Updating my review a bit: different title; same star rating for now.
I will say this: I wouldn't be writing a review or updating it if the book wasn't engaging me. While it frustrates me a bit in its presentation, I still stand by the ambition and scope of this book. I'm not quite to adding another star ... yet.
== Initial Review
I actually like much of the content of this book and I think its aim and approach is exactly the right way to handle it. However, so far, the presentation and setup offers enough issues to make this book problematic to recommend.
I do plan on updating my review as I get further into the book.
To explain my reasoning, just in chapter 1, the CSS, markup and JavaScript that is covered is very inconsistent in terms of what the authors devote time to explaining. My view is either cover it all or just assume the user will read it and get it and provide the code repository. Inconsistent coverage leads to cognitive friction, particularly when -- as is often the case with this book -- the code shown in the book listing does not match the examples in the GitHub repository.
As just two examples:
On page 16, there's the meta http-equiv that's used in the book listing. That's not in the chapter1 code repo. Should it be?
On page 17, there is a clearfix div block in the book listing. That same block is not in the source code repo. However, there are clearfix CSS entries in the code repo but those are not mentioned at all in the book listings.
I realize the book is not here to teach all of HTML or CSS. I also realize chapter 1 is mainly about getting an application in place as context for the rest of the book. That recognition being granted, I still maintain that the inconsistent coverage coupled with the lack of correspondence between the book examples and the code repo examples is harmful. This kind of cognitive friction can make a reader start to distrust the authors. And, to be sure, all of this is on the relatively simple stuff (HTML, CSS). That makes me worry about what I'm going to encounter when I get into more complicated stuff with these authors, like JavaScript frameworks.
One thing that bothers me about this is that, quite frankly, I found all of this in my first read-through. It's glaringly obvious. So that being said, I find it hard to believe that a test reader (reviewer, as opposed to editor) could not have done this for the authors prior to release.
== Update to Review
Another example of the cognitive friction I mention above is the first chapter 2 example doesn't contain the geolocation map JavaScript functionality that we ended chapter 1 with. Specifically, this file:
\chapter2\project-01-donation-ajax-html\js\main.js
It does not contain the geolocation code that we laboriously added over five iterations in chapter 1. Why not? Should it be there? Even if the authors are going to reimplement it for the reader, they haven't done that in the book by the time someone is looking at project-01-donation-ajax-html. I realize the geolocation code does not matter for the bit of Ajax the authors are showing by that point in chapter 2. But, again, attentive readers are going to notice.
This is similar to what happened with the Modernizr code that was introduced in the book and in \chapter1\project-08-1-Modernizr-geolocation-maps but is then apparently removed in the project examples for the rest of chapter 1 and chapter 2. Why?
Yet another example. In chapter 2, the authors introduce sending XHR errors to the footer area of the HTML in the book (where they even call out the specific CSS to use). However, that's not in the code repository for any of the chapter 2 projects.
But does any of this matter? Well, for me, I want a *consistent* application that I modify as I go. I don't want to have to wonder why parts are left out here and there.
All this said, I suppose it depends on if the reader is going to take the authors' advice and just open up the existing projects in WebStorm. If so, that would be a bad way for a reader to learn in my opinion. Readers will always learn more by actually typing out the code themselves which forces them to engage more with it. I'm that type of reader and that's definitely where my friction is coming in. I really like the scope and content in the book but it's a struggle to implement if, like me, you are a reductionist reader that wants to stick with a consistent code base through all examples.
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
