RE: [hwg-basics:] Overkill?

Good Morning Thomas--

<snip>
following requirement is quite possibly overkill
</snip>

Looks like standard CYA SOP* (cover-your-ass
standard-operating-procedure) to me. Written by people who are
reacting to what they have read and heard, not by what they themselves
have actually done. Who need to feel some sense of control in site
management. Who are trying to reduce the site content management to
the lowest possible common denominator.

<snip>
the reason they require this is that they want people to
use the same standards, so the intranet controllers can
make corrections if security issues arise.
</snip>

A page not written in FP is likely to change once it IS opened in FP.
FP has several "features" which "correct" code once it is opened. You
are not asked about this, and unless the human editor is familiar with
how to "edit the edits" that FP does on your behalf, there could be
some unpleasant surprises. Although the program is less intrusive in
its' current version than in previous ones, it does attempt to create
consistent (not necessarily W3C strict) code. If you didn't check it
in FP before submitting it, you could be in for a surprise or two, or
maybe not. Depends on your layout and design tolerance.

<snip>
this leads me to believe that they should have a
requirement that the authors at least have a basic
knowledge of HTML.
</snip>

I have noticed a trend in web project management toward giving authors
and other content sources a template page to work from. And then
saying "You're on your own, g'nite!" The authors become solely
responsible for the content, typos, timeliness, accuracy, and
"correctness" etc. of their department pages. The web master/web site
manager uploads the final files after running them through the various
validators (maybe.. it's not their job).

>From a management standpoint, this is a brilliant concept. Make people
"own" their own material. People with a vested interest in something
tend to give it more attention and care. From a professional
standpoint, I admit the results I have seen are awful. Just because
you know widgets inside and out doesn't mean you can do the HTML dance
with or without a template. How basic is your idea of "basic HTML?"

I still like the concept. But the QA side of it needs more work. Let
me know how your battle with the dragon(s) goes. I'd definitely be
interested.

kali
kaliajer(at)mail.com
=================
The learning curve is now a spin cycle
--Paul Bicknell

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