Re: Re: DHTML browsers [was Accessibility]

On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 04:20:32PM -0500, Austin, Darrel wrote:
[...]
> Until then, I'm trying to push more and more semantic markup on
> people...starting with proper use of MS-Word. There's a total lack of
> understanding of how to even properly structure a document in Word. Using
> lists for actual lists, using heading styles for actual headings, etc.
> Hopefully, by starting there, we'll get folks ready to jump into the web
> updates.

It would be really nice if Word could be forced into a mode where the
user could ONLY use styles to format text, and the individual
formatting controls were disabled.

Sigh...

> Another thing I try to do is hide all formatting from the content editors. I
> prohibit them from making color choices or font choices, etc. I find this is
> frustrating to the them, but hopefully, over time, they'll learn to focus on
> the content and not worry as much about the layout (since that's our job).
> 
> > Unfortunately, anything using ActiveX is not an option as business
> > users may 
> > not have admin rights on their machines and SMS updates can blow
> > those things 
> > away.
> 
> Yea, we're really hoping Xtstandard can come out with a non active-x
> version. My fingers are crossed.
> 
> Ultimately, the solution may revolve around XML templates. The more I work
> with XML (I'm pretty much a newbie to all of that) the more I see the
> disadvantage of storing content using the limited palet of HTML tags for
> structure.

It depends. XML is great for hierarchical structuring, but unless
you've also got a good XML object store, it's generally terrible for
querying or editing partial documents. That is to say - it's a good
part of an answer, but it's not the whole answer.

I find that XML is useful as an interchange format, but generally not
great for storage.


-- 
				- Adam

-----
http://www.adamfields.com