RE: Web-design in Fedora

[LinuxMedia]

>  Can anyone suggest a good tutorial or howto
>  for someone designing a web-site (their first)
>  intended to run under Apache/Fedora ? 
>  Any advice or suggestions gratefully received. 
I learned from a book called "HTML 4 for the world wide web" (fourth 
edition) by Elizabeth Castro. I can't imagine a better, easier book to 
follow and understand. And it's an extreemly good reference book. If you 
want to look up how to do something specific... you go right to that page.

I have since lost touch with the (constant and endless) changes with 
creating web pages and web sites. But HTML 4 is a very solid, basic 
language that should run on most (if not all) browsers. Any browser 
specific tags (in the book) are clearly listed as such.

Hope this helps,
Rocco

Web-design in Fedora

[Graham Cossey]

On 5/3/06, LinuxMedia <linuxmedia2(a)netscape.net&gt; wrote:
>   > Can anyone suggest a good tutorial or howto
>   > for someone designing a web-site (their first)
>   > intended to run under Apache/Fedora ?
>
>   > Any advice or suggestions gratefully received.
>
>  I learned from a book called "HTML 4 for the world wide web" (fourth
>  edition) by Elizabeth Castro. I can't imagine a better, easier book to
>  follow and understand. And it's an extreemly good reference book. If you
>  want to look up how to do something specific... you go right to that page. 
I would certainly second that recommendation ;-)

That book helped me sooo much, together with the accompanying
Javascript book, but mostly that HTML book. Highly recommended for the
'beginner' and as a quick reference/reminder source.

Beyond the basics, I always head to http://www.w3schools.com/ it's an
excellent resource.

-- 
Graham

Web-design in Fedora

[Tim]

On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 11:12 +0100, Graham Cossey wrote:
>  Beyond the basics, I always head to http://www.w3schools.com/
> it's an
>  excellent resource. 
Argh, NO!  It's not an excellent resource.  It's got serious factual
errors, and it's not something that someone learning HTML should refer
to.  How are they supposed to tell what's right or wrong from bad
advice?  You might as well recommend Microsoft as an example of good
programming practice.

-- 
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.

Web-design in Fedora

[Graham Cossey]

On 8/2/06, Tim <ignored_mailbox(a)yahoo.com.au&gt; wrote:
>  On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 11:12 +0100, Graham Cossey wrote:
>  > Beyond the basics, I always head to http://www.w3schools.com/ it's an
>  > excellent resource.
>
>  Argh, NO!  It's not an excellent resource.  It's got serious factual
>  errors, and it's not something that someone learning HTML should refer
>  to.  How are they supposed to tell what's right or wrong from bad
>  advice?  You might as well recommend Microsoft as an example of good
>  programming practice. 
Well, from personal experience it's nearly always provided me with the
information I've needed, however I do tend to use it more as a CSS
(and less often Javascript) reference.

-- 
Graham

Web-design in Fedora - $.02

[Ed Greshko]

Tim wrote:
>  On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 11:12 +0100, Graham Cossey wrote:
> > Beyond the basics, I always head to http://www.w3schools.com/ it's an
> > excellent resource.
>  
>  Argh, NO!  It's not an excellent resource.  It's got serious factual
>  errors, and it's not something that someone learning HTML should refer
>  to.  How are they supposed to tell what's right or wrong from bad
>  advice?  You might as well recommend Microsoft as an example of good
>  programming practice. 
<soap-box>
I don't do web design.  I've no idea if http://www.w3schools.com/ is
good or not.  What I do know, or maybe it is what I feel, is that advice
either for or against a resource should be complete with an example as
to why someone feels it is either good or bad.  Kind of like a book or
movie review so the reader can get a feel from where the reviewer is
coming from.
</soap-box>


-- 
Hello.  I know the divorce rate among unmarried Catholic Alaskan females!!

Web-design in Fedora - $.02

[Tim]

On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 20:22 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>  I don't do web design.  I've no idea if
> http://www.w3schools.com/ is
>  good or not.  What I do know, or maybe it is what I feel, is that
>  advice either for or against a resource should be complete with an
>  example as to why someone feels it is either good or bad.  
Web "design" is an emotive issue, and much of it is "opinion". 
However,
before arty design comes the construction, namely how to use HTML
(whether hand typed, or using an authoring problem).  If the information
you're told about what HTML does, how it's used, etc., is erroneous,
then the resource is no good.  That's where the fault lay with
W3Schools.

The *very* basics of HTML that they lecture you with had numerous errors
last time I checked through, and still has plenty during a quick
perusal, right now.  And I'm not the only one that's assessed them.
Once you accept that they a broken resource in the fundamentals, there's
little point in continuing to pay attention to anything else that they
teach.  Certainly not as any authoritative resource, and definitely
something to be highly sceptical about.  Anything that purports to be a
"school" had better bloody well teach something correctly, as far as I'm
concerned.  If they can't, then they've no business naming themselves as
such.  How can anyone properly teach something that they don't
understand?

I can go back and pick through several examples if you really want to,
and when I've got the time.  But you'd also have to understand HTML
properly, to see what they've preached is wrong.  Are you familiar with
it, properly?  Can I point out what's wrong, and you'd know?  Or would
you just be trying to guess which of us is right without really being
able to tell?  (*Some* samples below.)

Therein lay the rub with trying to debunk something.  You've got to
understand the material very well, and so does the person you're
debunking it to.  The catch-22 being that they wouldn't need to have you
explain what's wrong, they'd already know.

If you want to know what HTML is and how to use it, go to the real
source - the W3C which ratifies what becomes the specification.  Or, you
can read the ISO HTML Specification, the only truly "standard" HTML (if
you go by what the word "standards" really means).  If you want more
human-sensible information about using HTML, I'd recommend the WDG HTML
help website.  It's less formal, but still manages to stay correct, and
discusses common problems and solutions.

But, annoyingly, I couldn't refer someone to the W3C for being taught
how to make websites.  They've taken an attitude rather typical of some
teachers, that you should do what they say, rather than what they do.
Though "teaching" about HTML isn't really what the W3C site is about.
There are problems with their site that just shouldn't be, when they're
the body forging how HTML is supposed to be done.  I tend to view them
as the dictionary, it defines the terms, but someone else is better at
the explaining.  However, their tutorial documentation aside, the HTML
specifications available on the W3C site are factual.


Some samples of wrong advice from W3Schools:

-------------------------------------------
<http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_hn.asp>
HTML <h1> to <h6> tags

________________________________________________________________________
Definition and Usage
The <h1> to <h6> tags define headers. <h1> defines the largest header. 
<h6> defines the smallest header.
-------------------------------------------

Incorrect on a few counts:

H1 marks the *first* heading, H6 the *last*, a hierarchy.  They do *not*
define font "size".  Size changes are a common characteristic with
heading rendering, but that is not what the Hx tags are for.  And let's
see you put "larger" headings on Lynx!  :-\

The Hx tags mark-up "headings" (you know, like when you have a heading
on a page "How to teach HTML", etc.).  Headings are not "headers",
which
is even more confusing when people try to understand what a HTML head
element is.  And they certainly don't "define" them.

You've got to use the right explanations, and terminology.  Pedantry is
important, even mandatory, with computing.  You have to teach what
things really mean, not teach them as meaning something else because
that's what someone perceives them to be, or because it's simpler.  You
end up simplifying things to the point that they're incorrect.

--------------------------------------------
<http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_blockquote.asp>
HTML <blockquote> tag

________________________________________________________________________
Definition and Usage
The <blockquote> tag defines the start of a long quotation.

   ...

Note: The blockquote element creates white space on both sides of the text.
---------------------------------------------

No, the blockquote tags (opening and closing) mark-up a quotation.  They
don't "define" anything, and they don't simply indicate the
"start" of a
quotation, they mark-up the whole thing.

The blockquote element does NOT create white space on both sides of the
text.  While it's common that many browsers do indent, on both margins,
quoted text.  That's just a common behaviour, and purely a styling
issue.  It's not required, and most definitely does not occur in all
browsers.  I've used browsers which merely italicise such text.

Blockquote means this is a block of quoted material, nothing else.  What
may or may not be done with it isn't what it "means".

---------------------------------------------
<http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_html.asp>
HTML <html> tag

________________________________________________________________________
Definition and Usage
This element tells a browser that this is an HTML document.
---------------------------------------------

No, it does not.

I could go on, there's further examples, but I really don't have the
patience for it.  They're teaching the fundamentals wrong, that's a very
bad thing to do.  After years of working in schools, suffering from some
bad teaching beforehand, and having to unteach bad teaching from people
post-school, I take a VERY dim view of incompetent teaching.

-- 
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.