[WEB4LIB] RE: Learning curve: HTML or WYSIWYG

[Thomas Dowling]

> I second Raymond's suggestion.
>
> I teach our workshops using straight HTML, however, as part of our
training
> program, we provide vouchers for training at a computer training center
and
> the bulk of the vouchers have been used to take FrontPage classes.  I'm
> guessing this is because FrontPage is loaded on the Gates machines.
>
> Does anyone know of a survey that covers what HTML editors are the most
> widely used?

>From recent--within the last week or so--hits on library home pages,
here's a summary of pages with META Generator tags.  This is grossly
unfair to editors that don't leave a generator tag behind them (the
DreamWeaver total shouldn't be believed, for example)

  1421 FrontPage
    58 Microsoft Word
    31 Microsoft Publisher
     3 Microsoft (Other)
   531 Netscape Composer
     7 DreamWeaver
   178 Adobe Editors (GoLive, Pagemill)
    11 IBM Editors (HomePage Builder, WebSphere)
    18 Visual Page
     5 HomeSite
     9 HotDog
     9 BBEdit
   304 Other
2585 total generators

The FP number is disappointing.  The Netscape Composer number is simply
appalling.

I'm increasingly of the opinion that people who don't know HTML up on side
and down the other should not be placing *.html files on public servers.
Either teach staff the syntax or create a template system that allows them
to put Good Ol' ASCII into an area where it will be rendered dynamically
by something that creates valid, sensible HTML.  Making it easier for
dozens of staff members to create thousands of poorly structured pages
makes it daunting or impossible to mount a future project to restructure,
reorganize, or reformat that content.

Anyone willing and able to generate quality content for you site should be
able to do so.  Teaching them all to use crappy editors is not the way to
do it.

☮
Thomas Dowling
OhioLINK - Ohio Library and Information Network
tdowling at ohiolink.edu