Back in November, I wrote a blog post explaining a fix for the poor and varied rendering you will get with a wordy legend that forces its containing fieldset to be wider than you've specified. You can read more details in the previous post. In a nutshell, it involves placing a span within the legend. Since a span (and a legend) are inline, the span won't render the width until you change its display to block. The styling is then applied using a descendent selector - legend span. (The span within the legend technique is demonstrated here.)

And all was well in the world of cross browser fixes -- until the birth of Firefox 3. The changes made to FFOX 3 mean the span technique now fails in that browser. (Thanks to Atus for the heads up.) The behavior of FFOX 3 continues to be a legend that doesn't wrap. However, instead of making the fieldset wider, the legend now protrudes out the right side of the fieldset. (If you view the file linked above with FFOX3, you'll see that the span does render at the width specified in the selector - but the content within continues and protrudes to the right, until it ends. Unsightly to say the least.)

Just one more declaration

After filing a bug at Bugzilla, I was told that the changes made were to keep the original rendering for those that prefer it, but to now offer a fix (without the span technique) for those that desire more control. Certainly progress is a good thing. Using the white-space:normal declaration within the legend rule causes FFOX3 to actually wrap the text. So YAY for that! (Thanks a bunch, Philippe.) However, this of course, does nothing to FFOX2 or any other browser with the non-wrapping issue. So BOO for that.

If you want to support browsers with the non-wrapping issue, you'll still need to add the span within the legend. However, to support FFOX3, you'll need to add the white-space property to either the legend or legend span selector. In my testing, both will work. This fix for FFOX3 does not affect any other browser negatively - but it doesn't fix any of them either. (View the page with the white-space in the span selector. View the page with the white-space in the legend selector.)

To me, the bigger conversation is, why the blank can't we get some form rendering that actually makes it easier to more consistently mark up and render forms? I'm sure someone can tell me where my thinking is going wrong -- but a legend is an inline element. An inline element doesn't accept a width. I'm good with that. But when paired with the fieldset, it's parent that does have a width, why is it not contained? Why in some browsers does it force the fieldset wider than we've specified. I don't think inline elements should have that much power (especially since it must not be white-space:nowrap declaration causing the increased width for the other browsers since the FFOX3 white-space: normal fix doesn't work for them)! And why, in FFOX3, does the content in the span (contained in the legend) not react to the styling given to the legend span selector? The span itself does, but the text within runs out the right side of it. I know someone will say because in the Moz style sheet, the legend is set to white-space:nowrap. I see that, but WHY was that the fix/change given when none of the other browsers seem to be handling it in that way? Inquiring minds want to know! (I mean, when exactly would you want the legend to overrun the fieldset and not wrap? And couldn't you just add white-space:nowrap when you did?)

(Update) Philippe and Boris essentially explain it this way: A legend is not actually an inline element. A fieldset/legend pair are treated as replaced elements. Just like the form controls they contain (Boris explained that the reason has to do with the way borders have to work). Thus, they can't really be described with CSS. Philippe pointed out that in the conformance section of the specs, it says, "CSS 2.1 does not define which properties apply to form controls and frames, or how CSS can be used to style them. User agents may apply CSS properties to these elements. Authors are recommended to treat such support as experimental. A future level of CSS may specify this further." So I suppose what it boils down to is - this is what we've got for now. :)

For those wondering and dreaming of the great beyond - thinking about what's on the horizon with Internet Explorer 8 (currently in the beta), it's fine with the "span technique" and it's not bothered by the added declaration of white-space:normal. However, unlike IE6 and IE7, it's placing the legend down, below the top border of the fieldset - instead of halfway over it like the other browsers do. But it's still in beta. I'll worry about that little issue, if it still remains, later.

So there's been a pretty decent sized debate going on through the webosphere. Designers should know how to code. Developers should know how to design (or shouldn't need to design). I considered weighing in on the 37 Signals blog -- but the comments were already closed. Call me slow (yes, I've been on the road, had a birthday, and had my mom visiting with her birthday. ;). You'd be right. Oh well.

I do have one thing to say. Well, I probably have more than one, but I'll start with that. I recently did a couple sessions at the HOW design conference. One was on "Mistakes Print Designers Make on the Web." Yes, I definitely agree there are common mistakes from the print paradigm. Many times I can tell how people's brains work when they ask for help on lists. I can tell they don't understand the web or come from a print background. However, that does NOT mean I think they are useless. Do I think they should know how the web works? That the web is a fluid, not static medium? Am I willing to help them learn (if they're going to be in my "designer stable")? He77s yea. I am willing. Because I think they are very important to our industry.

Do I think that coders should not use a graphic medium. Lord no. "Designing" (or so they call it) using the constraints of "what's easy to do with code" is really a sad, and less attractive, way to work. I say bring on the tough comps -- we'll work it out, or we'll ask for a small revision. We'll come up with a way to make it work accessibly. A way you might not have thought of before -- but a way that is equally lovely. But lord knows I think you design types are valuable. I quit designing years ago. Why? I'm a tweakaholic. I make more money hiring people that are more creative, better trained and faster. My clients save money with those same people. The designers are freed to be their creative selves -- but yes, it's nice for me if they understand the web. It's nice if I don't have to lead, guide, explain. That said, because I know my craft, I'm willing to help them at the beginning. And no, I don't expect them to know how to code. Just to have an overall understanding that the web is not print. Everything will not have line breaks where they want it to. It won't be glued down. But I, with my experience, will guide them through what can and can't be done. In time, they will be one of my favorite designers. They will understand, but they will send it to me to code. Because that's what I do best.

Do you create the site with HTML? Do you create it without a graphic program? Well, gawd bless you. But I'd venture to say your designs are likely boring. I think 37 signals rawks in usability. I have no bad words to say about them. But what I'm seeing from their recent blog posts in this area is just silly. And no, I've never seen a super creative design come out of that group (at least that I KNEW was from them. I'm certainly not barring it).

Personally, I welcome the challenge of the design minds. I find that if I create the site IN HTML, I do what's easiest to do with HTML/CSS. I don't challenge my abilities. I don't push the envelope.

Yes, the site is about the content -- the message. People are generally looking for information on the web. I teach that all the time all over the world. But there's another side of it. There's the package that same content comes in. Is it readable and usable? Good. That's important. Does it work when the text size is large. Does it work with assistive technology. Excellent. Accessibility is even more important. But goodness knows that a majority of your readers are going to be influenced by what it looks like. Yes, even the colors. Study color psychology. Look at eye patterns. Immerse yourself in usability and interaction. Heck, watch your mom try to navigate things -- I just did. It's eye opening. How it looks is important. Sorry, that's just the facts. Why do you think company's spend so much on their Superbowl commercials?

And let's not leave out how you interact with the database -- how well that content dynamically appears. How much sense it makes. How usable the interface is. There are many things to think about. The root of my story and my point is -- it's the rare individual that has all the strengths needed for one web site. It's the team that matters. Should everyone have a basic understanding of the other member's jobs? How they work? What they can accomplish. Oh yes. Absolutely. Should they be able to do them? That's just ludicrous. Absolutely not. Surround yourself with people more brilliant than yourself. Always learn. Work hard. You, and those around you, will be enormously successful.

Ciao.

There is a bill which passed in the US congress which is H.R. 5889, the Orphan Works Act of 2008. I'd contacted my congressman about the bill and my concerns over the bill. I've received a reply which I would like to pass on here:

WOW - TODCon slipped by so fast ... it is over too quickly...

Anyways, this year we had an incredible line up of speakers, a bunch of wonderful attenders and the usual great time at the after events (i.e. dinner!). Florida is still hot, wouldn't mind it being a lot cooler, but that just isn't in the cards in June when you're in Orlando FL.

Some of the regulars didn't make it this year and they all were missed. We also had some new speakers who were standing up getting it done. Got to chat with a couple of the new speakers (Denise and Estell) and they are really cool people, hope you get a chance to meet them!

Best session (I went to...) was Derek's - he dressed up in a "Jedi" outfit (ok, it was a brown robe, but in context, he was a Jedi!) and I also picked up info from the other sessions I attended. The conference was great - you should plan to go to it next year - start saving today!

TODCon will be here very soon. Yep, I'm counting the days. OK that's not the secret.

It'll be great to hook up with some CMX friends and regular TODCon attendees and speakers. Well, that's no secret either.

I've written the last three CMXtraneous blog posts! That's more of a shock than a surprise, though. 

I'm pretty stoked about the Fireworks public beta. The Fireworks engineering team has done a phenominal job. It's to the point now where I don't like going back to CS3. Yeah, not really a secret there either, the way I've been blabbing all week long about it.

The secret is my second TODCon session. It will be a live demo of the new features in the Fireworks Public beta! We'll look at some of the cool features you've read about in my recent articles as well as Kim Cavanaugh's piece on the Path panel. Based on what you've read and heard this week, I hope you pull up a chair for my session.

Alan Musselman from Adobe will also be presenting a session on Fireworks. He'll no doubt have some very awesome and cool stuff to share as well.

I'm looking forward to seeing everyone. I'll be the guy with the loud shirt and - new this year - a limp (sprained my ankle and pulled a tendon a couple weeks ago YEOUCH). Feel free to have pity on me and buy me a martini or at least help me to the gift shop for a new fashion statement. ;-)

Today is a great day! At 12:01 am this morning, Adobe made available public betas for both Dreamweaver and Fireworks.

Not only that, but we've got brand spanking new content for both Fireworks and Dreamweaver public betas, starting today. 

Walk, run, fly, teleport on over to Adobe labs and get your own beta copies while supplies last. The public beta software will be available for download for the duration of the beta program and will run for 2 days as a demo before requiring unlocking. Unlocking the public beta for the remainder of the beta period requires an active CS3 serial number.

I've been nosing through both applications and the updates are quite impressive. Stay tuned here at CMX for a variety of sneak-peaks into both applications.

And if you are a Fireworks Junkie, you can learn even more in the coming days at the Adobe Dev Center, Peach Pit Press and Lynda.com. Yep, I've been a busy boy. ;-)

In less than one month, geeks will gather in Sunny Florida to catch some rays, share some laughs and learn a whole whack of geek stuff. Yep, TODCon is coming. I can't say enough positive things about this event. It's certainly opened up opportunities for me in my business, and the size of the event means you've got a great chance of hanging with your favorite authors or speakers, or making new connections to help you in your business.

There are some pretty interesting topics on the agenda as well (and I'm sure there will be a few surprises.) I'll be doing two sessions on Fireworks (Ok, that's no surprise).

The Wyndham Resort is a very nice place to spend a few days as well. You walk into the grounds area and forget how close you are to the hustle and bustle of Orlando.

So if you're in the mood for a break, and want to justify it as a business expense, TODCon may be just right for you. You get it all, sun, fun, education and networking in a nice little package.

I'm not one to put a lot of personal information on my blog. I don't have problem with people that do it, it's just not my personal style. When I was first on the web, it took about 3 or 4 years before you could find a picture of me anywhere (as a woman, I needed brain respect first). I was one of the last people I know to join Facebook (never have had a Myspace page). Don't get me wrong, I love the web, but I've just never found the need to expose a lot of personal information there.

Enter our new, confusing age

I've posted here about Twitter. And I do love it for a variety of reasons. I post more information there than I do in other places. Oddly, it feels like I'm talking to my friends--in some giant, controlled IM. Of course, I know that since I don't protect my tweets, anyone that follows me, google, and the world can read them. Still...

Facebook however, has turned out to be another animal entirely. After joining for an orchestrated birthday prank on a friend, I stayed and connected with a lot of folks--from real life friends to web friends I've not yet met in real life (IRL). In the past few months in fact, I've connected with several old friends, from grade school to college. It's fun to see what they're doing now.

Facebook is a Tattler!

What I and others seem to forget though, is that when you change anything on Facebook, it is broadcast to all your friends. Relationship status is a perfect example. When Greg and I got engaged via Twitter in March, most of my online friends knew what was going on. But my real life friends, the ones that I see at volleyball or on the weekends (as if I had weekends) are also connected to me on Facebook. Since I was headed out of town, I didn't have time to let most of them know, but intended to when I returned. Unthinkingly, I changed my Facebook relationship status to engaged instead of, in a relationship. Duh. Instantly, I started getting wall posts and emails -- Why didn't you TELL me!!? Ooops.

I'd say, in fact, that I know more about some of my friends from Facebook than I do from real life. Casual acquaintances, that I connect to there, show things like their new tattoo. They probably wouldn't have displayed it to me if we met on the street. Maybe they post pictures of their wild beer pong bachelor party. Who knew? People obviously feel safer in online social networks than they do in personal interaction.

Tonight I was reminded of just how far reaching this phenomenon is. I went to Facebook to join a group I was invited to by email. Somehow I followed a rabbit path ending at my younger son's girlfriend's page. I noticed she is now listed as single. Not surprisingly, so is he. We live in the same house. We talk a lot. I even knew he had told her we were moving at the end of the summer. But he omitted this one small detail about the outcome. Weird world where you learn of things in your own house through Facebook, eh? Maybe that's why my nineteen year old refuses to be my friend there, eh?

So how do you know WHO to friend?

This question has arisen in my own mind several times recently. I used to have much stricter rules for who I'd friend (though admittedly, not as strict as those that will only friend someone they've met IRL). On Twitter, if someone's witty or relevant, or knows lots of my friends, I'll follow for a while. But I try to keep the numbers I follow within reason so that I can actually pay attention. About 250 is the max I can comprehend. On Facebook, I tend to want to actually know the person somehow. I think it's because Facebook "feels more locked." I actually put my real email address there (though I don't list my phone number like some do).

But now there's BrightKite. BrightKite tells people your exact location (or a close proximity if you don't mark them as a trusted friend). So now I'm rather befuddled as to who to accept as a friend or not. When people ask to be friends, I (probably just me) feel bad to decline their friendship. I mean how do you meet new people if you decline anyone you don't know. But again, as a woman, how do you know if there are any "unsafe" people you're connecting with. This new, online community is a new and different place to navigate--that much is certain. What do you think?

Tomorrow, I get on a plane to Web Design World Chicago. It looks like it's going to be a great conference. If you're in the area, come on over and join in the geek fun. Jeff Veen, Jared Spool, Dan Rubin, Joe Marini, Greg Rewis and more!

Then it's on to HOW Design in Boston followed by Multi-Mania in Brussels, Belgium, TODCon in Orlando and finally Web Down Under in Sydney. The organizers have worked hard, and done a great job on all these conferences so be sure to come to the one closest to you. You will not regret it. Promise! Grab me in the hall if you're there. I love to meet people. :)

<soapbox> 

Just a little update to Ray's article today. After receiving many negative comments on his blog, emails from CMX and a not-so-subtle email from me, my article has finally been removed from the offending blogger's site.

Thank you to the CMX subscribers - and partners - who helped in this matter by posting comments on the blogger's site. You guys are great!

In an email response from the blogger, he stated, "...i had already your name in the end of this article..."

Yet again, this individual completely missed the point. Attribution is  not a replacement for permission. Copying is not a form of flattery.

And hey, if you've ever seen my loud shirt collection, you'd know I wasn't that much into flattery, anyway.

Why the score of 2 - 0, you ask? Well, at the same time I found this blog site, I also discovered a commercial software site which had not only republished another of my articles, but had edited the article in such a way that it seemed I was endorsing the product. One email to them and the article came down. Ironically, at THAT point they asked how much it would cost to reproduce the article.

Fat chance.

</soapbox>
 

Mastering CSS with Dreamweaver CS3, the book I co-wrote with Greg Rewis, is finally out. Yes, I know, it was long overdue. I took a picture of it when I finally got to see it at Greg's house (no, my copies haven't arrived yet), so if you'll excuse the exhausted, traipsing around Phoenix all day look on my face, you can see me with the book on Flickr.

Greg and I didn't want to create the same CSS or Dreamweaver book that others have written. Those books are published, are very useful, and if that's what you need buy the appropriate book. Our goal instead was to show how to create standards-based, accessible web layouts using Dreamweaver. It's a myth that you have to hand code to be a real web developer. Is it best to know how to semantically mark up your page? Yes, absolutely. This is a craft and you should know as much as you can about it. Can you hand code within the Dreamweaver environment? Of course you can -- I do it all the time. Do you have to? Absolutely not. There are tools within Dreamweaver that make your work faster, and more effective whether you're working in code or design view. If you haven't looked at Dreamweaver since about MX or so, it's come a long way baby!

Chapter 1 is an overall review of important CSS principles that you must understand to create sturdy CSS-based layouts. The project in chapter 3 takes a lovely, nested table-based layout and transforms it to a CSS layout. Each of the remaining four chapters are a full project based on the CSS layouts I wrote for Dreamweaver CS3 - Fixed, Liquid, Elastic and Hybrid. Chapter 6 also uses Spry 1.6 (an upgrade from Adobe Labs for the Spry 1.4 version that ships with Dreamweaver CS3) and takes you through the process of using HTML data sets to create an accessible Ajax gallery -- unobtrusive javascript and all. We hope the projects will feel like we're working with you as your personal trainer.

The book is full of CSS tips and techniques. It also teaches a variety of ways to use Dreamweaver CS3. Both Fireworks and Photoshop comps are used and the integration of those programs with Dreamweaver is illustrated.

Our hope is that the techniques taught in the book will make your beautiful designs more solid as well as making you more comfortable with the program used by so many web departments. I use Dreamweaver every day and even I learned some new Dreamweaver tips from Greg! Here's what one reader had to say:

"The first chapter alone was worth it to me. I have a lot of CSS books, tutorial sites, etc. Maybe I'm more familiar after working with it for a while, but for me, this book is as clear as a bell, informative as a book ought to be, and motivational as a hand grenade... made me want to jump up and run like hell... to Dreamweaver to try stuff out."

C. Lindauer

Some of you may have also heard a rumor about the other partnership that came out of writing this book. And to that I say, yes, it's true. Greg and I were engaged (via Twitter) in early March. You can think of the book as our baby. ;)

As the title indicates, my Fireworks article is now live on Adobe Edge. Feel free to check it out. I'm quite happy with the end result and I hope you gain some insights on the Fireworks work flow as well.

I have covered this topic in both written and video form here on CMX, but in this article, I atcually take someone else's single page design and build it out into a series of interconnected pages.

Enjoy! 

John Nack has a lengthy post about why you won't see 64-bit Photoshop goodness on Mac for CS4.

There is a lot of good information there about what 64-bit does and doesn't mean, both in general and for running Photoshop. In the end, it's about market, and Apple has decided to leave Carbon-64 in the trash heap. So, Adobe will be focusing on moving to the Cocoa way of doing things.

John brings up some good information for Mac folks, and also tries to head off any media-baited flame wars. However, I am willing to bet this will just spark a frenzy of armchair developers wagging fingers and charry-picking lame arguments. It's business, folks... take an objective step back and see what makes sense to all parties involved. Pay special attention to the 3 points made near the end of his blog entry.

Happy Anniversary to CMX and my fellow CMX'ers!!

Thanks to everyone who has worked so hard to make this site the success it is. And of course a huge thank you to all of our loyal subscribers, we wouldn't be here without you. :-)

Wow...hard to believe it's been 5 years! I have to say it's been a hell of a ride, and one I've thouroughly enjoyed and been proud to be a part of.

Some months ago, I wrote about my interest in a new audio book category, the podcast novel. These novels are similar to those movie serials of old (Flash Gordon, Lone Ranger), radio serials of not so old (The Shadow, Green Hornet) and TV mini-series of today. Their popularity has grown and many of the authors have earned a certain amount of fame (if not fortune) by writing and narrating their own books in serial form.

Some of these podcast novel authors are now going from cyberspace to the printed page! Yep, they're signing book deals for the novels they used to narrate for free. I think this is pretty cool.

Scott Sigler's sci-fi (and ultra violent) podcast novels can be subscribed to for free on iTunes, but he now has a book deal for the print release of his novel, Infected, coming out in April.

Seth Harwood's film noire private detective podcast novel, Jack Wakes Up is also now in print.

J.C. Hutchins, author of the Seventh Son Trilogy will see the first of the trilogy, Descent, hit the printed page this summer.

What I love about all this is how things got started; online, free, serialized but complete, versions of the books. These authors, and others, I am sure (I'm a sci-fi geek so my interest only extends so far, I admit), gained a following, a fan-base online and their hard work has paid off. It's a geat example of how new media is affecting the way things are done.

Check out iTunes or Podiobooks.com for a long list of podcast novels in a variety of genre's. Give yourself a break from the same old, same old on your iPod.

Personally, I'm hoping to dump a bunch of these onto Tom Green's iPod before our camping trip this August, and delete his Abba collection in the process . . .

Ok, I'm in Kansas and I thought we're pretty good with online business tech stuff - I have to file, monthly, on my income, etc. I can do this online which is quick, convenient and saved me a stamp and a check (EFT payment). Now, I'm no fan of taxes, but it is the law and not paying is more painful than paying, so I've been faithful to make the payments every month before the due date (errr.... on the due date) and get the yearly required paperwork in too. Each transaction has a confirmation ID and each monthly form is stored, electronically, on their site. I can see that I've paid for the entire 2007 year, have everything filed, etc...

However, today I get a call from the Kansas Department of Revenue - I wasn't there, so I call back when I get in. It is a long distance call and they are only open from 9am to 5pm. I have voip service, so I dial away. I'm put on hold. (insert elevator music here with brief interruptions telling me how important my call is to them...)

Mike answers the phone, I chat a little letting him know why I'm calling, give the case number and wait. He asks some questions to make sure I'm the right guy (you know, that hard to get information, like the address of my business...) - after he's certain I'm not some stranger calling to make good on a government debt for someone else, we proceed to figure out why they called....

"Sir, we don't have your filing for all of last quarter no the payment for the last quarter either"

I'm a little shocked, I know I paid, I saw the money leave my account, all he can tell me is I need to get the right paper work in. They do have my yearly, which has the exact details for my monthly, but we won't go there - having the government actually make the connection between the yearly and monthly reports is asking too much. I mutter something and then get off the phone. By this time, I've loaded up the Kansas on-line payment system and just got to the section about my payments. I call back.

May answers the phone. I give her the details like I did Mike. As we progress, I tell her I've got the electronic confirmation numbers for the payments. I give those to her. She says she sees them, but she can't open them (huh?) and tells me I'm late and fees are assessed , which I suspected, and that, if those were the reports, I'd need to call someone else to get it figured out. Oddly enough, they know I did make a payment and they know that the payment made matches the figure they said I didn't pay in December. Again, this is a leap they cannot grasp. I'm given another long distance number to call.

Kevin answers the phone. I tell him the issue and he's able to figure out that, yes, I did make the payments and yes, the confirmation numbers are for the transactions I said they were for and, yes I filed on time. However, he can't do anything about it. The money was credited to the first quarter 2008, mind you, we're not allowed to file for the first quarter until it is over which is in two weeks. I need to call someone else and, yes, it is a long distance number again. I need to call accounting and tell them that Kevin in the electronics division said it was OK and verified the payments (and since there is only one Kevin, I think they may check on that). See, someone in accounting mis-keyed the information in to the wrong area. Several thoughts went through my mind, but the ones I can print involve:

• Why am I fixing this problem? I did what I was supposed to do.
• Why can't the revenue department open the confirmed electronic transactions?
• Why can't Kevin call accounting himself and fix the issue?
• Why can't Kevin just fix it himself?
• Why couldn't May or Mike have called Kevin and then accounting to fix the issue?
• Why couldn't May or Mike have fixed this themselves?
• By the time this is done, I'll have spent more time resolving their foul up than the entire bill is worth
• When I screw up, as they thought and billed me for, I'm charged, who pays me for their screw ups?

In any case, I had to leave for an appointment before I could call accounting, something I'm "looking forward to" the same was you look forward to a root canal. Luckily, they will find in my favor and reverse the charges and all, but, man what a waste of time...

Keep your eyes peeled for the April issue of Adobe Edge because yours truly is making a guest appearance.

Here at CMX as well as in my teaching, I've been focusing recently on using Fireworks to create click-through prototypes, and establishing best practices for one's FW workflow. With the evolution of Fireworks, it's much easier to create these interactive mock ups quickly, allowing more immediate client feedback/approval of a site's design and flow. The beauty of this process is many changes are made early in the design stage, rather than during the coding process.

As designs get more complex, it becomes even more important to set up some best practices for workflow. This helps in case you have to revisit the design weeks or months down the road. It is also very helpful if you have to pass on the design to someone else.

My article on Adobe Edge will focus on the creation of a click-through mock up from a finalized multi-page Fireworks PNG file.

If you've not heard of Adobe Edge before, here's the low-down:

Adobe Edge is a free electronic newsletter that comes out every couple months. It features content for web designers and developers, covering stuff going on at Adobe and the web in general. While the focus is about Adobe and what it's doing to make web-life easier, the magazine also covers things happening outside "the mothership."

For example,  February 2008's issues has this list of contents:

• Adobe Media Player: Understanding the structure of the RSS feed
• BlazeDS and what it means for the developer community
• The edge of Flash
• Comparing Adobe Flex and Ajax development models
• Project profile: Virtual life on the International Space Station
• Quick tips for integrating Adobe Creative Suite 3 products
• Open source at Adobe

You can either check out the Edge every couple months, or subscribe to it online. I hope you get a chance to read the article and find it useful.