Quote:
Originally Posted by nKoan
But, in a way you're right, the website has one function. That is to get information from the Reno SCCA BoD to the members and potential members in a timely fashion. In my opinion a Word as HTML only satisfies the requirement for members (in a barely acceptable manner), but doesn't satisfy the needs of the BoD to be able to update pages in a timely manner if the HTML is so bad it makes the maintainer unable or unwilling to take the significantly extra time to update the site.
|
If Scott sets it up so the secretary can upload the minutes and the newsletter editor can upload those, then they can use any tool they wish to create that content.
There are great content management systems that do amazing stuff but those are not supportable at this scale for the opposite reasons. You would spend more time managing the management system than just managing the content manually.
It all goes back to using the right toll for the right reasons. This is true for web content as it is for application code.
I agree with you, and wouldn't use Word to manage a core framed page with embedded much of anything. But it works fine for creating end pages especially Quick and Dirty. So does Excel.
I can't imagine hand coding or even attempting to import some of our Excel sheets into an GUI HTML editor. No matter how bloated the Excel exported HTML code is, I'd live with it.
A schedule is an end document, and thus Word is an acceptable HTML creator IMHO. This is especially true because the creator is likely to maintain it in Word until he is given a better easier tool, and even then, they may not choose to use it. Heck, I never did get some of our past board to stop using spaces for formating and thus had to recreate much of the material they sent me to make it web friendly.