This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
First Thoughts on WebML?
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.
An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.
Re:Vapid Deployment Software Methodologies... (Score:3)
I would disagree with that strongly. Experience with ANY UI is that users tend to prefer packages that look-and-feel the same as things they already know and use, but with different content - The more consistant your user interface is across different packages in a suite, the more usable it is considered to be (and the more each package adds to the value of the OTHER packages in the suite). There is no reason this isn't valid for websites, and many people already say it is.
If a user is familiar with site a, and does click-pulldown-select-order to get (say) a book, then goes to YOUR site and does click-pulldown-select-order to get (say) a CD, then he will be pleased with himself for how quickly he did that, and state he feels "comfortable" with the site, when in fact he is merely conditioned to the style of the site from elsewhere. If you need proof, think of the time it took to figure out exactly what goes where here on slashdot - then go to any of the Slashcode [slashcode.com] sites and note how familiar it feels - even though the content and style is different, the interface is reassuringly the same.
--
Re:Whoa, whoa whoa WHOA (Score:1)
I don't much like traditional HTML. In order to achieve practically any satisfactory layout effects, you have to hack and kludge your way through an ugly DTD, using tricks like table layout and blank images that were never meant to be used.
I'm much more satisfied with the idea of clean, strict XHTML with CSS reserved for typographic and layout effects. Netscape and Microsoft have had more than enough time to implement proper support for CSS. CSS-2 is a great technology (have you read the spec [w3.org]? Man, they've thought of everything!) and there's no excuse for the current state of things, other than the fact that this fork in functionality, so to speak, is great business for Microsoft. It's not so great for developers.
I've been doing HTML since version, what, 1.1? It wasn't so great back then, and it's gotten a lot worse.
It's also long past time we got major browser support for PNG, but that's another story.
erghh. (Score:2)
The purpose of composition modeling in WebML is to define which nodes make up the hypertext contained in the Web site. More precisely, composition modeling specifies content units (units for short), i.e., the atomic information elements that may appear in the Web site, and pages, i.e., containers by means of which information is actually clustered for delivery to the user. In a concrete setting, e.g., an HTML or WML implementation of a WebML site, pages and units are mapped to suitable constructs in the delivery language
Because I just know that sometime I'll be asked to work on a site using it, probably with a short deadline...
Like thier toolcube though.
no engineering reqd. (Score:2)
Vapid Deployment Software Methodologies... (Score:1)
Eaargh! HTML meets 4D. Bambi meets Godzilla. Both flicks turn out the same.
Granted, HTML was, in my opinion, a great step backward in terms of representation and structure. Reminded me of editing documents in Runoff and QED. But it did have the advantage of being the lowest common denominator, and as such became an instant standard.
Yet, the purpose of most web sites is to advertise or sell. This is done most effectively by making the customer WANT to look at the site. In this day that means that you have to have a serious difference factor. Why should customers pick any one of you if you all look the same. Folks will focus on the different item in any list (try being the only guy in the squad with glasses). This leads me to believe the working (sale curve increasing) website is one that has a different look and feel to it, thus requiring high degrees of individuality in design. This is not easily accomplished with high level design tools. The time spent in customising the tools to fit the requirements often outstrips the time saved in design.
I will grant that maintenance will be simplified, though.
All of the above is predicated on the public use of a website to sell or persuade. Other uses should fit better.
presently staring at a wall of 4gl manuals...
Re:My first thought (Score:2)
The thing with tools like this is that they really appeal to management types, especially with all the hip marketing buzzwords (pet hate, along with hip marketing types) used to sell them.
I've been designing sites since around the time BGCOLOR arrived, and I've never found any 'system' that was more effective than hand edititing the code, otherwise you have no feel for what is going on and if something breaks or bends you don't know where to start to fix it, if you even notice it in the first place.
No, I've got Last Post (Score:1)
Whoa, whoa whoa WHOA (Score:3)
There are very few truly good web architects out there, but the ones that are definitely have enough headaches to deal with.