any good online html code turtorial ?

[Jukka K. Korpela]

What wrong information did you find on w3schools?

I sent you a summary by E-mail. Have fun.

To others, here's a quick extract from their main page:

<td ...>
<br />
<b>HTML Tutorials</b>
<br />

Thus, they should study some good HTML tutorials, or even just fairly
good HTML tutorials, before trying to write one.

I learned from
that site but haven't gone through it in a long time.

So why are you asking? Most of the things you got wrong there are
probably just common wrong information that tutorials spread around.

 

[Guest]

I sent you a summary by E-mail. Have fun.

Thanks, it was very informative.

To others, here's a quick extract from their main page:

<td ...>
<br />
<b>HTML Tutorials</b>
<br />

Thus, they should study some good HTML tutorials, or even just fairly
good HTML tutorials, before trying to write one.

But did you find significant problems with the actual tutorials? I think
that they are well done and organized logically. I don't think there is a
"perfect" tutorial out there.

 

[Travis Newbury]

I sent you a summary by E-mail. Have fun.

What, were not good enought to get your thoughts?

 

[Andy Dingley]

It also has references so you can go back and find HTML
color tables, lists of HTML tags,

A tutorial site that offers either of those has already failed.

What are "HTML colours" ? Now "grey/gray" is perhaps justifiable, but
you don't need a table to tell you how to spell "red" or "black".
Useful colour work needs to be done with the numeric form, not the
names. And please tell me they're not still pushing a "web-safe"
palette.

A "list of HTML tags" is doubly bad. They're elements, not tags. It's a
trivial distinction to learn and any half-competent tutorial should be
teaching it. Students who emerge from a course talking about "tags" have
failed to understand how SGML is structured, to a level that's necessary
for competent web designers.

Secondly HTML is defined by a DTD, not a list. If you don't teach the
relevant nesting rules, then you encourage students to mis-use elements
and produce horrors like <a><div>...</div></a>

This stuff is not hard to learn, but it's very badly taught almost
everywhere. In particular it's a broad topic and usually the wrong
things are being taught. You don't need to teach "valign" or "vlink" to
new students, or anyone other than an already skilled developer who now
wishes to learn archaeology.

W3Schools is an inaccurate site in many ways. These are inexcusable for
anyone claiming to be a serious tutorial. If you can't do, then don't
teach.

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

A tutorial site that offers either of those has already failed.

What are "HTML colours" ? Now "grey/gray" is perhaps justifiable,
but you don't need a table to tell you how to spell "red" or
"black". Useful colour work needs to be done with the numeric form,
not the names. And please tell me they're not still pushing a
"web-safe" palette.

A list is useful, so you know that "heliotrope" is not a valid name.

A "list of HTML tags" is doubly bad. They're elements, not tags.
It's a trivial distinction to learn and any half-competent tutorial
should be teaching it. Students who emerge from a course talking
about "tags" have failed to understand how SGML is structured, to a
level that's necessary for competent web designers.

Actually, the word "tags" in noSpam000's post was his own. The
w3schools page says:

HTML documents are text files made up of HTML elements.

HTML elements are defined using HTML tags.
HTML Tags

* HTML tags are used to mark-up HTML elements
* HTML tags are surrounded by the two characters < and >
* The surrounding characters are called angle brackets
* HTML tags normally come in pairs like <b> and </b>
* The first tag in a pair is the start tag, the second tag is the
end tag
* The text between the start and end tags is the element content
* HTML tags are not case sensitive, <b> means the same as <B>

...therefore properly calling them elements->comprised of tags.
http://www.w3schools.com/html/html_elements.asp

The site does have its flaws, but it isn't a really bad site. <g>

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

What, were not good enought to get your thoughts?

Oh, sorry. But maybe noSpAm0000 will post a copy here. It was such an
irrelevant piece of information that I didn't save it. Everyone knows
w3schools is not reliable. It's like an elementary school teacher.
You might learn something from her if you are a child, but later you'll
realize how wrong she was in many issues and simplified things far too
much. Unless you remain a child, that is.

 

[Guest]

A tutorial site that offers either of those has already failed.

What are "HTML colours" ? Now "grey/gray" is perhaps justifiable, but
you don't need a table to tell you how to spell "red" or "black".
Useful colour work needs to be done with the numeric form, not the
names. And please tell me they're not still pushing a "web-safe"
palette.

ok... "web-safe palette" then. Personally, I find it useful to be able to
reference a page that has
colors on screen with their
numeric form like this: http://www.w3schools.com/html/html_colors.asp.
For example, if you want to know what CSS #9f9 looks like you can
just keep that page open as a reference... or the one for HTML ASCII or
Entities or whatever you are looking for.

A "list of HTML tags" is doubly bad. They're elements, not tags. It's a
trivial distinction to learn and any half-competent tutorial should be
teaching it. Students who emerge from a course talking about "tags" have
failed to understand how SGML is structured, to a level that's necessary
for competent web designers.

Sorry... I got the word "tags" from a O'Riely book called Learning XML.
Is that incorrect?

This stuff is not hard to learn, but it's very badly taught almost
everywhere. In particular it's a broad topic and usually the wrong
things are being taught. You don't need to teach "valign" or "vlink" to
new students, or anyone other than an already skilled developer who now
wishes to learn archaeology.

W3Schools is an inaccurate site in many ways. These are inexcusable for
anyone claiming to be a serious tutorial. If you can't do, then don't
teach.

So, which flawless site do you recommend for people to learn HTML?

 

[Lauri Raittila]

ok... "web-safe palette" then. Personally, I find it useful to be able to
reference a page that has
colors on screen with their
numeric form like this: http://www.w3schools.com/html/html_colors.asp.
For example, if you want to know what CSS #9f9 looks like you can
just keep that page open as a reference... or the one for HTML ASCII or
Entities or whatever you are looking for.

Well, they propably have color - code thing correctly. Rest is more or
less bad. But there is billion sites doing that better, and you can
create one in ten minutes.

On this particular page:

Color Values
-don't give the named names, but rgb notation () which is taken from CSS.
I wonder if it is any more readable than hexcode. (I don't know, as I
personally find hex colors of those 16 named colors easier than their
names...)

Color Names
-gives unstandard colornames and then tells they are not supported by
W3C. Does list the standard colors, but does not display them.

Web Safe Colors
-not relevant today, and in fact 216 colors are from time of Windows 3.1
and ancient macs. Anyway, if you think these are anyhow relevant, why are
you suing JPGs and 256color gifs? Web save colors weren't issue 10 years
ago either, unless used more than 200 at time, so practically only when
images were involved...

And it sells some bogus diplomas.

It seems to link to google with
http://www.google.com/search?q=W3Schools&safe=active
So if someone bothers writing review, it might end up linked... Might do
that if I have too much time...

In other words, it is very easy to learn it wrong, and after that, teach
it wrong.

 

[Guest]

in alt.html, noSpAm0000 wrote:
Well, they propably have color - code thing correctly. Rest is more or
less bad. But there is billion sites doing that better, and you can
create one in ten minutes.

I'd like to find one. Do you know any better sites for learning HTML, etc.?

 

[Lauri Raittila]

I'd like to find one. Do you know any better sites for learning HTML, etc.?

I was speaking of colors. Try google with "color picker". Brucie used to
recommend good one, but I can't find it...
And no, I don't remember any good, as I don't need any. I have never used
tutorial to learn HTML, nor program/website to find colors (exept when I
have image that I need to use, in which case I use image software)

For website tutorial, I had bookmarked this:
http://philip.greenspun.com/panda/
but it won't teach too much HTML. (and refers to w3schools for more...)

 

[Toby Inkster]

I was speaking of colors. Try google with "color picker". Brucie used to
recommend good one, but I can't find it...

http://wellstyled.com/tools/colorscheme2/index-en.html ??

 

[Adrienne]

I still think w3schools.com is a great place to learn. I learned HTML
& XHTML there and expanded on that knowledge from other sites. I think
that w3schools is great because it gives you a quick introduction to a
lot of different things. It also has references so you can go back and
find HTML color tables, lists of HTML tags, etc. The site is very well
organized and you will be able to go back and find information quickly
even if you forgot which page you originally saw it on.

W3schools is a good, simple reference for syntax. I do a lot of coding
in ASP and SQL, and sometimes I forget syntax for something, so it's an
easy way for me to refresh my memory, a lot easier than trying to find
something at Microsoft, especially when you use Opera.

For HTML and CSS I go to the specs.