Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 03:53 PM 3/25/2002 +0100, you wrote: > > I write to how I want to learn -- which includes most of the "whys" then > > following up with the "hows". So far it's been a successful format for me, > > but not all authors and publishers agree with the approach. > >I tried writing my book like that (Teach Yourself XML in 21 Days, 1st >edition) and got nothing but flames for thanks. I felt that it was >senseless to dive straight into examples without getting some >background first -- or else the examples would be so trivial as to be >pointless. The publisher insisted; they were. Most of the time the >authors have very little to say ... > >Simon North. -- >If a man speaks in a forest and no woman hears him, is he still >wrong? I wonder if there isn't some kind of 'middle ground', perhaps along the lines of the Suzuki music method combined with constructivist, project-based learning. There, the learners experience the software cycle (code, compile, test -- or words to that effect) with the simplest of all possible HelloWorld (yup, trivial) projects. Then, mix in a bit of background, followed by a deeper project, etc... Jack Park
|
