drummyfish/less_retarded_wiki
5
1
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Update

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Miloslav Ciz 2025-04-02 17:51:15 +02:00
parent 2275f9c44d
commit 490ffab10e
10 changed files with 2008 additions and 1962 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

14
html.md
View file

@ -1,20 +1,22 @@
# HTML
HTML, short for *Hypertext Markup Language*, is a relatively simple [computer](computer.md) language for describing documents with hyperlinks ("clickable pointers to other such documents"), serving to create websites on the [World Wide Web](www.md). This makes it **the most basic language of the web**, it's a text format in which websites are transferred over the [Internet](internet.md). HTML is **NOT a [programming language](programming_language.md)**, just one for describing documents -- it contains the text of the website along with special tags marking parts of it as paragraphs, heading etc. **HTML is easy!** Even [women](woman.md) can learn it.
HTML, short for *Hypertext Markup Language*, is a relatively simple [computer](computer.md) language for describing documents with hyperlinks ("clickable pointers to other such documents"), serving to create websites on the [World Wide Web](www.md). This makes it **the most basic language of the web**, it's a text format in which websites are sent over the [Internet](internet.md). HTML is **NOT a [programming language](programming_language.md)**, just one for describing documents -- it contains the text of the website along with special tags marking parts of it as paragraphs, heading etc. **HTML is easy!** Even [women](woman.md) can learn it.
Going by traditional definitions, **HTML is NOT a [programming language](programming_language.md)** because it doesn't express [algorithms](algorithm.md), just a structure and content of a document (webpage), so boasting about being an "HTML programmer" only results in cringe and embarrassment. Still under a more liberal definition of a "programming language" (such as the one used in the [esolang](esolang.md) circles) it IS possible to claim HTML is a sort of programming language, specifically a [declarative](declarative.md) one that's not [Turing complete](turing_completeness.md). But this is like stretching the definition of "[music](music.md)" so that it includes any kind of audible noise, like farting for example, so that anyone who farts can be called a musician.
By traditional definitions **HTML is NOT a [programming language](programming_language.md)** because it doesn't express [algorithms](algorithm.md), only a structure and content of a document (webpage), so boasting about being an "HTML programmer" results in nothing but cringe and embarrassment. HTML webdevs are therefore NOT necessarily programmers. Going by a more liberal definition of a "programming language" (such as that of the [esolang](esolang.md) wiki) a 200 [IQ](iq.md) nerd can claim HTML is ACKCHUALLY a programming language of a very odd sort, specifically a [declarative](declarative.md) one that's not [Turing complete](turing_completeness.md). But that's like stretching the definition of "[music](music.md)" to include any kind of audible noise, like farting for example, so that anyone who farts can be called a musician.
**[History](history.md) and context**: HTML came to be as a part of the [world wide web](www.md) framework created around 1990 by Tim Berners-Lee. Later on it got standardized every once in a few years or so; the latest standard is HTML5 from 2014. In [syntax](syntax.md) HTML is similar to another widely popular language called [XML](xml.md). This is due to both languages descending from [SGML](sgml.md), a standard for markup languages. HTML and XML different, however, in both syntax and semantics (unlike with XML, HTML tags are case insensitive, closing tags aren't required, semantics of tags is predefined etc.), and so in general HTML and XML require different parsers and [libraries](library.md). There was once an effort to make a version of HTML conforming to XML rules, so called [XHTML](xhtml.md), but it was kind of fruitless as hardly anyone adopted it.
**[History](history.md) and context**: HTML emerged as a part of the [world wide web](www.md) framework created circa 1990 by Tim Berners-Lee. Later on it got standardized every once in a few years or so; the latest standard is HTML5 from 2014. In [syntax](syntax.md) HTML is of resemblance to another widely popular language called [XML](xml.md). This is due to both languages descending from [SGML](sgml.md), a standard for markup languages. HTML and XML different, however, in both syntax and semantics (unlike with XML, HTML tags are case insensitive, closing tags aren't required, semantics of tags is predefined etc.), and so in general HTML and XML require different [parsers](parser.md) and [libraries](library.md). There was once an effort to make a version of HTML conforming to XML rules, so called [XHTML](xhtml.md), but it was kind of fruitless as hardly anyone adopted it.
HTML can be mixed with other web languages, namely [CSS](css.md) and [JavaScript](javascript.md). JavaScript is a [shitty](shit.md) retarded [scripting](script.md) language for embedding sneaky, automatically executed programs to the HTML document, such as [crypto](crypto.md) miners, [keyloggers](keylogger.md), [bloat](bloat.md) and other [malware](malware.md), so good programmers consider use of JavaScript a very bad practice, so henceforth we'll just ignore it. CSS serves to give the HTML document a specific visual style, for instance specify concrete [fonts](font.md), background [color](color.md), paragraph spacing etc. In its beginning HTML actually contained its own ways for manipulating the visual appearance of the document (and for backwards compatibility still does), but later on a new [paradigm](paradigm.md) was adopted, stating that HTML should only define the "structure and content" of the document, while its appearance would be dictated separately by another language. CSS is crap too, but using it correctly and moderately is justifiable, i.e. as long as the CSS is light and the document stays fine when the style is removed, everything's cool.
HTML can be (and often is) intermixed with other web languages, namely [CSS](css.md) and [JavaScript](javascript.md). As we know, JavaScript is a [shitty](shit.md) retarded [scripting](script.md) language for embedding sneaky, automatically executed programs to the HTML document, such as [crypto](crypto.md) miners, [keyloggers](keylogger.md), [bloat](bloat.md) and other [malware](malware.md), so good programmers consider use of JavaScript a very bad practice, so henceforth we'll just ignore it. CSS serves to give the HTML document a specific visual style, for instance specify concrete [fonts](font.md), background [color](color.md), paragraph spacing etc. In its beginning HTML actually contained its own ways for manipulating the visual appearance of the document (and for backwards compatibility still does), but later on a new [paradigm](paradigm.md) was adopted, stating that HTML should only define the "structure and content" of the document, while its appearance would be dictated separately by another language. CSS is crap too, but using it correctly and moderately is justifiable, i.e. as long as the CSS is light and the document stays fine when the style is removed, everything's cool.
**Is HTML [bloat](bloat.md)? Is it acceptable?** Strictly speaking it's neither the most [minimal](minimalism.md) language, nor the most elegant one, but it definitely leans towards the more [KISS](kiss.md) part of the spectrum, i.e. it is completely acceptable and usable, especially when limited to a subset of most commonly used tags. A nicely made HTML can relatively easily be auto-converted to other formats too, so in the end it doesn't matter too much whether a document is in HTML or Markdown or whatever. Unfortunately the vast majority of websites nowadays are not a nice HTML, but this is due to retarded [soydevs](soydev.md). HTML's advantage is mainly in its [historical](history.md) status as the most widely supported common denominator of the web -- a plain HTML page can be viewed in EVERY web browser, and of course in the end it's even human readable. HTML is incomparably simpler and more [sucklesss](suckless.md) when contrasted with formats such as [PDF](pdf.md), [Latex](latex.md) or MS Word, but formats such as [Markdown](md.md) or even plaintext [ASCII](ascii.md) [txt](txt.md) are indeed yet a lot simpler and more often than not objectively better than HTML. Full HTML compliance is bloat of course, but the same probably holds even for Markdown. To sum up: using HTML is cool if we do it well.
**Is HTML [bloat](bloat.md)? Is it acceptable?** By a strict measure it's neither the most [minimal](minimalism.md) language, nor the most elegant one, but it definitely leans towards the more [KISS](kiss.md) part of the spectrum. I.e. it is completely acceptable and usable, especially when limited to a subset of most commonly used tags. A nicely made HTML can relatively easily be auto-converted to other formats too, so in the end it doesn't matter too much whether a document is in HTML or Markdown or whatever. Unfortunately the vast majority of websites nowadays are not a nice HTML, but this is due to retarded [soydevs](soydev.md). HTML's advantage is mainly in its [historical](history.md) status as the most widely supported common denominator of the web -- a plain HTML page can be viewed in EVERY web browser, and of course in the end it's even human readable. HTML is incomparably simpler and more [sucklesss](suckless.md) when contrasted with formats such as [PDF](pdf.md), [Latex](latex.md) or MS Word, but formats such as [Markdown](md.md) or even plaintext [ASCII](ascii.md) [txt](txt.md) are indeed yet a lot simpler and more often than not objectively better than HTML. Full HTML compliance is bloat of course, but the same probably holds even for Markdown. To sum up: using HTML is cool if we do it well.
Back in the day webdevs used to write all HTML manually, nowadays [soydevs](soydev.md) use various filthy cancerous "frameworks" that do everything for them and that's why typical websites today take such magnificent amounts of memory and bandwidth. Of course this is retardation, we want to do it the old way. The [small web](smol_internet.md) community already recognized this as well, a few already start to revert back to manually written pages, but our numbers are still small.
## Example
HTML is literally easy as [fuck](fuck.md), here's more or less how it works:
The whole HTML document (webpage) is just a text file with *.html* extension. So to make a page, create an empty file, name it *mypage.html* and open it with a [text editor](text_editor.md) ([gedit](gedit.md), [vim](vim.md), [emacs](emacs.md) or whatever), then start editing it. To see the result just open the file simultaneously in any [web browser](web_browser.md) (drag-and-drop should [just work](just_werks.md)), then after every edit just refresh the page. NOTE: default page on a website is always named *index.html*, so name your main page like this.
The whole glorious HTML document (webpage) is in fact just a text file with *.html* extension. So to make a page create an empty file, name it *mypage.html* (or something) and open it with a [text editor](text_editor.md) ([gedit](gedit.md), [vim](vim.md), [emacs](emacs.md) or whatever), then start editing it. To see the result just open the file simultaneously in any [web browser](web_browser.md) (drag-and-drop should [just work](just_werks.md)), then after every edit just refresh the page. NOTE: default page on a website is always named *index.html*, so name your main page like this.
PRO TIP: When you're done making the page, always validate it! Browsers tolerate errors and will show the page even if it's faulty, but stupider browsers may not handle it, so you want to make sure there are actually no errors. Just look up "HTML validator" on the web.