I dissagree. I don't believe familiarity with anything other than Perl (or even Perl itself in our newbies) is really assumed. I think that statistic about 90% of our content being CGI related is rediculous. Probably less than half of our Monks could use the Document Object Model competently. That's an offhand guess though, as everyone is free to define 'competent' as they please. ;-)
Conversely, if the monestary were to accumulate one new section at a time, it would certainly pick up HTML before Basic. I imagine a potential order might be: Databases, Security, HTML, Python, Java, C/C++, etc... but really, who's to say?
-Lexicon | [reply] |
Since three of the seven Monastary FAQ questions deal with HTML, you might say that if it's not assumed knowledge, it is at least very useful. I'm not talking about in-depth knowledge of HTML, but enough to format your posts.
As further evidence for my point that perlmonks wouldn't work for other languages, I like to suggest that those of us who aren't using perl for HTML tasks are probably using it for system administration. Those users therefore have the same understanding of how to manage a community of users as a webmaster does.
I'd also like to bring up this contentious point: would you use perlmonks if it wasn't written in perl? Would a python, java or PHP developer want to use a website that was written in perl? (Naturally a SQL developer wouldn't mind, since perlmonks site uses mySQL too :)
And finally, Would you even read this sentence if I didn't know how to change the font tags?? The HTML savvy users have an advantage on this site.
| [reply] |
