Re: Online portfolios and viewing source (was RE: Other handshakes?)

Subject: Re: Online portfolios and viewing source (was RE: Other handshakes?)
From: "Steve Arrants" <stephena -at- compbear -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 15:07:18 -0800

"Darren Barefoot" <darren -dot- barefoot -at- capeclear -dot- com> asks:
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>

> On a related subject, if I'm viewing writing samples or looking at
> somebody's resume on their Web site, I always look at the HTML source to
> determine, if possible, how it was constructed. That is, many HTML tools
> insert header information about the source tool that people fail to
> remove. Furthermore, as everybody knows, if people save from MS Word
> then they get lots of extra code.

Which means what? That they converted their Word document into a Word HTML
document. You don't know why they did it from looking at it. It could be
that they would want to edit it later in Word as HTML. It could be because
it seemed at the time to be the most efficient way to get the thing up on
the net. It could be that the HTML editor they normally use doesn't do a
good job of supporting import to/from Word.

> Now, if someone lists HTML amongst their skills, but their Web site was
> all auto-magically created by MS FrontPage, should they receive strikes
> against them?

No. Using a tool such as Front Page or Dreamweaver, or HomeSite doesn't tell
a damn thing about whether the person knows HTML. It just shows that they
can use a tool to generate HTML. And for most jobs, that's enough. I
managed a rather large site for CNET for a few years. We used proprietary
in-house tools, Dreamweaver, bbedit, use what you need to get
the job done. So suppose I list that CNET site as a reference on my resume.
You go to the site. You view the source. You don't like the way the source
looks. My fault? Nope. I'm following the design and tool guidelines set
down for me, because different browsers can sometimes render the same HTML
differently and you have to make compromises in the code and not follow the
strict rules.

>Am I a big tool snob if I think they should author these
> pages by hand (particularly as most portfolio/resume sites are pretty
> straight forward)? Just a thought. I'm far more ambivalent about this
> issue, probably because it hasn't occurred very often. Thanks. DB.

If you're that big a tool snob, you should be checking to see if each and
every page of the site strictly adheres to the W3C guidelines. And be sure
you're viewing it with a browser that strictly adheres to the W3C
guidelines. And, also, you should be sure that the job you're hiring for
requires that candidates write HTML "by hand" without the use of an editing
tool above the utility of vi.

Attention ForeHelp and Doc-to-Help Users! Upgrade your existing product to
RoboHelp for only $299, through January 31st. RoboHelp can import your
existing Help projects! Learn how else RoboHelp can benefit you.

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Online portfolios and viewing source (was RE: Other handshakes?): From: Darren Barefoot

Previous by Author: Seeking an end-user term for a browser-side save (nothing saved on server)
Next by Author: Bug Tracking Software
Previous by Thread: RE: Joys of techwriting
Next by Thread: FW: Other handshakes?

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

Sponsored Ads