On Sat, Nov 15, 2003, Bill Vermillion wrote:
>In article <i0dcrvcgel6299g59s623qu4h5ko2qm1o5@4ax.com>,
>JamesDad <mewnewsARROGANCE@mailandnews.com> wrote:
>
>>Plus there's the matter of a *nix company using a Windows word
>>processor to edit HTML. I'd say SCO's credibility as a company
>>just dropped a couple of notches with me, but I don't know if
>>they have that many left. :-)
>
>That argument has been used against others - and it's not a real
>argument. A couple of years ago there was a big bruhaha about
>Sun using MS machines and MS products instead of the StarOffice.

The problem with using any Micro$oft programs to generate HTML is that they
tend to use non-standard extensions (in addtion to being generally
bloated).

My biggest complaint with every HTML editor I've ever seen is that they
always seem to want to play with fonts, specifying absolute sizes and such
which totally defeat the design intentions of HTML which is to make the
display independent of the content.

>MS products do run a vast majority of offices in the US and tyring
>to hire someone who knows how to write documentation using
>nroff/troff and the associated macros is pretty hard - unless they
>are retired Bell employees who used to write manuals there.
>
>Bill Campbell posted a story [here on in another NG/list]about a
>woman in an office where his wife worked [as I recall] who was so
>much more efficient that the others they had to find out why she
>was so productive.
>
>It turns out she did all her work in vi and then just imported into
>Word.

The woman didn't work with my wife, she's a technical writer and editor for
Microsoft :-). Her boss asked why she was at least five times more
productive than anybody else in her department.

Bill
--
INTERNET: bill@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676
URL: http://www.celestial.com/

``Never do your enemy a minor injury.''
- Machiavelli

In article <20031115234525.GA14115@alexis.mi.celestial.com>
bill@celestial.com (Bill Campbell) writes:

>The problem with using any Micro$oft programs to generate HTML is that
>they tend to use non-standard extensions (in addtion to being generally
>bloated).
>
>My biggest complaint with every HTML editor I've ever seen is that they
>always seem to want to play with fonts, specifying absolute sizes and
>such which totally defeat the design intentions of HTML which is to
>make the display independent of the content.

Recently I took a look at a friend's web page using Netscape on my
Linux box. It was a mess - captions were overlaid by photos instead
of sitting below them, etc. It had been created with FrontPage and
naturally looked just fine when viewed with IE. Just for kicks I
pulled a copy of her index.html and started fiddling with it in vi.
I wound up with a page that looked good on either browser and was
only half the size.

>>Bill Campbell posted a story [here on in another NG/list]about a
>>woman in an office where his wife worked [as I recall] who was so
>>much more efficient that the others they had to find out why she
>>was so productive.
>>
>>It turns out she did all her work in vi and then just imported into
>>Word.
>
>The woman didn't work with my wife, she's a technical writer and editor
>for Microsoft :-). Her boss asked why she was at least five times more
>productive than anybody else in her department.

Let's see if I can write the rest of the story: She was reprimanded,
vi was removed from her machine, and she was forced to use Word for
her work. She quit two months later.

How close did I come? :-)

--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!