A 1995 website? It wouldn't, because HTML was the
method most were using.
A 2007 website is CMS-driven, script-operated and has
a lot more content to update, as well as features
that are essentially programmatic.
Jeremy H. Griffith wrote:
The Frame docs are all UNstructured, and I can't
A 1995 website? It wouldn't, because HTML was the
method most were using.
A 2007 website is CMS-driven, script-operated and has
a lot more content to update, as well as "features"
that are essentially programmatic.
> Jeremy H. Griffith wrote:
>
> > The Frame docs are all UNstructured, and I
Jeremy H. Griffith wrote:
> The Frame docs are all UNstructured, and I can't imagine what benefit
> structure would bring to something as free-form as a Web site... ;-)
Huh?? It's Sunday morning and I've not yet caffeinated, but that seems
like a rather sweeping statement. Obviously any big
Jeremy H. Griffith wrote:
The Frame docs are all UNstructured, and I can't imagine what benefit
structure would bring to something as free-form as a Web site... ;-)
Huh?? It's Sunday morning and I've not yet caffeinated, but that seems
like a rather sweeping statement. Obviously any big site
It occurs to me that as FrameMaker comes with an 'out of the box' XHTML
structured application, it might be a useful tool for prototyping web content
(without any WYSIWYG) prior to export into a web development app such as
Dreamweaver.
Has anyone used it like this? Did it work for you?
--
Steve, I like your thinking, but in my view HTML code
is dead except as a transit mechanism. You can to get
your structured FrameMaker content into a CMS so you
spend less time in FTP/HTML updating stuff that is
better handled by an automated link and document
manager.
I'm looking along these
At 06:50 -0700 23/3/07, Chris Borokowski wrote:
Steve, I like your thinking, but in my view HTML codeis dead except as a
transit mechanism. You can to get your structured FrameMaker content into a
CMS so you spend less time in FTP/HTML updating stuff that is better handled
by an automated
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 09:40:58 +, Steve Rickaby
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It occurs to me that as FrameMaker comes with an
'out of the box' XHTML structured application, it
might be a useful tool for prototyping web content
(without any WYSIWYG) prior to export into a web
development app
It occurs to me that as FrameMaker comes with an 'out of the box' XHTML
structured application, it might be a useful tool for prototyping web content
(without any WYSIWYG) prior to export into a web development app such as
Dreamweaver.
Has anyone used it like this? Did it work for you?
--
Steve, I like your thinking, but in my view HTML code
is dead except as a transit mechanism. You can to get
your structured FrameMaker content into a CMS so you
spend less time in FTP/HTML updating stuff that is
better handled by an automated link and document
manager.
I'm looking along these
At 06:50 -0700 23/3/07, Chris Borokowski wrote:
>Steve, I like your thinking, but in my view HTML codeis dead except as a
>transit mechanism. You can to get your structured FrameMaker content into a
>CMS so you spend less time in FTP/HTML updating stuff that is better handled
>by an automated
It's hard to keep a website updated, which is one
reason many people are switching to portable document
formats. I can do all the web development in my sleep,
but am looking toward a next generation site that I
can make portable without losing URL placement and
without extensive, manual
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 09:40:58 +, Steve Rickaby
wrote:
>It occurs to me that as FrameMaker comes with an
>'out of the box' XHTML structured application, it
>might be a useful tool for prototyping web content
>(without any WYSIWYG) prior to export into a web
>development app such as
13 matches
Mail list logo
