Showing posts with label LIS 2600 Week 8. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LIS 2600 Week 8. Show all posts
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Muddiest Point
If there was any article that I felt was unnecessary to mention, then it was probably the “HTML Cheatsheet.” I am not saying that it had failed to serve a useful purpose. However, if the objective of the “HTML Tutorial” from “W3schools.com” was to give the user a general idea as of how HTML works, then I believe that one source alone could have sufficed. By adding that extra article, I felt as though it was getting a little, extra attention. In my opinion, this becomes somewhat unfair for the other subjects in the week’s topic. If the topic on HTML deserves mention of another source via a “cheat-sheet,” then it would seem logical that CSS should receive the same kind of treatment. Even though the objective of the latter is to simplify where the former appears complicated in one sense or another, I am sure that CSS may have similar issues of its own in terms of trying to memorize so much about the language. People are as much at risk to forget about certain aspects of CSS as HTML, hence why the other language should have a “cheat-sheet” of its own and readily available as well. I just figured that this issue was worth mentioning only for the sake of fairness and personal convenience.
Week 8: HTML and Web Authoring Software
When people have the intelligence to design their own website, they are also given the means organize the information in any manner in which each individual feels most comfortable maneuvering before the launch. The essence of the website is the Hyper-Text Markup Language (HTML) and to achieve a better understanding of the language is to achieve a better understanding on how to express one’s self via the design of the website. For those who do not have the knowledge to do so, there are websites that allow users to obtain such an opportunity. The “HTML Tutorial” from “W3schools.com” manages to give users a detailed, step-by-step approach on how to comprehend the language, which can serve as a perfectly good source of reference for starters. As for those who have achieved a little beyond the beginner level, the “HTML Cheatsheet” from “Webmonkey” can always come in handy whenever the more experience could use a quick reminder. However, regardless as to how well anyone may be able to master the language, no one could ever deny the tediousness of HTML, with such difficulties including certain lines of code being repeated constantly throughout the data. For the sake of lessening the burden and saving more on resources, Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) had been invented. In order for other people’s lives to be easier, it would help for them to have a better understanding of the language, which is the goal that the availability of the “CSS Tutorial” from “W3schools.com” attempts to achieve. Even if someone is able to achieve full mastery of this language as well, if there is to be a collaborative effort on how someone wants information to be organized via the design of a website, there would be communication problems between those who know what they want, but do know how to express it, and those who know how to express it, but do not know what they want. That is why there is the Content Management System (CMS) to create compromise. Those who are more familiar with the goals are able to cooperate better with those who are more familiar with the language, and vice-versa; thus eliminating the frustrations as the two groups collaborate on their project, which was the case for the library liaisons and the web development personnel at the Georgia State University Library.
The situation with these tutorials reminds me of a segment from “Phaedrus,” which is one of Plato’s works. Thoth, an Egyptian Deity, was having a debate with King Thamuz. The God had insisted that his introduction of the writing system to the human race enables information to be recorded; therefore better preserved. The King was pessimistic, claiming that the invention would actually do human beings a disservice, because they are relying less upon memory; therefore neglecting their mental capacity. In parallel with this scene was a debate Plato had with his teacher, Socrates. Socrates was more sympathetic with the King, whereas Plato with the God. The teacher had claimed that the written word can never substitute the spoken word. Although information is being preserved, what the source is able to provide is only confined to whatever has been recorded. When there are any details that have not been made clear and the readers have more questions, words on paper simply cannot respond to them, and the author cannot always be present to explain everything. The phenomenon clearly required an even greater need for human interaction. The availability of those tutorials obviously works in a similar manner. Even though users have an opportunity to learn how to create on their own, the information that is given cannot always be sufficient. Details can be prone to misinterpretation or there could be factors that have yet to be covered. Whatever the case may be, because the user/reader does not have a human contact directly available to provide some sort of guidance, the individual is pretty much stranded in the middle of nowhere. It was probably from realizing the problems these sorts of situations tend to impose that inspired the creation and utilization of the CMS. An important thought to bear in mind from the widespread use of differing methods to communicate is that instead of one substituting another, each should actually be complimenting the other, and none of them could ever be fully replaced by the next.
The situation with these tutorials reminds me of a segment from “Phaedrus,” which is one of Plato’s works. Thoth, an Egyptian Deity, was having a debate with King Thamuz. The God had insisted that his introduction of the writing system to the human race enables information to be recorded; therefore better preserved. The King was pessimistic, claiming that the invention would actually do human beings a disservice, because they are relying less upon memory; therefore neglecting their mental capacity. In parallel with this scene was a debate Plato had with his teacher, Socrates. Socrates was more sympathetic with the King, whereas Plato with the God. The teacher had claimed that the written word can never substitute the spoken word. Although information is being preserved, what the source is able to provide is only confined to whatever has been recorded. When there are any details that have not been made clear and the readers have more questions, words on paper simply cannot respond to them, and the author cannot always be present to explain everything. The phenomenon clearly required an even greater need for human interaction. The availability of those tutorials obviously works in a similar manner. Even though users have an opportunity to learn how to create on their own, the information that is given cannot always be sufficient. Details can be prone to misinterpretation or there could be factors that have yet to be covered. Whatever the case may be, because the user/reader does not have a human contact directly available to provide some sort of guidance, the individual is pretty much stranded in the middle of nowhere. It was probably from realizing the problems these sorts of situations tend to impose that inspired the creation and utilization of the CMS. An important thought to bear in mind from the widespread use of differing methods to communicate is that instead of one substituting another, each should actually be complimenting the other, and none of them could ever be fully replaced by the next.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)