Re: a different resume red flag

Subject: Re: a different resume red flag
From: David Castro <thejavaguy -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 09:45:28 -0400

> > If you're only looking at the code. But if the Word-generated HTML
> > validates and displays in IE, Firefox, etc., what's wrong with it?
> Clean code matters in HTML no less than in C++.

Is that true when you're looking at output generated from a different
source? Sure, I'd agree that code cleanness is important if you are
directly maintaining the HTML. But if it's automatically-generated
output from a separate document, and if changes to that separate
document are easy to make, then is the cleanness of the generated code
really important?

-David Castro


ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed!

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

RE: a different resume red flag: From: Goldstein, Dan

Previous by Author: Re: Samples Query
Next by Author: Re: Display installer panels in doc?
Previous by Thread: RE: a different resume red flag
Next by Thread: RE: a different resume red flag

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

Sponsored Ads