Re: apologia pro vita sua (was Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word)

Subject: Re: apologia pro vita sua (was Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word)
From: jeev -at- geocast -dot- com
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 19:10:15 -0800



Mark Baker wrote:
[]
> 2. It should not be true. Your content should be comprehensible independent
> of presentation. Presentation should aid in the ergonomics of reading, but
> it should not impact meaning or comprehension. To the extent that it does,
> it is bad design. To the extent that text is susceptible to having its
> meaning altered by presentation, it is bad text. (There are exceptions, but
> they are rare.)

This is an argument as old as book design, and will not be solved
here, either by argument or fiat, as much of what is being argued
depends upon definitions of all the terms.

Ellen Evans
jeev -at- geocast -dot- com




Previous by Author: Re: Process Documentation (WAS: Disabling Print)
Next by Author: A grudging Help partnership...
Previous by Thread: Re: Why TW Projects Fail. Was Pizza Process.
Next by Thread: OT How do I unsubscribe?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads