Newbie questions RE: Learning CSS

On Dec 26, 10:27 am, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4... (AT) centralva (DOT) net>
wrote:

RobG wrote:
On Dec 24, 1:00 pm, Blinky the Shark <no.s... (AT) box (DOT) invalid> wrote:
Jonathan N. Little wrote:
BestStudentViolins.com wrote:
On Dec 23, 5:34 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4... (AT) centralva (DOT) net
[...]
You can think whatever you like, but unless you're a nearly 60 year
old woman with multiple schlerosis (among other difficulties), then i
don't think you get a vote.
We're voting here?
I'm voting that there's no "h" in "sclerosis".

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project -http://improve-usenet.org

And exposing a serious bias against those who use a browser to access
Usenet.

The problem with GG is that it provided access to Usenet to the masses
without any introduction to the established protocol. A number of
misconceptions and irritations have resulted. It is like crashing the
party in jeans without bothering to discover that it is black tie
affair. Most problems could be avoided if GoogleGroupers would Google
the term "lurk"[1]*first!*

When it was newsreader only one had to subscribe first; that tended to
get people to "lurk" before posting and they could learn the etiquette
and protocol first. Things like how to make a brief but descriptive
subject line [not "Help"]. How to quote [2] and what is a thread?[2]
That Usenet's purpose is for discussion and not a help desk[3]

[1]Since GoogleGroups is connected to the search engine it does add a
very useful feature. GoogleGroups made it much easier to locate topics
of discussion. Maybe the error was to expand the service to allow
posting! It is simply amazing how many GoogleGroupers *never* think to
Google first before asking the questions that are asked millions of
times... "Table or CSS?", "Pixels or Points?", "How to make 2 Columns
with a Table?", ... ad nauseam

[2]Because GoogleGroup "reformats" and displays the NewsGroups in web
browsers as a webpage, GoogleGroupers are under the misconception that
Usenet is a website and that a thread is a webpage. A thread is *not*
the linear webpage that *you* see but a dendritic collection of
connected messages and therefore they have an annoying tendency to not
quote their references, assuming what they are referring to is just a
few lines above. Or they will make such incomprehensible statements as
"In the 4th message..."

[3]Since Usenet was created for discussion on various topics for folks
interested is such topics GoogleGroups opening it all, The clueless, the
malicious, the oblivious and the huddled mases... the discussion for the
most part has been lost. It is unfortunate that a pretty good idea, an
easy search engine for Usenet, can be so harmful through misuse and
ignorance. For the "lost", yes Usenet can be a wonderful learning tool
and source for solutions, and GoogleGroups could make it easy for
newbies to find these answers, but it not a help desk, and the
GoogleGrouper after making the above transgressions to follow up with
demands for "satisfaction"! Well, I hope you can understand the
frustration and the prejudice of the regulars.

Personally I joined this NewsGroups because of my interest in *html*. I
am not interested in "finding God" whatever the flavor-of-the-week
version is being currently pushed. Or in some snake-oil SEO, clueless
grade-school web design, affiliate web hosting, cheap porn DVDs spam. It
is fun learning about problems with html and discovering solutions, but
normally containing blocks are not supposed to expand and contain
floated children--IE is the on that has got it wrong!

I hope (but do not really expect) the next to bring more Usenet worthy
topics...

glances left and then right, slowly descends from soapbox...

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIOhttp://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

I'm very sorry; I'm just not entirely sure what you guys are talking
about or how my question degenerated into a discussion of the Google
interface. Unfortunately, I don't care enough to find out. People
carping about the format of threads (top posting, for example) bring
to mind images of little old ladies, stomping their feet because
things are not being presented the way they wish.

BestStudentViolins.com wrote:

<snipped massive quote>

I'm very sorry; I'm just not entirely sure what you guys are talking
about or how my question degenerated into a discussion of the Google
interface. Unfortunately, I don't care enough to find out. People
carping about the format of threads (top posting, for example) bring
to mind images of little old ladies, stomping their feet because
things are not being presented the way they wish.

Well Blinky you may be right.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Jonathan N. Little wrote:

BestStudentViolins.com wrote:

snipped massive quote

I'm very sorry; I'm just not entirely sure what you guys are talking
about or how my question degenerated into a discussion of the Google
interface. Unfortunately, I don't care enough to find out. People
carping about the format of threads (top posting, for example) bring
to mind images of little old ladies, stomping their feet because
things are not being presented the way they wish.

Well Blinky you may be right.

It was really never in doubt.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

In article
<1d134051-1fef-4e89-a7f6-6c40cf89de39 (AT) r60g2000hsc (DOT) googlegroups.com>,
"BestStudentViolins.com" <SunMusicStrings (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

On Dec 26, 10:27 am, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4... (AT) centralva (DOT) net
wrote:
RobG wrote:
On Dec 24, 1:00 pm, Blinky the Shark <no.s... (AT) box (DOT) invalid> wrote:
Jonathan N. Little wrote:
BestStudentViolins.com wrote:
On Dec 23, 5:34 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4... (AT) centralva (DOT) net
[...]
You can think whatever you like, but unless you're a nearly 60 year
old woman with multiple schlerosis (among other difficulties), then i
don't think you get a vote.
We're voting here?
I'm voting that there's no "h" in "sclerosis".

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project -http://improve-usenet.org

And exposing a serious bias against those who use a browser to access
Usenet.

The problem with GG is that it provided access to Usenet to the masses
without any introduction to the established protocol. A number of
misconceptions and irritations have resulted. It is like crashing the
party in jeans without bothering to discover that it is black tie
affair. Most problems could be avoided if GoogleGroupers would Google
the term "lurk"[1]*first!*

When it was newsreader only one had to subscribe first; that tended to
get people to "lurk" before posting and they could learn the etiquette
and protocol first. Things like how to make a brief but descriptive
subject line [not "Help"]. How to quote [2] and what is a thread?[2]
That Usenet's purpose is for discussion and not a help desk[3]

[1]Since GoogleGroups is connected to the search engine it does add a
very useful feature. GoogleGroups made it much easier to locate topics
of discussion. Maybe the error was to expand the service to allow
posting! It is simply amazing how many GoogleGroupers *never* think to
Google first before asking the questions that are asked millions of
times... "Table or CSS?", "Pixels or Points?", "How to make 2 Columns
with a Table?", ... ad nauseam

[2]Because GoogleGroup "reformats" and displays the NewsGroups in web
browsers as a webpage, GoogleGroupers are under the misconception that
Usenet is a website and that a thread is a webpage. A thread is *not*
the linear webpage that *you* see but a dendritic collection of
connected messages and therefore they have an annoying tendency to not
quote their references, assuming what they are referring to is just a
few lines above. Or they will make such incomprehensible statements as
"In the 4th message..."

[3]Since Usenet was created for discussion on various topics for folks
interested is such topics GoogleGroups opening it all, The clueless, the
malicious, the oblivious and the huddled mases... the discussion for the
most part has been lost. It is unfortunate that a pretty good idea, an
easy search engine for Usenet, can be so harmful through misuse and
ignorance. For the "lost", yes Usenet can be a wonderful learning tool
and source for solutions, and GoogleGroups could make it easy for
newbies to find these answers, but it not a help desk, and the
GoogleGrouper after making the above transgressions to follow up with
demands for "satisfaction"! Well, I hope you can understand the
frustration and the prejudice of the regulars.

Personally I joined this NewsGroups because of my interest in *html*. I
am not interested in "finding God" whatever the flavor-of-the-week
version is being currently pushed. Or in some snake-oil SEO, clueless
grade-school web design, affiliate web hosting, cheap porn DVDs spam. It
is fun learning about problems with html and discovering solutions, but
normally containing blocks are not supposed to expand and contain
floated children--IE is the on that has got it wrong!

I hope (but do not really expect) the next to bring more Usenet worthy
topics...

glances left and then right, slowly descends from soapbox...

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIOhttp://www.LittleWorksStudio.com



I'm very sorry; I'm just not entirely sure what you guys are talking
about or how my question degenerated into a discussion of the Google
interface. Unfortunately, I don't care enough to find out. People
carping about the format of threads (top posting, for example) bring
to mind images of little old ladies, stomping their feet because
things are not being presented the way they wish.

Well - I am kind of wondering the same thing, although it does seem to
happen a lot. The web newsgroups are a electronic imitation of an
absent minded professor, where a discussion of yellow paint leads into
which town has the best taxi services.

So, to clearly answer a question, I have found a couple of good
references:

HTML Utopia: Designing Without Tables Using CSS - by Sitepoint
HTML & CSS - also published by Sitepoint
Web Standards Solutions - published by friendsoft.

I hope this helps you.

Fred.