Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Hi, We use a schema to define different content pieces (article, FAQ, poll, callout, glossentry, etc) - basically global elements. The schema is basically XHTML, but removes the structural elements (HTML, HEAD, BODY) and DIV and SPAN. We replace DIV and SPAN with (hopefully) more semantically meaningful elements. A user chooses a content type (global element) from a drop down and is presented with a project defined (or fallback) template to get started editing. When editing they can only use elements/attributes defined by the schema. http://livestoryboard.com/Tour/update-content.html best, -Rob Dave Pawson wrote: > Combining two of Lens points > On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 13:36 -0600, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: > >>Given a market of server-side components, > > >>It is evident that the market for the highly complex >>and costly word processing tools is shrinking. > > > Then add that to the fact that 80% of office (Writer |Word) users > only ever use 20% of the functionality, > > The provision of a server based office tool that users can't mess with > (easy on support costs) starts to look inviting? > > That way even if it is WYSIWYG, the organisation can enforce styles > such > generating regular, usable XML from styled content is easy, never mind > viable. > >
|
