5 ms·

w3schools is not the best resource, but 90% of the time, when it shows up as the top result on Google, it tells me exactly what I want to know. Some common exa

by shazow 14y ago

w3schools is not the best resource, but 90% of the time, when it shows up as the top result on Google, it tells me exactly what I want to know. Some common examples: - What values does CSS attribute white-space take? #1 result on Google for "css white-space" is http://www.w3schools.com/cssref/pr_text_white-space.asp http://www.w3schools.com/cssref/pr_text_white-space.asp which has exactly what I need to know. - What members does the Array object in JavaScript have? For the query "javascript array", the first result is an overview of what an Array is, but the second result is the object reference which is exactly what I need. When learning, looking things up is one of the most common actions. Whenever w3schools comes up, it doesn't necessarily make me smile but it's reliable^Wconsistent so I know what to expect. It maintains a lot of utility, unlike good ol' experts-exchange.

ricardobeat 14y ago
So? The 2nd result (MDN) does the same, looks better, and almost never contains inaccuracies or bad practices. > it's reliable That's the whole point of w3fools: w3s is not reliable.
- qubot 14y ago
  > "That's the point of w3fools: w3s is not reliable..." This unreliable (albeit crystal-clear) source did not stop me from scoring a good portfolio and happy clients (http://linkd.in/ON5eHL http://linkd.in/ON5eHL).
  - ricardobeat 14y ago
    Working on a crappy Fujitsu laptop for years didn't stop me either, but I don't go out of my way to defend it. Your point seems to be that w3schools has a special place in your heart. Okay.
    - qubot 14y ago
      Forgive me for appreciating what helped me grow. > "Your point seems to be that w3schools has a special place in your heart. Okay." Yep.
    - Confusion 14y ago
      There's a lesson for entrepreneurs here: w3schools makes people happy, despite containing inaccuracies and being far from perfect. It's good enough and was the best available for a long time.
  - halefx 14y ago
    I'll bite. It's possible that you have worked on more projects than are listed on Linkedin, but that's what you've offered as evidence of your "good portfolio" and growth as a developer (the reason, I assume, that you keep distancing yourself from those hapless beginners), so that's what I'll reply to. You have three web projects and a personal website all listed on your profile. 1. "Metasyllabus Initiative": This is a generic Wordpress site using a contributed theme. I assume this is your first attempt at a personal blog. There doesn't appear to be anything technically special about it, and it hasn't been updated in 8 months. If you stick with web development, get used to that. I haven't updated my blog in a year and a half. Wordpress is great, though, because anyone can set it up and use it. Anyone. 2. "Decision Tree Generator": About as simple as it can get. An independent multi-page Javascript-dependent (Did you learn that on W3Schools?) post form that's easily broken and seems to offer very little utility to the user. The most complicated styling used in this project is probably the absolute-positioned results. 3. "OmicronAlpha.org": This site is down. 4. "www.sagegerard.com": I don't know any serious web developers who would use Concrete5, and the comments I've received even from novices about it (it seems to appeal primarily to novices) have all ended with disappointment. My point is that you're still a beginner. As a beginner, you don't know as much as the people you're arguing with, and you're making yourself look a bit foolish. W3Schools is a fine resource for anyone who knows that it's often unsafe, inaccurate, and wrong. However, the people who know that don't use W3Schools. My biggest problems with W3Schools (other than the inaccurate information) are that 1) they don't explain that they are not associated in any way with the W3C and 2) they sell overpriced certifications that require a user learns inaccurate information. I read an article a few years ago (that I'm not possibly going to look for now) about best practices when creating examples and guides. The most important lesson in the article was that you should almost never show wrong examples or antipatterns. I.e., don't show an example of what NOT to do. The reason was that the novice ends up remembering the wrong examples as often (or possibly more often) as the good examples. At that point, the example/guide has failed. That's what W3Schools does. They can add as many disclaimers to their site as they want, but that doesn't change the result. They aren't just not doing as much to help people as they could. They're doing harm to the internet. And by the way, the second sentence of your blog post is both ambiguous and wrong. Was W3Fools created in 2008 (It wasn't.)? Or did W3Fools teleport back in time to only criticize a 2008 version of W3Schools (They didn't.)?
- shazow 14y ago
  It's consistent. The layout of the site is simple and predictable. It's easy to figure out where to find what you're looking for and what to expect. > So? The 2nd result (MDN) does the same, looks better, and almost never contains gross errors/bad practices. So indeed. I have nothing against MDN--it's great. If it was the first result, I'd click on it instead.
kibibyte 14y ago
I highly recommend http://dochub.io/ http://dochub.io/ over w3schools. Not only does it source MDN, which is much more accurate, but it allows you to instantly search for whatever CSS property or JS function/object you're looking for. (The only thing that I find disadvantageous is that you have to know the name of what you're looking for)
- qubot 14y ago
  Oo! I like the system, but beginners wouldn't know what to do there. By that I mean, they would not learn much there without prior knowledge.
- jasonhanley 14y ago
  Is there a similar site that is less Firefox-specific?
  - jacobr 14y ago
    MDN is not Firefox specific, it intends to document JavaScript, CSS and HTML in general.

by shazow 14y ago

ricardobeat 14y ago

So? The 2nd result (MDN) does the same, looks better, and almost never contains inaccuracies or bad practices. > it's reliable That's the whole point of w3fools: w3s is not reliable.

qubot 14y ago
> "That's the point of w3fools: w3s is not reliable..." This unreliable (albeit crystal-clear) source did not stop me from scoring a good portfolio and happy clients (http://linkd.in/ON5eHL http://linkd.in/ON5eHL).
- ricardobeat 14y ago
  Working on a crappy Fujitsu laptop for years didn't stop me either, but I don't go out of my way to defend it. Your point seems to be that w3schools has a special place in your heart. Okay.
  - qubot 14y ago
    Forgive me for appreciating what helped me grow. > "Your point seems to be that w3schools has a special place in your heart. Okay." Yep.
  - Confusion 14y ago
    There's a lesson for entrepreneurs here: w3schools makes people happy, despite containing inaccuracies and being far from perfect. It's good enough and was the best available for a long time.
- halefx 14y ago
  I'll bite. It's possible that you have worked on more projects than are listed on Linkedin, but that's what you've offered as evidence of your "good portfolio" and growth as a developer (the reason, I assume, that you keep distancing yourself from those hapless beginners), so that's what I'll reply to. You have three web projects and a personal website all listed on your profile. 1. "Metasyllabus Initiative": This is a generic Wordpress site using a contributed theme. I assume this is your first attempt at a personal blog. There doesn't appear to be anything technically special about it, and it hasn't been updated in 8 months. If you stick with web development, get used to that. I haven't updated my blog in a year and a half. Wordpress is great, though, because anyone can set it up and use it. Anyone. 2. "Decision Tree Generator": About as simple as it can get. An independent multi-page Javascript-dependent (Did you learn that on W3Schools?) post form that's easily broken and seems to offer very little utility to the user. The most complicated styling used in this project is probably the absolute-positioned results. 3. "OmicronAlpha.org": This site is down. 4. "www.sagegerard.com": I don't know any serious web developers who would use Concrete5, and the comments I've received even from novices about it (it seems to appeal primarily to novices) have all ended with disappointment. My point is that you're still a beginner. As a beginner, you don't know as much as the people you're arguing with, and you're making yourself look a bit foolish. W3Schools is a fine resource for anyone who knows that it's often unsafe, inaccurate, and wrong. However, the people who know that don't use W3Schools. My biggest problems with W3Schools (other than the inaccurate information) are that 1) they don't explain that they are not associated in any way with the W3C and 2) they sell overpriced certifications that require a user learns inaccurate information. I read an article a few years ago (that I'm not possibly going to look for now) about best practices when creating examples and guides. The most important lesson in the article was that you should almost never show wrong examples or antipatterns. I.e., don't show an example of what NOT to do. The reason was that the novice ends up remembering the wrong examples as often (or possibly more often) as the good examples. At that point, the example/guide has failed. That's what W3Schools does. They can add as many disclaimers to their site as they want, but that doesn't change the result. They aren't just not doing as much to help people as they could. They're doing harm to the internet. And by the way, the second sentence of your blog post is both ambiguous and wrong. Was W3Fools created in 2008 (It wasn't.)? Or did W3Fools teleport back in time to only criticize a 2008 version of W3Schools (They didn't.)?
shazow 14y ago
It's consistent. The layout of the site is simple and predictable. It's easy to figure out where to find what you're looking for and what to expect. > So? The 2nd result (MDN) does the same, looks better, and almost never contains gross errors/bad practices. So indeed. I have nothing against MDN--it's great. If it was the first result, I'd click on it instead.

kibibyte 14y ago

I highly recommend http://dochub.io/ http://dochub.io/ over w3schools. Not only does it source MDN, which is much more accurate, but it allows you to instantly search for whatever CSS property or JS function/object you're looking for. (The only thing that I find disadvantageous is that you have to know the name of what you're looking for)

qubot 14y ago
Oo! I like the system, but beginners wouldn't know what to do there. By that I mean, they would not learn much there without prior knowledge.
jasonhanley 14y ago
Is there a similar site that is less Firefox-specific?
- jacobr 14y ago
  MDN is not Firefox specific, it intends to document JavaScript, CSS and HTML in general.