|
|
|
|
|
by gostsamo
2124 days ago
|
|
MDN vs. a random resource on the net... Honestly, the article that you link to has a few h1s and only one of them is for the article itself, while the rest seem like ads and not equally important content. I can continue pointing contradictions in what the author says, but the article is rather long. |
|
No, it's an presumed expert deep diving on a subject vs MDN reference material. MDN is extremely inadequate for explaining anything that isn't mere reference, like how things are practically used in the wild or their practical impact.
A good example of this would be https://css-tricks.com/ vs MDN. MDN doesn't even try to be the resource that css-tricks is.
Anyways, why not respond to the author's actual content? What tutsplus.com's CMS is doing to their content is irrelevant.