Before I get into the details of the next question I would just like to state my views on writing for blogs. I have read Rebecca Blood's book, The Weblog Handbook.
"Write each entry as if it could not be changed: add to, but do not rewrite or delete, any entry."(Blood 2002, p. 118)
As much as I respect Rebecca's experience, I will reserve the right to edit and rewrite as necessary to make my point clear and concise—I know I do sometimes have a rant, I will uphold her views about not deleting entries.
If you would like to read more about Rebecca, visit her site.
anyway, that's all.
Reference
Blood, R (2002). The Weblog Handbook: Practical Advice on Creating and Maintaining Your Blog. Cambridge: Perseus Publishing.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
HTML part 7—more differences
I need to stop thinking about the differences between web and blog pages and move on, so this is the last post on this topic.
The other difference is how the post are deployed, most blogs like this one use a web interface or browsers as the entry system to post blogs. Where as web pages are usually produced through software like Dreamweaver and others. I know there are other web page applications that allow you to create web pages through a browser but they tend to be very regimented and compartmentalised. I'll post sample once I remember their names.
The other difference is how the post are deployed, most blogs like this one use a web interface or browsers as the entry system to post blogs. Where as web pages are usually produced through software like Dreamweaver and others. I know there are other web page applications that allow you to create web pages through a browser but they tend to be very regimented and compartmentalised. I'll post sample once I remember their names.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
HTML part 6
After thinking a bit harder about the difference between html and blogging, I think the real question should be, "what is the difference between web pages and blogging". After all, behind the facade of the blog entry system—in this case Blogger, is essentially html (and some other code such as Javascript). It's just the process of how to enter the information onto a page.
But answering my question, the real difference between web pages and blogs are tremendous when you consider the style of writing. Blogs are friendly, interesting, rambling, fun and personal (well my blog is) but webs site tend to be static, dull, predictable and hardly ever updated (at least compared to my blog). Remember, I'm talking (or typing) about the words. Sample of a dull web site.
So, all I'm say is there are more difference if you scratch the surface, kick the tyres and smell the roses. Take a second look and you'll see.
But answering my question, the real difference between web pages and blogs are tremendous when you consider the style of writing. Blogs are friendly, interesting, rambling, fun and personal (well my blog is) but webs site tend to be static, dull, predictable and hardly ever updated (at least compared to my blog). Remember, I'm talking (or typing) about the words. Sample of a dull web site.
So, all I'm say is there are more difference if you scratch the surface, kick the tyres and smell the roses. Take a second look and you'll see.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
HTML part 5, validation
Validation screen shots from W3C of my web page as seen in html-part 1.
The errors were "ALT", I needed to include descriptive text of the images that will be read aloud to the vision impaired.
The errors were "ALT", I needed to include descriptive text of the images that will be read aloud to the vision impaired.
HTML part 4
Psychobabble—is it all just metaphysical speculation?
The so called "Essential reading: Cybertextspace by Dr. Karin Wenz" articles gave me reoccurring nightmares of the time when I was reading the works of philosophers Baruch Spinoza.
It reminds me of the following passage;
"Of the two antithetic terms in the Greek philosophy one only was real and self-subsisting: and the one was Ideal Thought as opposed to that which it has to penetrate and mould. The other, corresponding to our Nature, was in itself phenomenal;, unreal, without any permanent footing, having no predicates that held true for two moments together; in short, redeemed from negation only by including indwelling realities appearing through." Types of Ethival Theory, Baruch Spinoza.
You can read more at http://www.ditext.com/broad/ftet/ftet2.html. Once you decipher it you can then let me know.
One of my favorite quotes is:
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. ( Nietzsche, n.d.)
However, I have faith in the tutors reasons to why I should read Cybertextspace by Dr. Karin Wenz but at this point in time I just can't see it. I'll try to read it again.
Nietzsche, F. Retrieved March 25, 2009 from http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Friedrich_Nietzsche/
The so called "Essential reading: Cybertextspace by Dr. Karin Wenz" articles gave me reoccurring nightmares of the time when I was reading the works of philosophers Baruch Spinoza.
It reminds me of the following passage;
"Of the two antithetic terms in the Greek philosophy one only was real and self-subsisting: and the one was Ideal Thought as opposed to that which it has to penetrate and mould. The other, corresponding to our Nature, was in itself phenomenal;, unreal, without any permanent footing, having no predicates that held true for two moments together; in short, redeemed from negation only by including indwelling realities appearing through." Types of Ethival Theory, Baruch Spinoza.
You can read more at http://www.ditext.com/broad/ftet/ftet2.html. Once you decipher it you can then let me know.
One of my favorite quotes is:
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. ( Nietzsche, n.d.)
However, I have faith in the tutors reasons to why I should read Cybertextspace by Dr. Karin Wenz but at this point in time I just can't see it. I'll try to read it again.
Nietzsche, F. Retrieved March 25, 2009 from http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Friedrich_Nietzsche/
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
HTML part 3
The difference between blogging and webbing?
Ok, yes, yes, yes you need to know html to create effective webs sites and blogs. Blogs are a little easier if your using a service such as "Blogger", but I still find html is the way to go. The controls in Blogger are very limited and don't real give you many options for formatting pages. You really need to know html if you desire to thrill your audience.
For a recent example—I was trying to insert a link or an anchor to entry within my blog but there are no tools to do this. I had to ask the magic Blackboard for a answer, and it supplied one.
As for creating a web site only in a text editor, well that's for the people who enjoy pain. People who like to do things the hard way, you know the type—to make a real fire you MUST use a flint stone, never matches. Me, I like to use matches, but in the case of web sites it's Dreamweaver all the way, if I need code I can use the code viewer, but I'm much better of not to (I usually stuff it up).
But the point is you can create web site and blogs without knowing html but it's better if you do.
So the last point is unless your hand coding, blogs and web work are much the same.
Ok, yes, yes, yes you need to know html to create effective webs sites and blogs. Blogs are a little easier if your using a service such as "Blogger", but I still find html is the way to go. The controls in Blogger are very limited and don't real give you many options for formatting pages. You really need to know html if you desire to thrill your audience.
For a recent example—I was trying to insert a link or an anchor to entry within my blog but there are no tools to do this. I had to ask the magic Blackboard for a answer, and it supplied one.
As for creating a web site only in a text editor, well that's for the people who enjoy pain. People who like to do things the hard way, you know the type—to make a real fire you MUST use a flint stone, never matches. Me, I like to use matches, but in the case of web sites it's Dreamweaver all the way, if I need code I can use the code viewer, but I'm much better of not to (I usually stuff it up).
But the point is you can create web site and blogs without knowing html but it's better if you do.
So the last point is unless your hand coding, blogs and web work are much the same.
HTML part 2—It's such a drag on design
I started Module 3 with some anxiety as I've been meaning learn html for quite some time now but as usual something always gets in the way. I have several books on the subject along with CSS, PHP, MySQL and Flash Action Script so I have read lots but I've only gone backwards. The main reason I'm trying to complete this Uni stuff is to broaden my skills from just a graphic designer for print. However, I see this as a major stumbling block because of the vast amount of change in technology. Once I have learnt html and CSS then what's next, there's just too much to learn and not enough time.
Anyway, getting into it.
I can see the value of learning code to find errors, but with W3C validation service and applications like Dreamweaver that validate code, this has become less of an issue. The tutors tell me there's a reason for learning this, so I'll have to believe them for now. The whole process is such a drag learning code that won't even do the job. The control I have placing text on a web page is just about nonexistent when you compare the amount of control I have in page preparations for print. I can control the juxtaposition of text to graphic to within 0.01 mm, but with html it's raw, it's either left, center or right and it drives me crazy (It's like trying to remover a splinter from a finger with a circular saw).
I can knock up a design for print and barely think about the process of assembling the parts onto a page, this leaves me free to concentrate on the design, not the process. I can work in Adobe InDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator without ever going into the code (with the exception of using GREP expressions—a search tool within InDesign) and yet, to built ever a simple web page you must have a sound understanding of HTML. And then there's the problem of browser compatibility. It completely baffles me why in the early days of the web, developers such as Microsoft and Netscape would implement different code structure that renders pages differently on screen. This will force me to write code that circumnavigates quirks in browsers—designes can't be just designers, they have to be engineers too.
I give thanks the the great work at W3C and Web Standards for standardising code at will one day make my life easier. (If I could only shoot Microsoft Word.)
Thank god for WYSWIG. Now I know the tutors said to write this code in a text editor application and so I did, but I can't see why I would normally do this when there are those wonderful people a Adobe, developing applications like Dreanweaver to make life simplier. Isn't the reason inventors invent to make life easier?
Now I can give you a direct comparison between developing a blog page to a web page—or at least some idea of the differences. See next entry
Anyway, getting into it.
I can see the value of learning code to find errors, but with W3C validation service and applications like Dreamweaver that validate code, this has become less of an issue. The tutors tell me there's a reason for learning this, so I'll have to believe them for now. The whole process is such a drag learning code that won't even do the job. The control I have placing text on a web page is just about nonexistent when you compare the amount of control I have in page preparations for print. I can control the juxtaposition of text to graphic to within 0.01 mm, but with html it's raw, it's either left, center or right and it drives me crazy (It's like trying to remover a splinter from a finger with a circular saw).
I can knock up a design for print and barely think about the process of assembling the parts onto a page, this leaves me free to concentrate on the design, not the process. I can work in Adobe InDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator without ever going into the code (with the exception of using GREP expressions—a search tool within InDesign) and yet, to built ever a simple web page you must have a sound understanding of HTML. And then there's the problem of browser compatibility. It completely baffles me why in the early days of the web, developers such as Microsoft and Netscape would implement different code structure that renders pages differently on screen. This will force me to write code that circumnavigates quirks in browsers—designes can't be just designers, they have to be engineers too.
I give thanks the the great work at W3C and Web Standards for standardising code at will one day make my life easier. (If I could only shoot Microsoft Word.)
Thank god for WYSWIG. Now I know the tutors said to write this code in a text editor application and so I did, but I can't see why I would normally do this when there are those wonderful people a Adobe, developing applications like Dreanweaver to make life simplier. Isn't the reason inventors invent to make life easier?
Now I can give you a direct comparison between developing a blog page to a web page—or at least some idea of the differences. See next entry
Monday, March 23, 2009
HTML part 1—My first web page, almost
I'll write my thoughts tomorrow after I've had time to compost them.
///\\___
(@ @)
+----oOO----(_)-----------+
| Larry |
| for |
| President |
+-----------------oOO-----+
|__|__|
|| ||
ooO Ooo
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Titles
I know I'm suppose to make the titles interesting but as I discover new facts or need to discuss the topic further after thinking about it more—I like to keep the thread going. Hence "part".
No post today
I'm not posting today, I'm going out in the sun to experience life and get some vitamin D.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
