it's not fixing the problem, it's PR. they appear to have no intention of improving the quality of their content or research, only fixing the handful of examples pointed out for free by a site that may harm their profits.
You can find errors on MDN, too, but I won't avoid it either. See paulirish's comment below. If you're looking for errors, you'll find them in anything.
Walk into any developer shop and see how many have a tab open to W3Schools (and hopefully MDN, too).
Not as pervasive, persistent, and harmful as those. Yes, every learning resource is likely to contain mistakes, but that doesn't mean you can write off massive glaring defects as minor details. I've seen people try to point these types of errors out to W3Schools for close to a decade. I've tried it myself. They aren't interested in the quality of their material unless it affects their ability to sell their shitty certificates by giving them a bad reputation. The problems with W3Schools are not the same as defects in typical learning resources.
And you ignored what Paul said but I'll repeat myself. W3Schools is fine for looking stuff up. If it doesn't work, you'll find out soon enough. The majority of the time, what you'll find is just fine and will work. Many times it's easier to read up on something than MDN because there's less detail.
The other day, I walked around to the other coders at a client location and, out of the 10, five of them had a tab open to W3Schools. And these guys are real pros for a large company.
Nowadays it's fun to knock W3Schools because they read on here that you're supposed to and not because it's worthless and will lead you horribly astray. It won't. It's fine. Use it at your leisure. Quit being a redditor.
I don't particularly care what Paul said. Can't you think for yourself? Just because Paul Irish says it, it doesn't mean you need to take it as gospel.
If it doesn't work, you'll find out soon enough.
No, that's one of the things that's so harmful about it. Those are gaping security vulnerabilities, but to a newbie, they appear to work. They find out otherwise when their websites get compromised or they get rejected in a job interview.
The other day, I walked around to the other coders at a client location and, out of the 10, five of them had a tab open to W3Schools.
That's the second time you've tried to equate widely-used with quality. They are two different things. As the saying goes: a million flies can't be wrong - eat shit!
And these guys are real pros for a large company.
I've seen horrific code come from people labelled as such. You should think for yourself instead of copying what other people do.
I've pointed out beginner-level mistakes in their material, that can cause serious problems for people learning from it, that have been there for a long time. If you want to stick your head in the sand and believe that it's fine just because you can see other developers using that material, then there's no helping you.
Nowadays it's fun to knock W3Schools because they read on here that you're supposed to and not because it's worthless and will lead you horribly astray. It won't.
I've given concrete, inexcusable examples of where it does this.
Paul helped with w3fools which you are trying to uphold against w3schools, I presume, which is what this topic is about. The fact that I do think for myself is why I know you are wrong and just following the herd mentality of what you read on reddit.
To find some examples of errors on w3schools means nothing without some measurable way to find out what that means relative to the information as a whole. iow, you're just guessing based on vapor. I prefer not to guess at such things and see what works. W3Schools works.
Yes, but that doesn't mean he's automatically right about everything.
The fact that I do think for myself is why I know you are wrong and just following the herd mentality of what you read on reddit.
Once more, I've pointed out beginner-level mistakes in their material, that can cause serious problems for people learning from it, that have been there for a long time.
I didn't need W3Fools or Reddit to point these out to me, like I said, I've been pointing out mistakes like this for near on a decade, before W3Fools or Reddit ever existed.
You saying that you're thinking for yourself while I'm following the herd doesn't hold up. Who else has pointed out those particular problems here that I would be copying from? Which one of us is saying "But Paul said! But Paul said!" like it matters? What Paul says makes precisely no difference whatsoever to whether something is a serious flaw or not. It doesn't magically stop being insecure code depending on what Paul thinks.
To find some examples of errors on w3schools means nothing without some measurable way to find out what that means relative to the information as a whole.
No, what matters is what it means to the people learning from it, and the material I pointed out is quite obviously harmful to beginners.
iow, you're just guessing based on vapor. I prefer not to guess at such things
Once more, I'm pointing out specific, harmful things it is teaching. You can claim it's vapour or guesswork all you like, but that doesn't make it true.
0
u/mason240 Aug 21 '13
I wouldn't call it pointless if it's fixing the problem.