Ok...my last post on the topic (I think people are getting bored with me)...

> I'd like to play devil's advocate here.  One of the intrinsically
> different things about presentation on the web -- to say nothing about
> alternative formats like WAP -- is that you have no idea what the
> physical presentation parameters are going to be. 

Right. I agree. 

 > For that matter, consider a cleverness I have detected on salon.com. 
> Since they break their articles across pages, some of their writers
> build up to a "cliff-hanger" comment at the bottom of one page, to get
> the reader to click-through to the next section of story.  If 
> an author
> cannot anticipate where that break will fall, how can he utilize it?

Well, he/she needs to anticipate it happens after so many characters, but
he/she doesn't need to know where on the screen it will appear. As you point
out, you wouldn't know that anyways. It's going to show up in a different
spot on a PDA vs. a 640x480 monitor at the library vs. someone sitting at
home with a portrait 1200x1800 monitor.

> If content is divorced from format, how can you anticipate and
> accommodate the medium?

Very true. But if you are going to design for a specific medium's format to
begin with, then there's absolutely no reason for the separation argument as
you will need to write unique content for each medium. You'll have to write
a PDA article, a web article, a pdf article, a RSS article, etc. etc.

The separation argument is important for repurposing content. If you are
crafting content for specific media, then I completely agree that
presentation and content need to be integrated. 

> You argue that one shouldn't.  I certainly know why -- I am a 
> developer,
> after all, and am inclined to feel likewise.  But my understanding of
> the craft of writing (I presume there are analogs in graphical design)
> says that *is* a part of the craft, and not to be sacrificed 
> in the name
> of "flexibility".

Well, I'm certainly not a writer. That said, IMHO, if you are a good writer,
you should be able to communicate eloquently with ASCII text. 

Good content can overcome bad presentation. The reverse is less true. If you
have x units of employee time for both content and presentation, I'd always
argue to maximize the content side of it. (And, for the record, I'm a
graphic designer)

In summary (I need to wrap this up as I imagine people are getting a bit
bored...):

Ehmad had a nice list of what a CMS should be used for:

 - help you define you content elements as you need
 - help you sharing and publishing information in different format
 - help you create as many pages as you want form specific content element
 - help users create and edit  content NOT  pages
 - Create Pages from content NOT content from Pages
 - CMS Manage the pages that are created by CMS itself NOT by user
 - provide Workflow and authorization in the content element itself NOT in
Pages

Any attempt at the content author trying to format content based on a
specific presentation at the time of authoring makes most of the above
bullet points moot. At that point, I believe the user needs to consider a
document management model, or a simple page editing system.

-Darrel
--
http://cms-list.org/
more signal, less noise.

Reply via email to