Category Archives: computers

Fun with haiku

Haiku

What it is

Haiku, a japanese form of very brief poem, is quite popular at the moment. It’s particularly popular on the social interaction site Twitter, where messages are limited to 140 characters each, since a haiku will normally fit comfortably into one message.

You can read properly about how Japanese haiku works here. Most people who write it for fun, though, disregard most of the conventions and treat a haiku as being simply a three-line poem of seventeen syllables, broken up as 5+7+5.

Why I like it

I’ve recently started trying to write haiku, and it turns out that I like it, for a variety of reasons.

I suppose haiku’s most obvious feature is that it’s very short. And in fact, because the Japanese version doesn’t actually count syllables but an even shorter unit, seventeen syllables is a bit on the long side.

The shortness means that

  • every word counts
  • you can, however, take time to choose every word carefully, since there are so few
  • you’re forced to get to the core of what you want to express
  • there are a limited number of rhythmic patterns for each line, and you can experiment with them

These features make it a fascinating exercise, good editing practice, and for me, quite therapeutic: if there’s something you want to express, there’s nothing quite like boiling it down to seventeen concentrated syllables to get it out of your system.

Haiku rant

Digression: why I hate misused .pdf files

I get particularly irritated online by use of .pdf files as a substitute for web pages. For example, I recently joined my local NHS Trust. They started sending me their newsletter–so I thought. But what actually came was a link to a .pdf file.

As it was in .pdf form I had to go to my local library to read it. Once there, I found it was laid out like a large, glossy publication, with pages too large to read even on the huge PC screen I was using. I couldn’t simultaneously have the text a legible size and see the whole page; but seeing the whole page was necessary in order to read the text without scrolling from side to side, and to find my way around. And this was in the interests of “inclusion” in the NHS. If they’d not bothered with the glossy print layout, I could have read it, and they could probably have published it weeks earlier too and saved time and money.

That’s not surprising, really. What .pdf excels at is preserving a print layout, so that whoever prints it out gets the same result. It’s ideal for sending material for commercial printing, for example. In other words, it’s totally inflexible. Whereas computers are good at displaying material flexibly. As I write this, I can resize the window and simultaneously view another containing my notes.

There are of course solutions like Google Reader for reading online .pdf files. And it often does a good job. Though I’ve several times had the experience of trying to read maths .pdf files that way, only to discover that Google Reader had in fact removed all the maths from them. Presumably the equations had been treated as images which it ignored.

OK, now that was a longish explanation of why I’m not keen on .pdf documents on the Web. But it doesn’t really express how I feel about it. I think it was because of the maths-free maths articles that I found myself posting a series of haiku on Twitter.

The haiku

First was


PC screens–and Mac!–
are not the same as paper.
Don’t post PDF!

which expresses the basic problem. But it’s not very specific. One of the main difficulties is


Your paper layout
is precisely the wrong shape
to view on my screen.

And then there’s the way I have to read the things:


Acrobat Reader
is not a way I would choose
for reading your stuff

Ane even if I liked the program,


Acrobat Reader
cannot run on my mobile.
My web browser can.


You want me to read?
Then let it wrap to the screen
of any device.

Usually I’m accessing the Web not from a PC, but from my phone. I use Opera Mini, which does a brilliant job of making most HTML pages viewable. But every so often, I’m told that I need to download “a more current version of Flash Player”. And I’m 99% sure that it couldn’t run on my k750i. And 100% sure that it’s no use at all for enabling Opera Mini to display Flash. So, please:


ERROR: your website
lacks compatibility
and needs upgrading

and finally,


You cannot predict
my operating system.
Be universal.

You’d be amazed how satisfying those were to write.

And yes, I know, this is a fixed-width page, going against the spirit of what I’ve just said . . . But one step at a time.

Playing with CSS

Warning: geekery ahead. But maybe useful geekery.

If you’re observant, and if your screen shows it, you might notice the text in my posts has gone from not quite black to black. That’s because I’ve been playing with the CSS for this WordPress “theme”. Which I’ve done mainly because I hate watery type and think black should be black.

When I started, I assumed I’d be able to copy the text of the existing stylesheet into Notepad and edit it as a text document, or at least search in it for the things I needed to change. It turned out though that this didn’t work: oh yes, it copied into Notepad, but without line breaks, creating a huge block of gibberish.

Well, today I discovered how to copy it legibly into a text document, and I thought I’d tell you, in case the same problem has been driving you insane.

This procedure worked for me:

  • Open the CSS editor (My dashboard > Appearance > Edit CSS)
  • Click View original stylesheet.
  • Press ctrl-a to select all the text in the original stylesheet, then ctrl-c to copy it, and close the popup window.
  • Paste it into the CSS editing box.
  • Select all the text that you’ve just pasted, and copy that into Notepad.

This time it copies into Notepad, but, lo and behold, the line breaks now appear properly, and the result is readable.

And there’s loads more I want to change about the page layout, but making black text black will do for a start.

Off home now to nurse my cold.

Missing an old wordprocessor

Every so often, writing on my decrepit laptop at home or on the fast up-to-date PCs in the library, I find myself wondering when modern word processors like Word will catch up with the old one which I used from about 1989…

I’m talking about the Amstrad PCW8256, running a wordprocessing package called Locoscript 2. (Later, I upgraded to Locoscript 3!) The computer had 256 kB of memory (yes kilobytes not megabytes), though I eventually upgraded mine to 512 kB. It had no hard drive. Starting up the wordprocessor involved inserting a 360 kB disc, waiting until the grunting noises from the disc drive stopped, then taking it out to insert whatever disc my documents were on.

The computer had a specially designed keyboard, with extra keys which are absent from the standard PC one: in particular the [CUT], [COPY] and [PASTE] keys. Also unlike a standard PC keyboard, it had all the characters on it which you would have expected any decent typewriter to have. (Yes, I remember typewriters too…) And they were a comfortable distance apart–less stretching of the fingers was involved than on most PC keyboards.

As I recall–unless I had to upgrade the memory before I could use that version–Locoscript 2 fitted on one side of its 360k disc; the other side was used for extra fonts and things. Yet it could happily do useful things which in modern wordprocessors are either absent or very difficult. Features I particularly miss are:

  • Multiple clipboards for copying and pasting. I found this incredibly useful if I had a set of notes in a more or less random order and was trying to collect them into something organised. There were effectively 36 clipboards, labelled A-Z and 0-9. So if I wanted to collect the material together for a particular section of my document, I would simply go through the notes, and copy/cut each relevant one to one of the clipboards. Then when I’d got them all, [B][PASTE] A [PASTE] B [PASTE] C [PASTE] D[/B] etc. would plonk the contents of clipboards A, B, C, D… all down into the new location, nicely collected together in the desired order. You’ve no idea how clumsy and inefficient having just one clipboard seems after being used to working like that.
  • Search and replace for formatting codes, not just text. By formatting codes I mean the ones for bold type, italics etc. Suppose you decide that a particular word–say a name of a pub or something–should always appear in quotation marks. Then you change your mind and want it in italics, without the quotation marks. Simple: you search for all instances of “word in quotes”, and have them automatically replaces with word in italics.
  • Add any accent to any character. I think I’m right in saying that with current PCs running Windows, if you want a particular accent on a particular character then you’ve got to have a font installed that includes that particular accented character. Some are more difficult to come by than others. For example, I’ve searched and searched unsuccessfully for a c with a hacek on it (needed, for example, if I want to spell the composer Janacek properly, or even if I want to spell hacek properly), and I occasionally want to type Welsh words which have a circumflex accent on a w or a y: both very common in the Welsh language but completely lacking in the standard fonts. This was easy in Locoscript: accents are like separate characters, so you just type the accent, type the character, and get what you’re after.
  • No need to use 0.5 when you mean a half. How many times have you seen people type, say, 1.5 hours simply because it’s so hard to get at a half sign? (I mean, since when did we divide hours up into tenths? Units of six minutes? It’s crazy!) It leaps out as WRONG. No problem on the PCW: it was properly thought-out and you simply pressed the half key, located somewhere to the right of the spacebar. I still remember my shocked disbelief the first time I used a standard PC keyboard, was merrily typing away, then needed to type something-and-a-half. How could anything so utterly basic be missing?!
  • Add user-designed characters to a font. No font can cover absolutely everything that might be needed. In my case, I wanted to make notes on harmony, and I needed symbols which are used for that, such as a 6 above a 4, or a 9 above a 7 with a flat sign after the 9. Obviously those didn’t come with the font. But it was easy enough to create them, and add them as special characters.

The question is: if a wordprocessor which fitted on one small disc and ran on a computer with only 512k of memory could do all this, why can’t the memory-eating modern ones like Word do it? In particular, the multiple clipboards and the half sign seem to me like essentials in anything calling itself a wordprocessor, and ther absence makes present-day wordprocessors feel clumsy and amateurish in comparison–almost as if they’d accidentally missed out a letter of the alphabet or something.

And don’t get me started on the amateurishness of the DTP-like features of certain wordprocessors… Well not unless you want to. Let’s just say that some of the default settings are designed to make any document leap out as being amateurish and the first thing you have to do for any piece of serious work is to override them all…

There. That feels better! 🙂

Two-handed computing

A question that probably doesn’t get asked very often:

Why do right-handed people use a mouse with their right hand?

I am but I don’t, you see…

When I first used a computer with a mouse, I was working for someone who was interested in psychology. He had a theory that it was best to use the mouse with his non-dominant hand. As a violinist, having to do all my fingering with my left hand, and as someone who is also interested in psychology, I decided he might have a point. So, rather than use the mouse with my right hand–which is also my writing hand–I learnt to use it with my left hand.

I think he was right–the left hand tends to be used for more instinctive actions such as holding an awkwardly-shaped object in place, and the right hand for more conscious ones such as working on the awkwardly-shaped object with tools. Using the mouse is an instinctive action so the left hand is the ideal candidate.

If I use someone else’s computer, invariably the first thing I do is move the mouse over from where they’ve put it to the left-hand side. Then then normally ask whether I’m left-handed. In fact, the reason I use my left hand for it is that I’m right-handed. Basically

  • the left hand moves the mouse

while the right hand is free to

  • use the keyboard, especially the Return key
  • hold a pen to write notes with
  • hold the coffee mug!

Why doesn’t everyone do it?

When you’re used to this way of working, using the same hand for the mouse as for everything else seems quite labourious and clumsy. For example, as I typed the full stop at the end of that sentence with my right hand, my left hand moved to the mouse in anticipation of saving the post… then back to type another sentence… and in a moment, to the mouse again to click the Save button.