TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Front Page Fussy From:Tracy Boyington <tracy_boyington -at- OKVOTECH -dot- ORG> Date:Wed, 13 Jan 1999 14:58:10 -0600
> On Wed, 13 Jan 1999 14:28:56 -0600, Kris Olberg wrote:
>
> >HTML is a standard. "Crappy" can only describe something that does not
> >conform to the standard.
I disagree. "Crappy" can describe something that uses valid HTML, but
uses it in ways that will not always work as the creator was led to
believe (for example, using the definition tag to indent a paragraph...
works on some browsers, not on others, since browsers can display text
with that tag different ways while still following the standard).
"Crappy" can describe tag bloat such as adding a non-breaking space when
importing text that has two spaces after each period just to make sure
that extra space displays, or putting <bold> tags before and after every
sentence in a bold paragraph when all that's needed is one at the
beginning of the paragraph and one at the end.
> >Ergo, because FP creates standard HTML, it cannot
> >be described as "crappy." Find a different argument.
So, using this logic, a sentence written using standard grammar and
sentence structure could never be considered crappy? Doesn't work that
way in my world. Find a different argument. :-)
