Posted by Andy Dingley on 12/02/06 12:25

natashab wrote:
> thank you for your total lack of support, in fact I find your replies
> totally demeaning

You think this is bad? You should see the response you'd get in
c.i.w.a.h !

This is a HTML group. There's a tendency (and not a good one) for
everything to be picked apart strictly in terms of a very narrow HTML
view. This isn't good because it's boring (we can all see the same
problems just as well) but mainly because it always forgets to look at
the big new question in favour of the obvious technical trivia.

Your site is a lot better than stuff I've written in the past. My work
today is a lot better than your site. I doubt if either of these is
surprising, nor is it helpful to anyone to pick holes in beginner's
sites. You need a broad direction of where to go next, not a critique
of where you've been -- give it a month or two and you can work it out
for yourself.

> Yes it probably is well out of 1995. How else is one meant to learn
> without trial and error.

By learning from the right sources to begin with. It's easier to learn
from them than it is to _find_ the good ones! Most (almost all, in
fact) HTML tutorials, books and courses are the most appalling rubbish.

I only know of three books worth reading by beginners, and one of those
I'm still not certain about until I read the new edition for myself:
Head First HTML & CSS, Cascading Stylesheets by Lie & Bos and possibly
Elizabeth Castro's new HTML book.

[Back to original message]