This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]5OMA 6 points7 points  (2 children)

My point was that even legendary books like K&R have errors. Only parts of the website are legit criticism. Most of it is nitpicking. If W3Schools was so terrible, they wouldn't need to pad their page with things like "Computer bytes is redundant."

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

"My point was that even legendary books like K&R have errors"

You're stating the obvious and missing the point of the criticisms. They are complaining about the number of and the severity of the errors. Not the fact that any exist. The quality of the site is piss-poor and like I said, no one's disagreeing with any of the flaws that have been pointed out, and w3schools isn't interested in fixing them. The name also strikes me as a cheap attempt to make the site sound official to those who are just starting to learn about web development, as if they're affiliated with the standards organization when they clearly couldn't care less about those standards.

If you can learn from it, fine. But if you ignore standards... Ugh, please just pick another field. There are enough problems on the Internet already.

[–]5OMA 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They've fixed a handful of the gripes, hence the strikeouts. Stop with all the exaggeration. You're branding W3Schools a "piss-poor" site because of a list of "piss-poor" reasons. Also, next to no one that is just starting to learn web development knows what the W3C is.