pays soit achevé vite et bien.

En résumé, le futur Secrétariat au Numérique peut avoir un rôle étonnament important dans la relance. Le « Numérique », et en particulier le Logiciel mais même le hardware, est un domaine où l'investissement nécessaire reste faible par rapport à la potentielle création de valeurs. Il faut s'en saisir, immédiatement, fortement. Le Retour sur Investissement est possible en un à deux ans, une opportunité rarissime. L'écosystème que cela créera sera explosif, dans le bon sens du terme.


Tuesday 9 May 2017

En Marge !

Cher Emmanuel Macron (Monsieur le bientôt-Président), cher M. Ferrand, cher M. Griveaux... Vous êtes en général polis en public pour ne pas dire extrêmement polis (j'ajoute que j'espère que vous savez jurer comme des charretiers en privé, ce qui ne me regarde absolument pas). Donc quand un de vos Délégués Nationaux se la pête en public façon revanchard-moi-je-suis-jeune, ça se voit un peu trop comme un bouton d'acné sur le bout du nez :

  1. ce matin sur LCI à 8h19, Bernard Kouchner s'est pris à rêver que l'âge légal de la retraite soit repoussé plutôt vers les 85 ans, ahem. Mais lui-même ne croyait pas trop à cet appel du pied...
  2. à 8h40, Stéphane Travert, le donc ci-devant « Député de la Manche Coutances-Valognes, Conseiller Régional.#Normandie #Manche #CôteOuest #Cotentin #circo5003 Délégué National #EnMarche #EmmanuelMacron » pête un cable et répond:

    « Encore un qui prend ses rêves pour une réalité. #VieillePolitique On a plus ton no. #AuRevoir »

Oui, bon, d'accord, Kouchner ne fait pas exactement "renouvellement" et il aurait peut-être pu le pressentir lui-même. Il aurait aussi pu attendre ; une mission, un strapontin, que sais-je, voire rien du tout, mais pas maintenant.

Mais Stravert a été odieux, son « On a plus ton no » est grossier et honteux. Si « En Marche ! » pouvait laisser « en marge » de tels comportements, votre mouvement et futur parti en sortirait grandi.

Merci de votre attention.

- page 1 of 288