|
|
Posted by Franklin on 08/14/07 03:48
On Tue 14 Aug 2007 04:15:46, dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au>
wrote in alt.comp.freeware:
> In article <Xns998C226A115E0Q78XD91A@127.0.0.1>,
> Franklin <frank.says@no.spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue 14 Aug 2007 02:19:54, dorayme
>> <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote in alt.comp.freeware:
>>
>> > In article <Xns998C1335C1DEFQ78XD91A@127.0.0.1>,
>> > Franklin <frank.says@no.spam.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I agree. HTML is not hard at all.
>> >
>> > This would be more convincing if it was not being said by folks
>> > who's business is html. It would also be more convincing if it
>> > was not being merely said but demonstrated. And how can it be
>> > demonstrated easily?
>> >
>> > The problem is this, once you are familiar with it and have
>> > taken very good advice, you can use that handy device called
>> > hindsight.
>> >
>> > I am not here discussing the merits of Albert's efforts. I am
>> > pointing out that it is no use whatsoever repeating endlessly
>> > how simple it all is deep down.
>> >
>>
>> It's not that HTML is simple deep down, it is simple high up.
>>
>> The markups are for the most part quite straightforward. A
>> utility like a generator becomes useful for repetitive tasks or
>> those of awkward alignment.
>>
>> This is not just because of hindsight.
>
> I am not defending generators. I hate the very ground they stand
> on. HTML mark up, taken an element at a time or in even smaller
> chunks is dead simple. That does not make website making dead
> simple.
>
I think you have moved the situation from writing competent and
usable HTML to making a website. Heh!
Making a website is usually a far more complex thing than HTML. The
website could contain all sorts of additional technologies (php, CSS,
external interfaces, server-side scripts, FTP, SQL, Flash, etc).
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|