Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

hacks.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 103 posts

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#31

Post by idoubtit »

jug wrote: post #19
toastal wrote: post #8

The new MDN design looks snazzy but no longer works in NetSurf. I would hope a resource like this was highly accessible, even to browsers without CSS3 support (isn't this why we have @supports?). It's also furthering a trope of themes being a binary toggle; there are more options than just white and gray--how about OLED black to conserve the least about of power (looks better on my screens too).

I agree that pages about web development should themselves not depend on CSS3 support at the renderer because it's a huge step forward from CSS2 and the documentation itself is just simple documents rather than complex layouts. This has the air of web designers not having even considered this aspect and just went with modern web standards as usual. So an issue should maybe be raised about this. As I browse the site,…

Instead of creating a new tool to convert MDN's content into HTML, it would probably be easier to modify the official tool, Yari, in order to produce web page with more compatible (and faster) CSS & JS. https://github.com/mdn/yari

But I don't think it would be useful unless MDN merges in the changes. My daily web browser struggles with the new MDN rendering unless JS is disabled. So I've lost a few features since the "design change", notably I cannot run the examples. Would I use a cloned site that's faster and where CSS&JS are more compatible? I would loose the external search I'm used to (DuckDuckGo !mdn), so using the clone would require a few changes on my side...

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#32

Post by jefftk »

syshum wrote: post #13
cies wrote: post #2

Death to w3schools! When search engines allowed blacklisting domain, w3schools was my first and only pick. It always seems to show up on top for many web tech questions, but the quality is rubbish. MDN is a breath of fresh air in this regard. I expect it will knock w3schools of it's search result throne in the coming years. The end of a era of low quality, ad sponsored (4 ads, just counted) web technology reference.

The concern is will MDN still be good in a few years now that Mozilla fired all of the professional technical writers that made MDN good and instead is going for the Wikipedia approach. I have my doubts the quality will remain

This article is about how they are not going for the Wikipedia approach. Instead of articles primarily being written by volunteers, they will mostly be written by paid techwriters at Open Web Docs.

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#33

Post by NavinF »

black_puppydog wrote: post #15
NavinF wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I found that page and photo to be adorable and it improved my overall impression of w3shools from “an acceptable target of ridicule” to “aww, they’re trying their best even if they’re a bit clueless”. If HN allowed embedded media, you can bet there would be a headpat animation in this comment.

> improved my overall impression of w3shools from “an acceptable target of ridicule” to “aww, they’re trying their best even if they’re a bit clueless” Funny how that works, huh? Here's a pertinent rule that some^Wall here may^Wshould have seen before: > Remember the human https://www.britannica.com/topic/netiquette

Facts. This isn’t the first time I learned my hatred was irrational.

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#35

Post by IshKebab »

_m4ua wrote: post #16
montroser wrote: post #11

I hope this works for them, but it seems a little bit contrived to me. If they just took a fundraising approach like how public radio and Wikipedia do, I would gladly contribute a few times per year when a big banner shows up asking for donations. That would be a nice direct value proposition -- "please contribute so we can keep this awesome resource free and high quality" But paying for customizations? This seems li…

There isn't even a way to donate. All "mozilla" donations go to the foundation and their social justice causes, not useful things like MSN and Firefox.

That's because donations will never even remotely cover Mozilla's costs. They get something like $3m in donations. Wikipedia gets something like $120m. Mozilla's costs and Google income are like $400m.

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#36

Post by jka »

cies wrote: post #26
archerx wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don't like something so no one should use it!" What kind of logic is that? I actually prefer going to w3schools because as a quick reference I find what I'm looking for much faster than MDN. It has interactive examples right at the top so you can get a quick idea on what a function does. I am happy that both exist. Either you are completely out of touch or you're going to need to show some of the "low quality" exa…

You do you. I find MDN so much better that I hope they soon push w3schools off their first-hit-throne. > Either you are completely out of touch or you're going to need to show some of the "low quality" examples from w3schools. Do you really need me for that? Here are "div" and "table" on both. https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_div.asp https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_table.asp https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/d…

Both seem fairly high quality to me, after reading the comments and viewing the pages from each site in comparison.

I remember using w3schools to learn HTML probably about twenty years ago now, and the content hasn't changed much since then. MDN appears to have gone through two major transitions within the past year.

Whether those qualities are good or bad depend on your perspective; whether one of them ranks above the other in terms of SEO depends on the algorithms used by the search engine in question.

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#37

Post by themihai »

IshKebab wrote: post #35
_m4ua wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't even a way to donate. All "mozilla" donations go to the foundation and their social justice causes, not useful things like MSN and Firefox.

That's because donations will never even remotely cover Mozilla's costs. They get something like $3m in donations. Wikipedia gets something like $120m. Mozilla's costs and Google income are like $400m.

Is a browser so expensive to maintain? $400m/year?

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#38

Post by chrisweekly »

archerx wrote: post #23
cies wrote: post #2

Death to w3schools! When search engines allowed blacklisting domain, w3schools was my first and only pick. It always seems to show up on top for many web tech questions, but the quality is rubbish. MDN is a breath of fresh air in this regard. I expect it will knock w3schools of it's search result throne in the coming years. The end of a era of low quality, ad sponsored (4 ads, just counted) web technology reference.

"I don't like something so no one should use it!" What kind of logic is that? I actually prefer going to w3schools because as a quick reference I find what I'm looking for much faster than MDN. It has interactive examples right at the top so you can get a quick idea on what a function does. I am happy that both exist. Either you are completely out of touch or you're going to need to show some of the "low quality" exa…

As someone who's done webdev for a living since 1998, I share the OP's distaste for w3schools -- they truly earned their notoriety as a low-quality, spammy, SEO-hacking parasite. It was so bad it inspired a large group of some of the biggest names in the field to push back with a site called "w3fools" that tried to set the record straight and steer the hapless masses away from w3schools. See eg https://web.archive.org/web/20110412103745/http://w3fools.co...

Unfortunately, it seems w3schools has since managed to acquire the w3fools domain, and (facepalm, what the actual f**) have appropriated the original content to make it appear as if those famous anti-w3schools signatories have all changed their minds and now endorse w3schools (!) -- which might actually be libel? and is just another scandalous example of the shadiness at play.

A leopard doesn't change its spots. w3schools sucks. Steer clear!

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#39

Post by archerx »

cies wrote: post #26
archerx wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don't like something so no one should use it!" What kind of logic is that? I actually prefer going to w3schools because as a quick reference I find what I'm looking for much faster than MDN. It has interactive examples right at the top so you can get a quick idea on what a function does. I am happy that both exist. Either you are completely out of touch or you're going to need to show some of the "low quality" exa…

You do you. I find MDN so much better that I hope they soon push w3schools off their first-hit-throne. > Either you are completely out of touch or you're going to need to show some of the "low quality" examples from w3schools. Do you really need me for that? Here are "div" and "table" on both. https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_div.asp https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_table.asp https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/d…

I still prefer the w3schools version, I feel like it is better because it is concise and get straight to the point without a ton of blah blah, if I want an encyclopedic type of reference (which is rare) I go to mdn, but most of the times I just need quick reference that gets to the point immediately. Also I forget the internet has ads, don't you have ublock origin installed?

Yes, they were totally reasonable sentences to throw at you because you want something to fail because of your subjective opinion disregarding if anyone else might find that something useful, it seems a bit solipsistic.

I'm not saying mdn should be blocked, I'm saying I'm happy both exists, do you see the difference?

Re: Mozilla and Open Web Docs Working Together on MDN

#40

Post by zarzavat »

themihai wrote: post #37
IshKebab wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because donations will never even remotely cover Mozilla's costs. They get something like $3m in donations. Wikipedia gets something like $120m. Mozilla's costs and Google income are like $400m.

Is a browser so expensive to maintain? $400m/year?

A web browser is some of the most complicated software in existence.
Post reply on HN