Re: Moving on .. need help

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 15:07:43 -0500, kchayka <usenet (AT) c-net (DOT) us> wrote:

Frogleg wrote:

If you don't understand HTML, it would be a good idea to learn before
trying to write your resume with it. Joe Barta's
http://www.pagetutor.com/
is excellent.

Ish - do you really want someone to learn from these outdated examples?
Nobody in their right mind should be using <font> any more. How about
something more up-to-date, like

URL:http://tranchant.plus.com/web/html-tutorial/

Barta's tutorial is very basic, very clear, full of step-by-step
examples and practice exercises, and downloadable. Its organization is
clear and unambiguous.

Mark's tutorial avoids <font> by not mentioning fonts at all, There
are numerous mentions that "CSS does this better," and an "unfinished"
CSS totorial, the link to which doesn't show up in Firefox (at
800x600) , since the leftmost column doesn't scroll! Its organization
is random; there are no "try this and see what it looks like"
examples.

I would recommend
http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp
over Mark's version, if I had to choose a basic HTML tutorial other
than Barta's

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 07:58:00 GMT, Frogleg <frogleg (AT) nowhere (DOT) com> wrote:

Mark's tutorial avoids <font> by not mentioning fonts at all,

.... and since that element is deprecated in the DTD it teaches, that's
appropriate.

There
are numerous mentions that "CSS does this better," and an "unfinished"
CSS totorial,

We're all busy, man.

the link to which doesn't show up in Firefox (at
800x600) , since the leftmost column doesn't scroll!

That's a big complaint from me as well - and a textbook example of the
usability problem with position: fixed;

Its organization
is random; there are no "try this and see what it looks like"
examples.

Hm? Quite a few as I saw.

I would recommend
http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp
over Mark's version, if I had to choose a basic HTML tutorial other
than Barta's

I also like http://www.htmldog.com for the CSS tutorial. I'm not satisfied
with the (X)HTML bits, they are sometimes misleading.

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:17:49 -0400, Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 07:58:00 GMT, Frogleg <frogleg (AT) nowhere (DOT) com> wrote:

Mark's tutorial avoids <font> by not mentioning fonts at all,

... and since that element is deprecated in the DTD it teaches, that's
appropriate.

Read the post -- I wrote that he doesn't mention "fonts" at all. Since
this is one of the basic things people generally want to fiddle with,
I think it's a notable ommission.

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:50:54 GMT, Frogleg <frogleg (AT) nowhere (DOT) com> wrote:

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:17:49 -0400, Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 07:58:00 GMT, Frogleg <frogleg (AT) nowhere (DOT) com> wrote:

Mark's tutorial avoids <font> by not mentioning fonts at all,

... and since that element is deprecated in the DTD it teaches, that's
appropriate.

Read the post -- I wrote that he doesn't mention "fonts" at all. Since
this is one of the basic things people generally want to fiddle with,
I think it's a notable ommission.

Read the very first page of his tutorial.

"The ML of HTML stands for mark-up language. HTML consists of text only—
there is no bold, no italics, no fancy fonts, just letters, numbers,
symbols and spaces. HTML is a “code” that describes the structure of the
content. Rules in the user’s browser tell it how to display the structure
in the HTML, which can be overridden by CSS styling rules (see the
separate tutorial when finished."