HTML guide for newbies.

Can anyone suggest a good website (or book) for someone new to the
webmaster game?

I've been trying to get my lists to output justified text, but haven't
had much luck. Tried google-searching for the answer, but each site
that I went to provided no help. Saw a <ul align="justify"> suggestion,
but it didn't work

I'm picking things up as I go along, sometimes with much head-ache; it
would be far easier to have a one-stop spot to get detailed answers.

Inkspot

Previously in alt.html, Inkspot <> said:

> Can anyone suggest a good website (or book) for someone new to the
> webmaster game?

http://www.w3.org/

> I've been trying to get my lists to output justified text,

Why?

> but haven't had much luck.

That is a presentation issue, therefore handled with CSS.
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#alignment-prop

> Tried google-searching for the answer, but each site
> that I went to provided no help. Saw a <ul align="justify"> suggestion,
> but it didn't work

Wherever you found that, don't go there again.

> I'm picking things up as I go along, sometimes with much head-ache; it
> would be far easier to have a one-stop spot to get detailed answers.

news://alt.html

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
"Never drink rum&coke whilst reading usenet" - rf 2004

Inkspot wrote:

> Can anyone suggest a good website (or book) for someone new to the
> webmaster game?
>
> I've been trying to get my lists to output justified text, but haven't
> had much luck. Tried google-searching for the answer, but each site
> that I went to provided no help. Saw a <ul align="justify"> suggestion,
> but it didn't work
>
> I'm picking things up as I go along, sometimes with much head-ache; it
> would be far easier to have a one-stop spot to get detailed answers.

Although this source was criticised by alt.html before, I choose to
recommend it again:

http://werbach.com/barebones/

I started using it many years ago and I still use it. It's concise and it
includes almost all the information that you need.

Roy

--
Roy Schestowitz
http://schestowitz.com

Roy Schestowitz opined.

> Although this source was criticised by alt.html before, I choose to
> recommend it again:
>
> http://werbach.com/barebones/

Oh my.

<quote>
The Bare Bones Guide to HTML lists every official HTML tag in common usage,
</quote>

Element. It is HTML Element. Not tag.

This alone indicates that whoever wrote this can not even get the
nomenclature correct. What other errors are there in there?

<quote>
plus Netscape and Microsoft extensions.
</quote>

Hmmm. It gets worse. These days we try to write web pages that work on every
browser, not specifically for just one or two, to the exclusion of the
others.

It's also interesting that this site makes no mention at all of the
technology the OP acually requires, that is CSS.

> I started using it many years ago and I still use it. It's concise and it
> includes almost all the information that you need.

Plus all of the crap that was in use last century.

I too will make a recommendation: You, and the OP, would be far better off
going to W3C and reading the specifications, or at least using something
that was written in the current era.

--
Cheers
Richard.

Inkspot wrote:
> Can anyone suggest a good website (or book) for someone new to the
> webmaster game?
>
> I've been trying to get my lists to output justified text, but haven't
> had much luck. Tried google-searching for the answer, but each site
> that I went to provided no help. Saw a <ul align="justify"> suggestion,
> but it didn't work
>
> I'm picking things up as I go along, sometimes with much head-ache; it
> would be far easier to have a one-stop spot to get detailed answers.

w3schools.com is also pretty good for beginners

--
A person is smart; people are dumb panicky dangerous animals and you
know it.

- MIB -

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 03:07:22 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:

> Roy Schestowitz opined.
>
>> Although this source was criticised by alt.html before, I choose to
>> recommend it again:
>>
>> http://werbach.com/barebones/
>
> Oh my.
>
> <quote>
> The Bare Bones Guide to HTML lists every official HTML tag in common
> usage,
> </quote>
>
> Element. It is HTML Element. Not tag.

So <h1> is not a tag?

Previously in alt.html, Roy Schestowitz <>
said:

> http://werbach.com/barebones/

I haven't seen that site before. It's not as bad as some of the others
around, but I still wouldn't even consider recommending it. It's very
outdated - no mention of CSS at all, and it's based on HTML4.0, which
was superseded by HTML4.01 5 years ago. In fact, the site itself hasn't
been updated in nearly 6 years. On the Internet that's a lifetime (or
several). Not a resource to be used now.

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
"Never drink rum&coke whilst reading usenet" - rf 2004

In article <>, Neal
() dropped a +5 bundle of words...

> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 03:07:22 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Roy Schestowitz opined.
> >
> >> Although this source was criticised by alt.html before, I choose to
> >> recommend it again:
> >>
> >> http://werbach.com/barebones/
> >
> > Oh my.
> >
> > <quote>
> > The Bare Bones Guide to HTML lists every official HTML tag in common
> > usage,
> > </quote>
> >
> > Element. It is HTML Element. Not tag.
>
> So <h1> is not a tag?

No. The correct term is element.

I don't wig out if people call it tag. I use tag so who am I to crack
down on people for doing it?

But the proper term is element.

--
Starshine Moonbeam
mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM

Neal
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 03:07:22 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Roy Schestowitz opined.
> >
> >> Although this source was criticised by alt.html before, I choose to
> >> recommend it again:
> >>
> >> http://werbach.com/barebones/
> >
> > Oh my.
> >
> > <quote>
> > The Bare Bones Guide to HTML lists every official HTML tag in common
> > usage,
> > </quote>
> >
> > Element. It is HTML Element. Not tag.
>
> So <h1> is not a tag?

<h1> is a tag. It is the opening tag for the h1 element. The h1 element also
has some content and a closing tag.

The middle bit is very important. The content is not some content on the
"page" with <h1> and </h1>tags wrapped around it. It is the content of the
h1 element.

Further the h1 element is part of the content of (probably) the body element
which is part of the content of the html element which *is* for all intents
and purposes the page. The "page" has no plain text content. It only has
other elements as content.

When talking about the "contents" of an HTML page we talk about the elements
that make up that page, not the tags, which are a part of the elements.

An HTML tutorial should be talking about elements and how they interact. It
should not have as its major emphasis, and in its opening paragraph, a
discussion of tags. That bit comes when we discuss what an element is.

This confusion (coupled with the misconception that tags are actually
"commands") leads to things like:

<b>bold<i>bold italic</b>italic</i>

This is of course wrong but it "does" mean something if you think about
tags, or "commands" It does not make any sense at all if you think about
elements.

--
Cheers
Richard.

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:01:14 -0600, Starshine Moonbeam
<> wrote:

>> So <h1> is not a tag?
>
> No. The correct term is element.
>
> I don't wig out if people call it tag. I use tag so who am I to crack
> down on people for doing it?
>
> But the proper term is element.

So <h1> is an element???