Yes, the 10 basic rules as given are just fine for someone starting out.

It would be hard just to follow all ten rules and harder not to just drop a piece for nothing.

No need to elaborate on these ten for a novice

http://blog.chess.com/NimzoRoy/chess-opening-principles

I´m really a newbie who tries to learn chess but when I study any game from any level of play these rules are always broken by both sides... I play more Italian style openings but of you play Spanish you will probably have to move that bishop twice (or 3-4 times).

They shouldn't be called rules. They're more of a guideline that one should follow, but can deviate from at any time.

These guys approve:

Chess already has the distinction:

There are rules of chess which govern principles of play (such as control the center). These rules can be broken.

There are also Laws of chess which can't be broken without fear of retribution from the arbiter.

We don't need to play semantic games; the definitions have already been made.

One writer (I forget!) set the goal for the opening as: advance both center pawns, develop all minor pieces, and castle, withing ten moves.  He explained that you seldom can accomplish this, but be conscious of the objective.

Many of my problems stemmed from not getting my center pawns advanced.

Here is my list:

1. Take the initiative!

The only rule you will ever need to know!

You say the King's Gambit is busted, but quote the Parham as a reason to need to break opening rules?

It isn't really a semantics game. My response was to the person that noticed the rules were constantly broken.

It hadn't occured to me that i was paraphrasing a line from PotC. I knew it sounded familiar!

lol, excellent pic.

Estragon, thanks for the link to Exeter Chess Club. I have just made a casual look, and think it will help in my development. Thanks for sharing...