A post in Micrsoft’s Bing blog, Understand Your World with Bing, announced that an update to their Satori knowledge base allows Bing to do a better job of identifying queries that mention a known entity, i.e., a person, place of organization. Bing’s use of Satori parallels the efforts of Google and Facebook in developing graph-based knowledge bases to move from “strings” to “things”.

Microsoft is using data from Satori to provide “snapshots” with data about an entity when it detects a likely mention of it in a query. This is very similar to how Google is using its Knowledge Graph KB.

One interesting thing that Satori is now doing is importing data from LinkedIn — data that neither Google’s Knowledge Graph nor Facebook’s Open Graph has. Another difference is that Satori uses RDF as its native model, or at least appears to, based on this description from 2012.

See recent posts in Techcrunch and Search Engine Land for more information.

In a Q&A with City Biz List, Joseph T. Jones ’06, social work, CEO of The Center for Urban Families, shares some of the challenges of his childhood years, and some of the secrets to his success in the non-profit sector, including a mentor relationship with UMBC president Freeman A. Hrabowski, III. Jones founded CFUF, a non-profit organization that connects men and women to career paths and strengthens their families, in 1999.

As he tells City Biz List:

I met Freeman at an event that I was speaking at in 2004 about education, father absence, and my personal story. After the talk, Freeman came up to me and asked why I never went back to school. I started making excuses and I had heard about Freeman but really didn’t know much about him; just that he has a really booming voice and presence. So he said that he wanted me in his office the next day. I go to his office and this man, in about 15 minutes, completely dresses me down—the way in which a father would dress down a son when he is not realizing his potential. I had no intention of going back to school; focusing my additional years on this earth in an academic institution was the furthest thing from my mind. I really don’t even know what the hell happened but the next thing you know I’m sitting in a class. Two years later, I graduated from UMBC cum laude. I would not have done that without him.

Read the full Q&A here.

Read an interview with Jones from UMBC Magazine here.

The Problem with Print: publishing born digital scholarship

Professor Helen J. Burgess
Department of English, UMBC

4:00pm Monday, 25 March 2013
7th Floor, A. O. Kuhn Library

Dr. Burgess will discuss some of the difficulties for academics seeking to work and publish outside traditional "print-bound" models of humanities scholarship – including issues of professional evaluation and distribution – and show some examples of "born digital" works that would benefit from a new model of publishing. A reception, sponsored by the Libby Kuhn Endowment Fund, will follow the program.

Helen J. Burgess is an Assistant Professor of English in the Communication and Technology track. Dr Burgess received her BA(Hons) and MA(Dist.) in English Language and Literature from Victoria University of Wellington, in New Zealand, and her PhD in English from West Virginia University. She is active in the new media research community as editor of the online journal Hyperrhiz: new Media Cultures, and technical editor of Rhizomes: Cultural Studies in Emerging Knowledge. Dr Burgess is coauthor of Red Planet: Scientific and Cultural Enounters with Mars and Biofutures: Owning Body Parts and Information, both titles published in the Mariner10 interactive DVD-Rom series at the University of Pennsylvania Press. She has interests in multimedia and web development, open source and open content production, electronic literature, and science fiction.

The following is a guest post by Roman Rudenko, a mad scientist at Mobify where he’s tasked with understanding why browsers misbehave and with cajoling them into playing nice. When he’s not coding, Roman is learning to ride a motorbike without crashing into too many solid objects.

Many web designers and developers are familiar with the CSS rem length unit. But, you may not know that it has a couple of handy alternate uses. In this post, I’ll describe how to use the CSS rem unit to scale specific page elements while leaving others unaffected. I’ll also discuss how to use it as a replacement for the under-supported vw (viewporth width) unit.

For readers unfamiliar with the rem unit (standing for "root em"), it provides a way to specify lengths as fractions of the root element’s font size. In practical terms, this almost always means the font size of the <html> element. The most obvious use for rem is replacing em to protect inner element font sizes from being changed by outer elements, thus avoiding the classic nested em scaling problem. But rem effectively operates as a custom adjustable unit, so it can be useful for other things too.

First, let’s look at how rem works and how it differs from the em unit. An em value is calculated against the font-size of a current element, so boxes sized with it will consequently scale as font sizes are adjusted by the element or its ancestors. Meanwhile, rem is defined as the font-size of the root element. So, all references to rem will return the same value, regardless of ancestor font size. In effect, rem is a document-wide CSS variable. Browser support for rem is quite good these days. It’s limited on desktop because IE8 does not support it, but common mobile and tablet browsers handle it much better.

Rem can be used for its typical font sizing duty. When markup nests in complex ways, font-size declarations with em values may compound unexpectedly, and rem is a good choice for untangling those issues. However, there are some other interesting uses of rem.

Scaling document elements

You can use rem to scale some elements in a document while leaving others in place. In this example, the font-size of secondary page content (slideshow controls, illustration names, post metadata) is controlled via rem, but the primary content remains sized in pixels.

Check out this Pen!

When one of the red size adjustment links is clicked, a small piece of JavaScript adjusts <html> font-size, resizing secondary elements without altering primary ones.

This style of sizing can be useful for user-driven customization, or to adapt layouts for cases that require secondary elements to be more touchable (tablet) or visible (TV). Without rem, every adjustable element would have to be resized separately.

/* States */
    html.secondary-12px { font-size: 12px; }
    html.secondary-14px { font-size: 14px; }
    html.secondary-16px { font-size: 16px; }
    
    /* Primary content stays fixed */
    body { font-size: 18px; }
    
    /* Secondary content scales */
    .post-inner .meta { font-size: 1rem; }
    .figure .title { font-size: 1rem; }
    .slideshow .controls { font-size: 1.25rem; }
    .slideshow .controls a { padding: 0 0.5rem; }

Replacement for vw

The CSS vw unit is defined as 1/100th of viewport width. This unit is useful for avoiding compounding in width calculations, just as rem avoids font-size multiplier compounding. It can also be used for non-width properties, such as font-size (fitting a fixed fragment of text into a percentage-sized box) or height (preserving element aspect ratio). Support for vw is still spotty. So, we can use rem instead and dynamically recalculate <html> font size to match vw unit size.

Let’s have a look at an example implementation for this workaround (resize browser to see adjustments):

Check out this Pen!

body { font-size: 12px; margin: 0; padding: 0;}
    .one, .two {
      border: solid #666;
      border-width: 10px; border-width: 0.01rem;   /* 1vw */
      border-radius: 30px; border-radius: 0.03rem; /* 3vw */
      font-size: 20px; font-size: 0.02rem;         /* 2vw */
      padding: 20px; padding: 0.02rem;             /* 2vw */
    }

Here, the <body> element font-size rule insulates content from changes in <html> font-size. Browsers that don’t understand rem are given a pixel-based fallback; browsers that do know rem derive the proper dimension from <html> font size.

An earlier version of this example allowed browsers that recognize the vw property to use it directly, but that was pulled after Chrome 25 failed to apply a border width specified with vw. Rem-based ersatz replacement had no such issue.

It was possible to do all of this before the rem unit was available by computing and assigning properties directly with JavaScript. But, rem makes things much easier. With rem, there’s only one assignment to make for the entire document, and the script doesn’t need to remember which properties should be scaled in what exact manner.

(function (doc, win) {
        var docEl = doc.documentElement,
            recalc = function () {
                var clientWidth = docEl.clientWidth;
                if (!clientWidth) return;
    
                docEl.style.fontSize = clientWidth + 'px';
                docEl.style.display = "none";
                docEl.clientWidth; // Force relayout - important to new Android devices
                docEl.style.display = "";
            };
    
        // Abort if browser does not support addEventListener
        if (!doc.addEventListener) return;
    
        // Test rem support
        var div = doc.createElement('div');
        div.setAttribute('style', 'font-size: 1rem');
    
        // Abort if browser does not recognize rem
        if (div.style.fontSize != "1rem") return;
    
        win.addEventListener('resize', recalc, false);
        doc.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', recalc, false);
    })(document, window);

There are a few things to note in the above JavaScript. First, the script will terminate early if the browser is out-of-date and doesn’t support the addEventListener API or the rem unit itself. Second, instead of setting <html> font size to an actual vw unit, it’s set to the viewport width in pixels. This means the CSS would need to scale vw values by a factor of 100 for use with rem, but avoids rounding bugs that would otherwise arise due to the limited font-size precision in Webkit.

Other viewport units can be supported in pretty much the same way. There are downsides to this approach. For instance, you can’t use rem for other purposes. And, you can only make use of one viewport unit (vw) at a time and so can’t use others like vh, vmin, or vmax.

While almost no production browser today supports true CSS variables, quite a few let you cheat a bit and get one in the form of the rem unit. If you don’t need to use rem for normal font sizing, you can use it for runtime scaling of pretty much anything. If you must use rem for font sizing, you have the option of using CSS preprocessors (Sass or Less) to compute proper font dimensions, leaving the rem unit free for runtime trickery.

The CSS-Tricks feed is sponsored by Wufoo, the best online form builder there is. I use it on every project I've done as long as I've been a web worker. Quickly build any type of form you need, from the humble contact form to the epic multi-page, logic-riddled, mobile-friendly, custom-designed, spam-protected, payment-taking super form. Try Wufoo for free today!

There’s more to the CSS rem unit than font sizing is a post from CSS-Tricks

This article looks at infrastructure development among colleges and universities participating in STARS. Data related to building construction and maintenance, GHG emissions, and energy consumption can shed light on how campuses are developing, whether improvements are being made over time, and how infrastructure relates to campus sustainability on a grand scale. The analysis was conducted on 237 STARS rated institutions in Spring 2013, and focused on data submitted within the Buildings, Climate, and Energy subcategories.

Building Operations & Construction
Two credits in STARS depict how colleges and universities address building operations and new design and construction. OP 1: Buildings Operations & Maintenance and OP 2: Building Design & Construction award points based on the proportion of sustainable building space on campus. Points are awarded at incremental values based on earned LEED ratings. STARS awards minimal points for space that is not certified, but is designed or maintained in accordance with green standards.

Comparing Building Operations & New Construction - all Institutions
When comparing building operations and new construction side-by-side, a significant disparity on green building standards can be found. In the area of existing building operations, only one percent of total building space earned a LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance (EBOM) rating. The majority of building space was identified as being “maintained in accordance with green standards.” For new construction, over one-third of new building space earned a LEED rating while one-quarter was identified as being “designed and constructed in accordance with green standards.”

What can account for the disparity between the rate of LEED EBOM and LEED for new building certifications? One explanation may be that new building certifications are more established, with EBOM coming on the scene later. Other possible considerations: Is it more difficult or costly to attain a strong LEED EBOM rating? How does deferred maintenance and aging campus infrastructure play a role? We welcome readers’ feedback.

Perhaps the more important question is, how do these campus infrastructure trends affect the state of campus sustainability on a larger scale? In higher education, building operations tend to generate the greatest proportion of greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption. For this reason, a review of Climate and Energy credits may shed additional light on the question.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
OP 5: Greenhouse Gas Emissions is the central credit in the Climate subcategory, with up to 14 points available for reducing Scope 1 and 2 emissions per weighted campus users (WCU) compared to a 2005 baseline (see page 109 of the STARS Technical Manual to see how WCU is calculated).

STARS data reveal that over time, average emissions per WCU decreased from 6.5 to 5.5 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). Sixty percent of rated institutions reduced their net greenhouse gas emissions relative to WCU between the 2005 baseline year and performance year (institutions select performance year based on when the most-recent data are available). While a drop in average emissions per weighted campus users does seem promising, can this be considered enough in the grand scheme of things? It is after all total emissions that cause harm to our environment and society.

The graph above depicts total GHG emissions reported for the 2005 baseline year and performance year among all STARS institutions. Scope 1 & 2 emissions decreased slightly between the baseline and performance years, while carbon offsets generated on-site increased marginally. Purchase of carbon offsets grew ten-fold between 2005 and performance years (though still covered only a fraction of total emissions).

Despite a promising reduction in GHG emissions per weighted campus user, STARS data depict a more modest reduction in total emissions. Does this demonstrate a sustainable rate of reduction? It may be too soon to tell, but it’s clear that more needs to be done in the area of climate mitigation.

Energy Consumption
OP 7: Building Energy Consumption is one of two central credits in the Energy subcategory of STARS. Institutions are awarded up to 8 points for reducing total building energy consumption per gross square foot (GSF) of building space compared to a 2005 baseline.

Energy consumption per GSF dropped from .18 to .16 MMBtu between the 2005 baseline and performance year for all STARS institutions. Overall, 68 percent of rated institutions had reduced energy consumption per GSF of building space during that time.

Once again, a review of total energy consumption presents a less-optimistic reality. STARS data reveal that total energy consumption (above-left) actually increased between 2005 and the performance year, despite a decrease in consumption per GSF. A slight increase in energy consumption can primarily be explained by growth in campus building space (above-right). The analysis reveals that a lot more needs to be done to achieve a sustainable rate of energy reduction.

Sustainable Development
Among STARS institutions, few existing buildings are earning EBOM ratings, though most are being maintained in accordance with green practices. A much higher rate of new building construction results in earned LEED ratings. Despite these findings, STARS data suggest that an increase in building space resulting from new construction and major renovations is a significant obstacle for achieving sustainability in the higher education sector. More should be done to plan for growth more effectively while cutting emissions and consumption.

Tackling the Problem
Emissions and consumption rates must be reduced by significant amounts regardless of the size and growth of our built environment and population. AASHE’s Climate Action Planning How-to Guide provides specific recommendations for GHG mitigation strategies related to all of the following and more: energy conservation and efficiency; on-site renewable energy technologies; maximizing space utilization; and designing and building only the greenest, most energy efficient new buildings. The Operations section of AASHE’s Resource Center also provides relevant suggestions and resources.

What else can colleges and universities do to encourage sustainable campus growth? What are some successful outreach strategies that campuses are using along with mitigation strategies? We welcome feedback on additional suggestions and ideas.