3 ms·

Rules are inherently subject to interpretation. I actually learned the opposite of what you're preaching in school. I struggled to shorten a report to meet req

Rules are inherently subject to interpretation. I actually learned the opposite of what you're preaching in school. I struggled to shorten a report to meet requirements. A friend of mine was 10 pages over the limit and went on to win a laptop with his report. Some rules are more akin to guidelines, turns out. It's not unreasonable to interpret this instances' rule as "no templates" rather than "no GitHub".

Dalewyn 4y ago
The rule is: "Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files ..." Followed by an inexhaustive list of examples: "such as Webs, Wix, Weebly, GitHub, Jekyll, and Replit ... " Finally closing off with a strongly emphasized: " ... are NOT permitted." No matter the interpretation, you're not supposed to use something that can automagically generate HTML, which Github absolutely is one such example. Whether you "only" use Github as a file repository is irrelevant, you are not allowed to use Github, nor all the others, nor examples not named. For what it's worth, I will point out that Rule G (permits use of "state-of-the-art web-based applications") and Rule H (permits selective use of Wordpress, Joomla, et al.) are in conflict with Rule I (this rule) because such tools and underlying tools like PHP and JavaScript are "tools that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files". If rules should be reconsidered, they are Rules G and H.
- dutchCourage 4y ago
  Sometimes rules are poorly written, outdated or straight up mistaken. I doubt the original intent of the rule was to disallow GitHub as a collaboration tool since it's the largest coding collaboration tool out there. It's even its primary use case . Interpreting the rule as what it meant to be seems appropriate to me. The world isn't as rigid as you paint it to be. If you were to really code a website without tools capable of generating html from text you'd find yourself coding with pen and paper.

Dalewyn 4y ago

The rule is: "Template engine websites, tools, and sites that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files ..." Followed by an inexhaustive list of examples: "such as Webs, Wix, Weebly, GitHub, Jekyll, and Replit ... " Finally closing off with a strongly emphasized: " ... are NOT permitted." No matter the interpretation, you're not supposed to use something that can automagically generate HTML, which Github absolutely is one such example. Whether you "only" use Github as a file repository is irrelevant, you are not allowed to use Github, nor all the others, nor examples not named. For what it's worth, I will point out that Rule G (permits use of "state-of-the-art web-based applications") and Rule H (permits selective use of Wordpress, Joomla, et al.) are in conflict with Rule I (this rule) because such tools and underlying tools like PHP and JavaScript are "tools that generate HTML from text, markdown, or script files". If rules should be reconsidered, they are Rules G and H.

dutchCourage 4y ago
Sometimes rules are poorly written, outdated or straight up mistaken. I doubt the original intent of the rule was to disallow GitHub as a collaboration tool since it's the largest coding collaboration tool out there. It's even its primary use case . Interpreting the rule as what it meant to be seems appropriate to me. The world isn't as rigid as you paint it to be. If you were to really code a website without tools capable of generating html from text you'd find yourself coding with pen and paper.