«

Is education Python's killer app? I think it could be.

I used the occasion of the Python Papers to motivate my efforts, and
you can see what I came up with here on pages 8-15.

The part that makes me especially queasy is the CP4E section on pages
10-11. I wish I had more to say there. It's fairly clear to those of
us who weren't there that there were some problems, but it's not
especially clear what they were or what we should learn from them. I'd
very much appreciate input from those who were actually there!

Anyway

http://tinyurl.com/yr62r3

seems to short-circuit some pointless hoop-jumping to get you to the
article.

If that doesn't work, try going to http://pyjournal.cgpublisher.com/
and looking for the spring 2007 edition.

I suggest a concerted effort by the community toward leveraging the
OLPC/Sugar momentum to revive the idea of Python as tool for teaching
some programming as a useful part of universal education.

mt

Michael Tobis wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/yr62r3
>
> seems to short-circuit some pointless hoop-jumping to get you to the
> article.

Hoop-jumping implemented to prevent just this kind of direct linking (and
thus not saving of the PDF to local disk to view, and thus increasing the
load on the server).

Thanks for abusing the free service being provided to the Python Papers
journal.


Richard

On May 24, 5:03 am, Richard Jones <richardjo...@optushome.com.au>
wrote:
> Michael Tobis wrote:
> >http://tinyurl.com/yr62r3
>
> > seems to short-circuit some pointless hoop-jumping to get you to the
> > article.
>
> Hoop-jumping implemented to prevent just this kind of direct linking (and
> thus not saving of the PDF to local disk to view, and thus increasing the
> load on the server).
>
> Thanks for abusing the free service being provided to the Python Papers
> journal.
>
> Richard

OK, oops, I'll take the tinyurl link down anywhere I can; I really
didn't (and still don't) quite get the server side issue but so be it.
(I thought it was a measure to ensure a license to view, which is not
in fact required in this case.)

On the other hand, given the modest reaction to the article (pro or
con) I am not getting the sense that it has generated a lot of
traffic.

I'd prefer flames about the content, though.

mt

On Thu, 24 May 2007 20:03:29 +1000, Richard Jones wrote:
> Hoop-jumping implemented to prevent just this kind of direct linking (and
> thus not saving of the PDF to local disk to view, and thus increasing the
> load on the server).

I'm not sure I see the connection - if you're serving something as
application/pdf, then people are going to download it or view it directly
as they see fit (or as their browser is configured), whether or not they
got their by clicking a link or pressing two buttons (indeed, using the
buttons makes it _harder_ to save the PDF to disk, if that's what you want
to enforce, because users can't right-click/save-as; if their browser is
set up to open PDFs directly, they can't change that behavior without
reconfiguring their browser).