f



Online resources for learning HTML [ 4 &/or 5]

http://www.w3schools.com/ and http://htmldog.com/ have already 
been mentioned.
I'm interested in online instructional material that may not be 
presented as tutorials.
I prefer material which focuses on either HTML 4 *OR* HTML 5 [not 
both].
TIA

0
Richard
4/15/2016 11:42:39 AM
comp.authoring.html 7078 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

6 Replies
561 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 12

In article <6uSdnURIO6EtTo3KnZ2dnUU7-cnNnZ2d@supernews.com>, 
rowlett@cloud85.net says...
> 
> http://www.w3schools.com/ and http://htmldog.com/ have already 
> been mentioned.
> I'm interested in online instructional material that may not be 
> presented as tutorials.
> I prefer material which focuses on either HTML 4 *OR* HTML 5 [not 
> both].
> TIA

I'm a fan of the online video tutorials at Lynda.com.  I haven't been 
through the HTML ones (and it's possible that a notation like HTML 
doesn't lend itself quite so well to video treatment) but there are free 
samples available, and a free trial, so why not give it a go?

-- 

Phil, London
0
Philip
4/15/2016 4:51:11 PM
In article <MPG.317b2c5e17941a20989706@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:

> I'm a fan of the online video tutorials at Lynda.com.  I haven't been 
> through the HTML ones (and it's possible that a notation like HTML 
> doesn't lend itself quite so well to video treatment)

Not only HTML and CSS, but a great many if not most things don't lend 
themselves well to the averagely resourced video tutorial. There are 
video productions and video productions, and I do not say quite the 
same thing about either the *non-existent*  or *very rare* superbly 
financed and highly competent ones. 

Perhaps the ideal type would be a text and illustrative online 
versions with video or animation where it is absolutely needed to 
illustrate some things. Big trouble happens when people caught by a 
trend try to do everything in video.

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
4/15/2016 10:46:41 PM
On Sat, 16 Apr 2016 08:46:41 +1000, dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com>
wrote:

> Big trouble happens when people caught by a 
> trend try to do everything in video.

All too often a "video" consists entirely of a close-up of the mouth
of someone reading text that I could read much faster and with more
comprehension if they'd just let me see it.

I uninstalled Flash and haven't missed it yet.

-- 
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
0
Joy
4/16/2016 3:19:48 AM
In article <dob3hbh2pnl04ctrpnh42trrtififlir5h@4ax.com>,
 Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Apr 2016 08:46:41 +1000, dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Big trouble happens when people caught by a 
> > trend try to do everything in video.
> 
> All too often a "video" consists entirely of a close-up of the mouth
> of someone reading text that I could read much faster and with more
> comprehension if they'd just let me see it.
> 

Well, that is one fault that can be seen, a particular case of 
incompetence in misusing the media to concentrate the camera on the 
less relevant things. I saw a case of this in a news TV broadcast last 
night, the focus was on the presenter's face when explaining an 
interesting new device that was right next to him! 

There are many serious pitfalls particular to video tutorialing, I 
mention one: it is much fiddlier and harder to go at your own pace.

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme
4/16/2016 7:52:27 AM
On 4/15/2016 11:51 AM, Philip Herlihy wrote:
> In article <6uSdnURIO6EtTo3KnZ2dnUU7-cnNnZ2d@supernews.com>,
> rowlett@cloud85.net says...
>>
>> http://www.w3schools.com/ and http://htmldog.com/ have already
>> been mentioned.
>> I'm interested in online instructional material that may not be
>> presented as tutorials.
>> I prefer material which focuses on either HTML 4 *OR* HTML 5 [not
>> both].
>> TIA
>
> I'm a fan of the online video tutorials at Lynda.com.  I haven't been
> through the HTML ones (and it's possible that a notation like HTML
> doesn't lend itself quite so well to video treatment) but there are free
> samples available, and a free trial, so why not give it a go?
>

Thanks for the suggestion. But I'm not a video person ;) Neither 
Flash nor its cousins are on my machine.

After having visited their site, I don't think they are qualified 
to teach HTML design.
I have visual problems which prompt me to normally surf with 
background images and colors disabled. Their homepage is an 
example of why. When I found the page that appeared to cover my 
area of interst 
(https://www.lynda.com/Web-training-tutorials/88-0.html) I found 
nothing about fundementals.

I then discovered their web skills lacking.
You cannot navigate that portion of their site without JavaScript 
enabled.
Their designer could not be bothered checking and advising 
visitors - I takes *ONE* line of code!
When I encounter sites with problems I check them with 
http://validator.w3.org/ . It had 10 errors and 5 warnings. They 
don't proofread their work.
0
Richard
4/16/2016 11:17:14 AM
On Sat, 16 Apr 2016 06:17:14 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
> On 4/15/2016 11:51 AM, Philip Herlihy wrote:

> > I'm a fan of the online video tutorials at Lynda.com.  I haven't been
> > through the HTML ones (and it's possible that a notation like HTML
> > doesn't lend itself quite so well to video treatment) 
> 
> After having visited their site, I don't think they are qualified 
> to teach HTML design.

Indeed -- Flavell's Law strikes again.

"A page that purports to teach others to use HTML, or to be a 
reference, will itself fail validation." Michael Tuck quotes it, but 
without crediting me, at 
http://www.iraqtimeline.com/maxdesign/basicdesign/principles.html

> When I encounter sites with problems I check them with 
> http://validator.w3.org/ . It had 10 errors and 5 warnings. They 
> don't proofread their work.

https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lynda.com%2F
found 39 errors and warnings. (They were merged in one list, but most 
were errors. I noticed an <img> without a src attribute was among 
them!

-- 
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
                                       http://BrownMath.com/
                                  http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator:      http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec:   http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator:      http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Why We Won't Help You: http://preview.tinyurl.com/WhyWont
0
Stan
4/16/2016 3:23:51 PM
Reply: