Re: spelling and grammar

Hello Friends:

Jim wrote:

>Yes, it is one type of ''simpler'',  but it is a simpler that takes up
>time. Nothing can slow a morning down faster than to have 20 pages on a
>site needing to be modified. 

Yup - can't disagree with that!

Jim continued:

>The editor prints out copies, then marks them up, then sends them to me,
>then I make the changes, then I send back that I've made the changes,
>and he checks the changes.

I think the "net" world has to get real when it comes to timelines.  Look - 
let's say you have a copy editor who is also a coder.  Basically he (or she) 
is going to go over the raw copy and edit as necessary.  Then he will code 
it.  Then he will proof it again.  That's the way it goes.  It takes time.  
Whether it's one person or two.

Jim continued:

>The other type of ''simpler'' would be for the copy editor to load up
>the page and make the changes directly, which is what we can do for the
>simpler, static web sites.

Aside from what I mentioned above, I have been part of web sites that have 
been created so that even the client can plug in their own changes.  It's 
possible - but when the project is being launched, you still need a good 
editor.

Jim wrote:

>The problem is compounded when everyone has access to the internet, but
>not everyone works in the office. Some of us work at home (me!) every
>day, and some work at home some days, and some days in the office.

Yes - it can get confusing when the office is virtual.  The only way to solve 
that problem is that only one person is appointed to amend the code.  Is that 
reality?  Maybe not - but at some point we are going to have to take the 
position that throwing the site up and fixing it later is the wrong approach. 
 

It's the bane of my existence here in the print world that material is 
released to me for production - and the agency continues to hack away at it 
even while it's on press.

- Jeff Kopito

HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA