Ben Langhinrichs

October, 2004
SMTWTFS
     01 02
03 04 05 06 07 08 09
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31

Search the weblog





























Genii Weblog


Civility in critiquing the ideas of others is no vice. Rudeness in defending your own ideas is no virtue.


Wed 27 Oct 2004, 10:00 AM
One of the most popular pages on this website has nothing to do with rich text; nothing to do with Notes/Exchange coexistence; and nothing to do with Genii Software itself.  This is the Domino Limits page, which lists many different limits, either documented or experimentally found, in Lotus Notes and Domino.  This is a living document, created from a post by Mike Woolsey of Solutions by Design in the Lotus Business Partner forum.  The living part means that people write in and let me know about new limits or modified information, and I try to keep the whole thing up to date.  In April I put the list up on our site, and pledged to keep it there, so you can add it as a resource link to your own website or list of useful links.  The full URL is http://www.GeniiSoft.com/showcase.nsf/DominoLimits and will remain that way for the foreseeable future.

Recent changes include a bunch of additions for the limits on organization names, organizational unit names, common names, server names, etc. etc., the maximum number of documents that can be selected when using the "Archive Selected Documents" menu item, and the maximum length of an ACL entry.   Do you have some new entries for us, or some revised information which might help your fellow Notes/Domino developers and administrators?  Reply to the Domino Limits blog entry, or write to me at  and I'll be happy to verify what I can and add to or modify the list as appropriate.  Where possible, I indicate the source for the information, so let me know if there is a Help document or other source or if the information was derived by manual efforts.

Copyright © 2004 Genii Software Ltd.

Tue 26 Oct 2004, 11:12 PM
No, I am not talking about the US presidential candidates.  I'm talking about Spirit and Opportunity, the two Mars Rovers who just keep on keeping on, long past their presumed life span.  Read about their latest exploits and view the latest images from a world far, far away (and blessedly free of election controversies).

Copyright © 2004 Genii Software Ltd.

Tue 26 Oct 2004, 10:08 AM
We are in the midst of rolling out the new on-line Midas Help database, but don't be surprised if it is a bit dodgy today, as we are making rapid changes and you may catch us in the middle of a replication.  Also, some of the information may not be updated completely for the @Midas Formulas and Midas Rich Text C++ API.  Still, if you don't mind the occasional gotcha, it is worth taking a look at, and I'd be happy to hear any suggestions or comments.  After the dust settles, we will have this available for download as well.

Copyright © 2004 Genii Software Ltd.

Mon 25 Oct 2004, 04:46 PM
Version 3.40a of the Midas Rich Text LSX has been released, as have companion versions of the @Midas Formulas and Midas Rich Text C++ API.  There was no Version 3.40 for the LSX since the @Midas Formulas and Midas Rich Text C++ API were released as Version 3.40 last month, and our goal is to keep all three products at the same version level.  More information will be forthcoming, but all three are now available on our website for those with valid Version 3.x license files.

Copyright © 2004 Genii Software Ltd.

Tue 19 Oct 2004, 08:59 PM
We're in the home stretch with Version 3.40, which we will call 3.40a so that all three Midas products can be released together with the same version.  There are some new features, and a lot of tweaks and monir adjustments.  There are also several new or newly revised samples, but those might take a few more days to get out there.

Copyright © 2004 Genii Software Ltd.

Mon 18 Oct 2004, 09:39 PM
Volker Weber had a link to a story about a case where a Lawyer's fax blunder costs EC €100m.  It is a pretty amazing story, in which a 100 page legal document was put in the machine upside down, so the court received 100 blank pages and thus had no legal argument to use in court, but I really think the author missed the crucial point.  He says, 
The incident illustrates how a failure to use technology correctly can have massive consequences, but also underlines the dangers of not moving with the times. Had the EC's documents been emailed, then the EC might be a hundred million euros better off.
This is silliness.  The crucial error was not putting the pages in upside down.  That is understandable human error and is not worthing blaming somebody about.  The crucial error, as I am sure Christopher Byrne would point out, is an error of business controls.  Who the heck would send a 100 page legal document and not check that it got there correctly?  This is why they should fire the lawyer, not for the simple human error of placing the document incorrectly.  The author clearly misses the point, because even in the case of e-mailing, as suggested in the quote, the document could have been marked as spam, thrown out as too large by a router, stopped in the original mailbox, etc. etc.  The incident does not "illustrate a failure to use technology correctly", but rather illustrates a dangerous blind faith in technology.  Even if a courier had been sent to deliver the document in person, the lawyer should have checked that it was received.  Anything else is negligence.

And before you laugh, do you always check that your faxes and e-mails get through?  Every time, or at least every time the future of your business or career is at stake?  It is worth taking a lesson from this, even if not the lesson the author thought you should.

Copyright © 2004 Genii Software Ltd.