I was being a bit flipant there I suppose! ;-)
I jokingly shudder at php (I haven't ever used if by the way) as I believe
it no longer represents the state of the art in web frameworks. The work
done recently to advance the MVC pattern has made web programming much more
elegant, again if anyone has experience of php programming that disproves my
opinion I'd like to hear it!

AFAICS it's the inderstanding of the generated content that's most
important, and not the tools that generate it.


Totally agree with you there!

I think the attraction of python/ruby for me is that they get out of your
way and let you operate much closer the problem domain conceptually.... I
fact, it's a bit of a problem now, in that I feel I should learn C, but
python fits my head so well that I really don't want to take the time off
coding to learn it! ;-)

Ben


On 17/05/07, Steve Holdoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Thu, 17 May 2007 17:55:43 +0700
Ben Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> My 2 pence worth:
> [snip]
>  or even *shudder* php)
> [snip]
I fail to see why people *shudder* at using any tool that directly affects
the content of a web page. To some extent, what's the difference between
your favourite html generator and frontpage?

I've used php, C, shellscripts, *even fortran* on one occasion to generate
(x)html. AFAICS it's the inderstanding of the generated content that's most
important, and not the tools that generate it. Personally, I veer towards
the generation of the content, rather than the design. However, the last
thing I do is to denigrate the designers - they have skills (aptitude?) that
I dont have, and vice versa.

As a longtime C programmer, I find that php is a really useful tool.
Personally, I could use C programs just as easily, but the number of people
who could maintain that solution would be so much smaller, so that solution
is less appealing. It's weird writing programs to generate html, like
programming one step removed, but you sort of get used to it.

Sure, sell ruby and the like as hard as you wish, but do your
apprenticeship first. You can't learn the nuts and bolts of writing (d)html
without resorting to first principles. This thread is about a qualification
in web design/implementation. Start off writing html use a text editor, then
get the principles of css sorted, and then you can start using shortcuts
like frontpage, ruby, pthon, dreamweaver, and the rest. O'Reilly's Dynamic
html is a useful reference.

Personally, I think that the basic premise of this course framework is
wrong, and the suggestion that a good portfolio will do you much more good
is a far better approach - however, the first thing I do ( as an employer )
is to look at the urls provided, and put them through w3c's validator. Ruby,
python, drupal, ..... will not help you there. Your apprenticeship will.

There's also another approach... without a reason to learn, you never
will. If you really want to learn how to write a good website, pick a
subject you feel passionate about, and go for it. Throw it all together,
then try to change the look and feel of the website you've just written.
It'll be really hard. Now use the tools provided by w3c to keep you on the
straight and narrow, and understand the concept of separating the content
and the look and feel of the site, basic css stuff that'll make that so much
easier ( and all the tricks that you can use in the css to get it to render
nicely in all the different browsers, but that isn't important now ).
Because in the real world, the customer will be *always* be changing their
mind, saying something along the lines of 'can you just make this a bit
greener' or 'can you make the left column 10 pix narrower'. If you can do
that easily then you're onto a winner, and you've learned the right skills
to a) feel good about what you've produced, and b) made the customer

That's my $0.02. I hope it makes sense... I've had a beer or two (:

Steve




--
Regards,
Ben Ford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+628111880346

Reply via email to