DOCSLIB.ORG

Timeline For

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Timeline For Pre-W3C Web and Internet Background W3C • Mark Andreessen and colleagues leave NCSA to • Feb: Tim Berners-Lee form Mosaic Communications meets Michael Dertouzos • 1945: Vannevar Bush article Corp., which later became in Zurich to discuss in Atlantic Monthly describes Netscape. possibility of starting new organization at MIT. • Jan: ERCIM a photo-electrical-mechanical • Traditional dial-up systems device called a Memex, for • Apr: INRIA becomes replaces INRIA as (CompuServe, AOL, Prodigy) • Apr: Alan Kotok, then at W3C Host in Europe. • Jun: In response to W3C Host in Europe. memory extension, which begin to provide Internet DEC, visits CERN to discuss could make and follow links “Peabody meeting” W3C • Jul: W3C charters access. creation of Consortium. • Jun: W3C holds first forms Process ERB. • W3C Creates Technical Architecture • Feb: W3C adopts between documents on Royalty-Free Patent microfiche. • 1 Oct: W3C created. Workshop, on Content • Nov: W3C launches Advisory Board Group (TAG). Rating; leads to PICS. • Sep: Keio University Offices program. (AB). Policy. •1960: J.C.R. Licklider publishes 1994 becomes W3C Host in Asia. “Man-Computer Symbiosis.” • Dec: First Web server •1962: Douglas Englebart • May: Tim Berners-Lee outside of publishes “Augmenting Human publishes version 2 of Europe set up at Intellect: A Conceptual “Information Management: Stanford Framework.” A proposal.” University. •1965: Ted Nelson coins the •End 1990: 1994 1995 1996 1997 19981999 2000 20012002 2003 2004 term “Hypertext” in “A File Development begins for Structure for the Complex, the first browser (called 1992 Changing, and the • 1980: While “WorldWideWeb”), editor, Starting year of current W3C Activities Indeterminate.” 20th National consulting for CERN, server, and line-mode 1993 Conference, New York, Tim Berners-Lee browser. Culminates in first Association for Computing writes a program, Web client-server • Graphics • Math • Document Object Model (DOM) •Internationalization • Voice Browser • URI • Device Independence • Multimodal Interaction • XForms • Compound Machinery. “Enquire-Within- communication over • Jan: Number of Document Upon-Everything”, browsers increases; • Hypertext Markup • Extensible Markup • Patent Policy • Semantic Web • Web Services Formats Internet in December 1990. Language (HTML) Language (XML) •1968: Douglas Englebart which allows links to includes Midas, Erwise, • Privacy • XML Key Management demonstrates Online System be made betwen Viola, and Samba. • Style (NLS). arbitrary nodes. 1990 • Synchronized Multimedia • Quality Assurance • Mar: NCSA releases first alpha version of • Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) pre1979 pre1989 1991 Mosaic for X Windows. • Dec: Hypertext ‘91 • Apr: CERN agrees to Conference in San allow anyone to use Antonio, Texas (USA). Web protocol and code Tim Berners-Lee paper royalty free. on Web only accepted as poster session. • Jun: Dale Dougherty of O’Reilly hosts WWW •1969: Advanced Research • 1984: Paul Mockapetris 1989 Wizards Workshop in Projects Agency commissions introduces Domain Cambridge, ARPANET to conduct research Name System (DNS). • Mar: Tim Berners- Massachusetts, USA. on networking. Lee circulates • Nov: At a Newcastle, “Information U.K. conference, Tim •1971: Ray Tomlinson of BBN Management: A creates email program to send Berners-Lee discusses Proposal” for the future of the Web messages across a distributed comments at CERN. network. with MIT's David Gifford, who suggests •1972: Tomlinson expands that Tim contact program to ARPANET users, Michael Dertouzos. using the “@” sign as part of the Web conference address. •1974: Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn Geneva (Jun) Darmstadt (Apr) Paris. Largest conference Santa Clara Brisbane Toronto Amsterdam Hong Kong Honolulu Budapest New York publish, “A Protocol for Packet Chicago (Oct) Boston (Dec) to date. Network Interconnection”, which specifies in detail the design of a Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). Web servers •1978: Part of TCP published seperately as the Internet Protocol (IP). 1 10 50 623 10,022100,000 603,367 ~1.6 million ~3.7 million ~9.5 million ~26 million ~36 million ~35 million ~46+.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Los Angeles Lawyer October 2006 California Aon Attorneys’ Advantage Insurance Program Building the Foundation for Lawyers’ Protection ONE BLOCK at a TIME
    2006 California State Bar Meeting LACBA 2006-07Directory PULLOUT SECTION October 2006 / $4 EARN MCLE CREDIT Hidden Implications of Arbitration Clauses page 35 MEET andCONFER Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael L. Stern offers insight on the new local trial preparation rules page 26 PLUS Local Regulation of Alcohol Sales page 14 Fugitive Disentitlement page 44 Lawyers Who Use Macs page 53 THIS IS MY POST OFFICE. Download My Desktop Post OfficeTM at usps.com/smartbusiness Introducing the online shortcut that lets you pick and choose the services you use most at usps.com and access them instantly. Request pickups, ship, track packages and more. ©2006 United States Postal Service. Eagle symbol and logotype are registered trademarks of the United States Postal Service. *Over 50% of malpractice suits start with client communication, calendaring and deadline issues. Do you remember what you were doing three weeks ago at this time? Your client does. A MEMBER BENEFIT OF Time Matters® Manage your: Communications • Calendars • Deadlines • E-mail • To Dos • Conflict Checks • Matters • Billing For a demo disk at no cost† or more information call 800.328.2898 or go to lexisnexis.com/TMinfo *Law Practice Today, November 2005 †Some restrictions may apply. Offer ends 12/29/06. LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered trademarks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used under license. Time Matters is a registered trademark of LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. AL9202 © 2006 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. October 2006 Vol. 29, No. 7 26 Meet and Confer BY JUDGE MICHAEL L.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origins of the Underline As Visual Representation of the Hyperlink on the Web: a Case Study in Skeuomorphism
    The Origins of the Underline as Visual Representation of the Hyperlink on the Web: A Case Study in Skeuomorphism The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Romano, John J. 2016. The Origins of the Underline as Visual Representation of the Hyperlink on the Web: A Case Study in Skeuomorphism. Master's thesis, Harvard Extension School. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33797379 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA The Origins of the Underline as Visual Representation of the Hyperlink on the Web: A Case Study in Skeuomorphism John J Romano A Thesis in the Field of Visual Arts for the Degree of Master of Liberal Arts in Extension Studies Harvard University November 2016 Abstract This thesis investigates the process by which the underline came to be used as the default signifier of hyperlinks on the World Wide Web. Created in 1990 by Tim Berners- Lee, the web quickly became the most used hypertext system in the world, and most browsers default to indicating hyperlinks with an underline. To answer the question of why the underline was chosen over competing demarcation techniques, the thesis applies the methods of history of technology and sociology of technology. Before the invention of the web, the underline–also known as the vinculum–was used in many contexts in writing systems; collecting entities together to form a whole and ascribing additional meaning to the content.
    [Show full text]
  • Fast, Inexpensive Content-Addressed Storage in Foundation Sean Rhea,∗ Russ Cox, Alex Pesterev∗ Meraki, Inc
    Fast, Inexpensive Content-Addressed Storage in Foundation Sean Rhea,∗ Russ Cox, Alex Pesterev∗ Meraki, Inc. MIT CSAIL Abstract particular operating system, itself depending on a particu- lar hardware configuration. In the worst case, a user in the Foundation is a preservation system for users’ personal, distant future might need to replicate an entire hardware- digital artifacts. Foundation preserves all of a user’s data software stack to view an old file as it once existed. and its dependencies—fonts, programs, plugins, kernel, Foundation is a system that preserves users’ personal and configuration state—by archiving nightly snapshots digital artifacts regardless of the applications with which of the user’s entire hard disk. Users can browse through they create those artifacts and without requiring any these images to view old data or recover accidentally preservation-specific effort on the users’ part. To do so, deleted files. To access data that a user’s current environ- it permanently archives nightly snapshots of a user’s en- ment can no longer interpret, Foundation boots the disk tire hard disk. These snapshots contain the complete soft- image in which that data resides under an emulator, al- ware stack needed to view a file in bootable form: given lowing the user to view and modify the data with the same an emulator for the hardware on which that stack once programs with which the user originally accessed it. ran, a future user can view a file exactly as it was. To limit This paper describes Foundation’s archival storage the hardware that future emulators must support, Foun- layer, which uses content-addressed storage (CAS) to re- dation confines users’ environments to a virtual machine.
    [Show full text]
  • How Did They Get to the Moon Without Powerpoint?
    How Did They Get to the Moon Without PowerPoint? Mordechai (Moti) Ben-Ari Department of Science Teaching Weizmann Institute of Science [email protected] Keynote speech at the Finnish Computer Science Society, May, 2003. 1 Developing a Technology The invention of writing, however, was the invention of an entirely new Let me start with a description of one of my first technology.[3, p. 9] full-time jobs: There is something to be said for this definition: I developed a technology for data min- do you remember those old movies that show “typ- ing in order to consolidate enterprise- ing pools,” where rows and rows of people, usually customer relations. women, sat pecking away at keyboards all day? Since I held that job in the early 1970s, clearly I would not have described my work in this terminol- ogy! What I actually did was: I wrote a program that read the system log, computed usage of CPU time and printed reports so that the users could be billed. My point in this talk is that hi-tech in general and computer science in particular did not begin in the 1990s, but that we have been doing it for decades. I believe that today’s students are being fed a lot of marketing propaganda to the contrary, and that they Well, things haven’t changed all that much! have completely lost a historical perspective of our discipline. I further believe that we have a respon- sibility as educators to downgrade the hype and to give our students a firm background in the scientific and engineering principles of computer science.
    [Show full text]
  • Educating the Whole Person? the Case of Athens College, 1940-1990
    Educating the whole person? The case of Athens College, 1940-1990 Polyanthi Giannakopoulou-Tsigkou Institute of Education, University of London A thesis submitted for the Degree of EdD September 2012 Abstract This thesis is a historical study of the growth and development of Athens College, a primary/secondary educational institution in Greece, during the period 1940-1990. Athens College, a private, non-profit institution, was founded in 1925 as a boys' school aiming to offer education for the whole person. The research explores critically the ways in which historical, political, socio-economic and cultural factors affected the evolution of Athens College during the period 1940-1990 and its impact on students' further studies and careers. This case study seeks to unfold aspects of education in a Greek school, and reach a better understanding of education and factors that affect it and interact with it. A mixed methods approach is used: document analysis, interviews with Athens College alumni and former teachers, analysis of student records providing data related to students' achievements, their family socio-economic 'origins' and their post-Athens College 'destinations'. The study focuses in particular on the learners at the School, and the kinds of learning that took place within this institution over half a century. Athens College, although under the control of a centralised educational system, has resisted the weaknesses of Greek schooling. Seeking to establish educational ideals associated with education of the whole person, excellence, meritocracy and equality of opportunity and embracing progressive curricula and pedagogies, it has been successful in taking its students towards university studies and careers.
    [Show full text]
  • Rough Consensus and Running Code: Integrating Engineering Principles Into Internet Policy Debates
    Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 63 Issue 2 Article 2 3-2011 Rough Consensus and Running Code: Integrating Engineering Principles into Internet Policy Debates Christopher S. Yoo University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Communications Law Commons, Computer and Systems Architecture Commons, Internet Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Yoo, Christopher S. (2011) "Rough Consensus and Running Code: Integrating Engineering Principles into Internet Policy Debates," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 63 : Iss. 2 , Article 2. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol63/iss2/2 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SYMPOSIUM INTRODUCTION Rough Consensus and Running Code: Integrating Engineering Principles into Internet Policy Debates Christopher S. Yoo* I. TUTORIAL ............................................. 343 II. THE CONTINUING DEBATE OVER NETWORK MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY OF SERVICE ........................... 344 III. CHANGING TECHNOLOGY AND THE LIMITS OF THE LAYERED AND END-TO-END MODELS ............ ............... 346 IV. ARCHITECTURE AND NETWORK SECURITY ..................... 349 V. KEYNOTE ADDRESS BY PAUL
    [Show full text]
  • Legislators of Cyberspace: an Analysis of the Role Of
    SHAPING CODE Jay P. Kesan* & Rajiv C. Shah** I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 4 II. THE CASE STUDIES: THE DEVELOPMENT OF CODE WITHIN INSTITUTIONS.............................. 13 A. World Wide Web......................................................................................................... 14 1. Libwww............................................................................................................ 14 2. NCSA Mosaic .................................................................................................. 16 B. Cookies ........................................................................................................................ 21 1. Netscape’s Cookies .......................................................................................... 21 2. The IETF’s Standard for Cookies .................................................................... 24 C. Platform for Internet Content Selection....................................................................... 28 D. Apache......................................................................................................................... 34 III. LEGISLATIVE BODIES: SOCIETAL INSTITUTIONS THAT DEVELOP CODE ................................. 37 A. Universities.................................................................................................................. 38 B. Firms...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rulemaking: 1999-10 FSOR Emission Standards and Test Procedures
    State of California Environmental Protection Agency AIR RESOURCES BOARD EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR NEW 2001 AND LATER MODEL YEAR SPARK-IGNITION MARINE ENGINES FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS October 1999 State of California AIR RESOURCES BOARD Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, Including Summary of Comments and Agency Response PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR NEW 2001 AND LATER MODEL YEAR SPARK-IGNITION MARINE ENGINES Public Hearing Date: December 10, 1998 Agenda Item No.: 98-14-2 I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................................ 3 II. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSES – COMMENTS PRIOR TO OR AT THE HEARING .................................................................................................................. 7 A. EMISSION STANDARDS ................................................................................................................... 7 1. Adequacy of National Standards............................................................................................. 7 2. Lead Time ................................................................................................................................. 8 3. Technological Feasibility ........................................................................................................ 13 a. Technological Feasibility of California-specific Standards ..............................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • The Internet and Isi: Four Decades of Innovation
    THE INTERNET AND ISI: FOUR DECADES OF INNOVATION ROD BECKSTROM President and Chief Executive Officer Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 40th Anniversary of USC Information Sciences Institute 26 April 2012 As prepared for delivery It’s an honor to be here today to mark the 40th anniversary of the University of Southern California’s Information Sciences Institute. Thank you to Herb Schorr for inviting me to speak with you today and participate in the day’s events. When he steps down he will leave some very large shoes to fill. When I received Herb’s invitation, I seized upon it as an opportunity to come before you to express the sincere gratitude that my colleagues and I feel for the work and support of ISI. When I think of ICANN and its development, and all we have accomplished, I never forget that we stand upon the shoulders of giants, many of whom contributed to my remarks today. In fact, I owe a special debt of gratitude to Bob Kahn, who has been a mentor to me. I am honored that he took the time to walk through a number of details in the history I have been asked to relate. The organizers asked me to speak about the history of ISI and ICANN. They also invited me to talk a bit about the future of the Internet. In my role as President and CEO of ICANN, I have many speaking engagements that are forward looking. They are opportunities to talk about ICANN’s work and how it will usher in the next phase in the history of the global, unified Internet that many of you have helped to create.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    2015 Annual Report ANNUAL 2015 REPORT CONTENTS i Letter from the President 4 ii NYSERNet Names New President 6 iii NYSERNet Members Institutions 8 iv Membership Update 9 v Data Center 10 vi VMWare Quilt Project 11 vii Working Groups 12 viii Education Services 13 ix iGlass 14 x Network 16 xi Internet Services 17 xii Board Members 18 xiii Our Staff 19 xiv Human Face of Research 20 LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT Dear Colleagues, I am pleased to present to you NYSERNet’s 2015 Annual Report. Through more than three decades, NYSERNet’s members have addressed the education and research community’s networking and other technology needs together, with trust in each other guiding us through every transition. This spring inaugurates more change, as City. The terrible attack of Sept. 11, 2001, we welcome a new president and I will step complicated achievement of that goal, made down from that position to focus on the it more essential, and taught a sobering research community’s work and needs. lesson concerning the importance of communication and the need to harden the By itself, working with NYSERNet’s infrastructure that supports it. We invested extraordinary Board and staff to support in a wounded New York City, deploying fiber and building what today has become a global exchange point at “ These two ventures formed pieces 32 Avenue of the Americas. In the process, we forged partnerships in a puzzle that, when assembled, that have proved deep and durable. benefited all of New York and beyond.” Despite inherent risks, and a perception that New York City the collective missions of our members institutions might principally benefit, for the past 18 years has been a privilege NYSERNet’s Board unanimously supported beyond my imagining.
    [Show full text]
  • Ali Aydar Anita Borg Alfred Aho Bjarne Stroustrup Bill Gates
    Ali Aydar Ali Aydar is a computer scientist and Internet entrepreneur. He is the chief executive officer at Sporcle. He is best known as an early employee and key technical contributor at the original Napster. Aydar bought Fanning his first book on programming in C++, the language he would use two years later to build the Napster file-sharing software. Anita Borg Anita Borg (January 17, 1949 – April 6, 2003) was an American computer scientist. She founded the Institute for Women and Technology (now the Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology). While at Digital Equipment, she developed and patented a method for generating complete address traces for analyzing and designing high-speed memory systems. Alfred Aho Alfred Aho (born August 9, 1941) is a Canadian computer scientist best known for his work on programming languages, compilers, and related algorithms, and his textbooks on the art and science of computer programming. Aho received a B.A.Sc. in Engineering Physics from the University of Toronto. Bjarne Stroustrup Bjarne Stroustrup (born 30 December 1950) is a Danish computer scientist, most notable for the creation and development of the widely used C++ programming language. He is a Distinguished Research Professor and holds the College of Engineering Chair in Computer Science. Bill Gates 2 of 10 Bill Gates (born October 28, 1955) is an American business magnate, philanthropist, investor, computer programmer, and inventor. Gates is the former chief executive and chairman of Microsoft, the world’s largest personal-computer software company, which he co-founded with Paul Allen. Bruce Arden Bruce Arden (born in 1927 in Minneapolis, Minnesota) is an American computer scientist.
    [Show full text]
  • Assignment #4: Big−O, Sorting, Tables, History − Soln
    Assignment #4: Big−O, Sorting, Tables, History − Soln 1. Consider the following code fragment: for (int pass = 1; pass <= 10; pass++) { for (int index = 0; index < k; index += 10) { for (int count = 0; count < index; count++) { do_something(); } } } Assuming that the execution time of do_something() is independent of k, what is the most accurate description of the worst case run−time for this algorithm? a) O(1) b) O(k ) c) O(k log(k) ) 2 d) O(k ) ← 3 e) O(k ) Briefly explain your reason for choosing this answer. The outer loop executes (10+1-1)/1=10 times, and the middle loop executes (k-0)/10 = k/10 times for each execution of the outer loop. The innermost loop executes no times at first, then once, then twice, until k-1 times the last time that the middle loop executes, and the body runs O(1) time. Thus the run time is 10*(0+1+2+?+k- 1)*O(1) = O(k2). 2. Consider the following code fragment: for (int pass = 1; pass <= k; pass++) { for (int index = 0; index < 100*k; index += k) { do_something(); } } Assuming that the execution time of do_something() is O(log(k) ), what is the most accurate description of the worst case run−time for this algorithm? f) O(log(k) ) g) O(k ) h) O(k log(k) ) ← 2 i) O(k ) 2 j) O(k log(k) ) Briefly explain your reason for choosing this answer. The outer loop is executed (k+1-1)/1 = k times, the inner loop is exectuted (100k-0)/k = 100 times, and the innermost block takes time O(log(k)).
    [Show full text]