The intellectual exploration is understanding that we have a better understanding of medicine, and ADHD is just like other conditions we can now treat.
but sure, lets ignore over a century of research and progress because someone wants to ask "what if" and treat all that as an emotional response.
"All of your colleagues have done something dumb. Don't be afraid to tell us when you make a mistake. We all remember our first screw up and will be happy to help."
Never have truer words been spoken.
As I tell all the new juniors at work doing sysadmin type tasks, everyone has deleted the production database at least once. Mistakes will always happen, it's how you deal with them that defines how good you are at the end of the day.
unfortunately this also needs to be done server side, unless your trusting the client to send you information that is what your expecting?
client side validation makes for a good user experience, but it does not replace the requirement to validate things server side, and many times you will end up doing the same validations for different reasons.
to be clear when I say no response, I am talking they got consistent updates that essentially said "we have no update on this issue", not them simply never putting anything on them.
also like it or not, by paying for support people have a right to expect that the company being paid will be engaging with you and the request you are putting into there system, not that you will have to find a person to chase down because your tickets are being ignored.
It's a shame your number one reason is customer support, when at least in my experience it has been woefully lacking.
Despite having a reasonably large contract with them at work, we had multiple support tickets go without response for months, with at least one that I am aware of being left open for almost 2 years before being closed as "won't fix"
Noting that its only my personal experience I am sure plenty of others have had the opposite experience, however I have found canonical support to be vastly superior as as such I would never chose RH if support was the primary thing I was after.
sounds like you need to go talk to the FAA since they are the ones originally publishing this info rather then a twitter account that is just consuming the info.
There is no value in reinventing the wheel, and not doing so gives you time to do other things that will give you value so someone should always be asking the question of if something should be done.
the study provides an interesting read, thanks for the link.
It is interesting when you look at the reading results, in particular the only significant difference in reading speed was for people that typed using 2 spaces at the end of a sentence, when they also were reading a document formatted that way. (I note that the other 3 articles cite back to the same source study)
This would appear to show that considering most people outside the legal profession do not follow that convention, that there is no real benefit, particularly when even this improvement was not considered statistically significant in the study.
I did a quick skim of the course notes, and I can defiantly agree with the principals your teaching. I hope your students appreciate just how important those points are in all there written communication.
If the speed users grasp the information presented is most important, is there any objective measurement that 1 vs 2 spaces actually makes a difference.
I would suggest rather then some arcane spacing convention, the simplicity and clarity of the wording is objectively far more important then any style guide. I would also suggest that this is something the legal profession is generally very bad at with the amount of legal jargon found in most documents produced in the profession.
There is no objectivly better here though, its entirely subjective.
The fact that the rest of society has moved on is a fairly clear indication that this subjective premise that 2 spaces is in some way better, shows it clearly does not show enough objective benefit to remain in use or it would be common practice in all of society.
edit: a sibling comment has provided links to a study on this, showing there is not statistically significant improvement in reading speeds reinforcing that this formatting is not objectivly better.
The problem is these clients have no idea what they are doing, they should be working out if something will be ready before booking.
If they are coming to you telling you the deadline and asking if you can meet it you know your going to have problems with them. Invariably they won't have a backup for when its not done on time for whatever reason.
The vast majority of the time, the browswer is infact going to be the only client.
once you reach the point where its not, then build the api to suit the new client rather then trying to build one that does both.