101–110 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's crazy how bad the mobile epidemic has gotten. There are kids coming into a Computer Science degree that can't figure out how to unzip a zip or even finding out where files get downloaded to. (Fwiw, those I know dropped out before 2nd year)
With all due respect, it's not like your average person who drives all the time knows how their car works at all either.
This is great. The decision to skip CSS by depending on https://simplecss.org/ is smart - CSS is a whole other thing, and having that on top of basic HTML would be pretty intimidating. I did worry a bit about https://htmlforpeople.com/zero-to-internet-your-first-websit... - "Step 1. Create a folder on your computer" - because apparently a large number of people these days don't understand files and folders at all! ht…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP here. I appreciate the kind words. Yeah, I hope it finds its way into the hands of non-professionals.
Will you add on to it to include custom CSS, or maybe a section for using different CSS templates (and where to find them), to make a slightly larger website like your own (blakewatson.com)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been hacking at computers for almost 30 years, and I cannot figure out where a file gets downloaded to on a mobile (Android) phone.
That sounds really difficult for you. It's just a "Download" folder on my device, just like in most operating systems since the '00s.
But attempting to save an attachment (from Telegram, WhatsApp, Viber...) and then either open it or attach it from another program leaves me perplexed. I generally rely on "share with" to avoid this, but I am guessing not all apps register proper MIME types or detect them properly so the option I need doesn't show up every time.
I guess the fact that I mostly moved from DOS to Linux never really got me away from thinking about files and directories, and inconsistency in Android really bothers me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can be even worse. I've seen younger generation only use Google Docs and streaming services (music/video) and not even understand what a "file" is, because everything is just on the internet.
Doesn’t Google Docs stores its files on Google Drive? What do they call the things they open to open an existing doc?
Still Google Docs? Many people use docs.google.com daily, but they have never visited drive.google.com
> It’s for anybody, the way documents are for anybody. HTML is just another type of document. You don't ask anybody to learn XML tags to edit a Word document in a plain text editor even though it's technically possible. Similarly, HTML is not "just another type", but one of the many poorly designed (especially so if CSS is added) document formats that no non-tech "anybody" should be exposed to WYSIWYG is for anybody.
I don't know why people shouldn't be exposed to markup.
I also don't see how HTML is a poor format. It has its issues but fundamentally? Seems fine.
It's cool someone tries to make it reachable to more people.
The text is very well written, straightforward, welcoming, well structured. It seems easy and enjoyable to read.
I believe that putting html in non professional hands is a good goal.
Some feedback:
- About , it seems to be introduced quite late. People comfortable with English but wanting to write their website in their own language might be surprised. Or even people with accents in their names (you are putting your name in the title, people will probably try this). You also say that it's for special characters like emojis, but you should probably say it's essential for most languages that are not purely ASCII (event English with words like cliché). Maybe you could introduce that earlier and say that it's there for historical reasons and that without it, you may have issues with characters. To be checked but it might be better to put it before .
- body, head, html tags are mostly useless, except for html because of the lang attribute (accessibility + some browsers incorrectly offering to translate)
- vscode is a bit unfortunate because of the telemetry part, and seems quite heavy and complex for the task. On Windows, notepad++ is a great option. On Linux, any default text editor that's already installed will do. There's always codium, which is code without the bad parts. The intended target doesn't know about the bad parts, so they are installing spyware without knowing.
I didn't know about the aria current page feature, I'll start using this.
However, I did become quite lazy and would never have continued maintaining it as raw HTML. I discovered PHP which gave me superpowers, but it is quite a paradigm shift. I wish I knew about static site generators sooner.
I love the idea and I'm thrilled to see more sites like this out there. But I do think this assumes a level of computer literacy that isn't consistent with typical, non-technical users. Step 1 starts with: > Pick a location on your computer and create a folder. Call it my-site or something similar. You've already lost the vast majority of people right here. There are a shockingly large number of people out there that…
Are you sure it's this bad, though, or are you not giving people the benefit of the doubt? How can it be this way? Is it due to people using cloud apps for everything?
> It’s for anybody, the way documents are for anybody. HTML is just another type of document. You don't ask anybody to learn XML tags to edit a Word document in a plain text editor even though it's technically possible. Similarly, HTML is not "just another type", but one of the many poorly designed (especially so if CSS is added) document formats that no non-tech "anybody" should be exposed to WYSIWYG is for anybody.
You need to learn WYSIWYG "codes" and "language" too. It's just that you probably already did so. "Select, then click on the B button to make it bold", or "click B, type, then click B again" is probably not straightforward at first. I don't know why people shouldn't be exposed to markup. I also don't see how HTML is a poor format. It has its issues but fundamentally? Seems fine. It's cool someone tries to make it rea…
Second, it's much more straightforward vs any tags (and remembering having to close them without any help in your plain text editor)
And is also much more discoverable in the intuitive interface with the full list of available styles right there with styled buttons so you don't need to think whether is underline, underscore, or something else entirely.
That's the whole point of why this can't ever be for "everyone" - it requires too much knowledge that's not generally useful.
But yeah, with such a trivialization of the effort required, you'll never understand why people shouldn't be exposed to markup.
> It's cool someone tries to make it reachable to more people.
Not unless he misleads them