[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Does WTSIWYG make simplicity moot? (was Re: dtds,

  • To: "Anthony B. Coates" <abcoates@T...>
  • Subject: Re: Does WTSIWYG make simplicity moot? (was Re: dtds, schemas, xhtml, and multimedia technologies)
  • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 22:38:48 -0800
  • Cc: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
  • References: <E18BeMp-000761-00@FUSMTA03-LRS>
  • User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

what does multimedia developer do
Anthony B. Coates wrote:
> ...
> 
> Not so.  The most illuminating thing for me was to have spent a couple of years
> as a multimedia developer, using Macromedia's Director. 

A multimedia developer is usually a visual person. They are working on 
creating a visual product. It isn't surprising to me that a visual 
environment would be more efficient than a textual one. But I'm talking 
about something like a computer program or a schema which has no 
intrinsic preference one way or the other.

> ...   Director opens up development to a far larger group of people
> than most programming languages do, by lowering the level of entry.

Director opens up multimedia development. That makes sense for two reasons:

  * first, as I said before, you're building something visual and 
probably every pixel counts. Doing that in a text file is no good (which 
is why I gave up on text-edited XML as a general replacement for PowerPoint)

  * Second, you're contrasting the visual abstraction layer with Lingo, 
which is a full programming language and probably at totally the wrong 
layer of abstraction. I have faith that whatever Lingo's GUI got right 
as an abstraction could be emulated in a carefully designed XML 
vocabulary (perhaps something like SMIL???) It isn't fair to compare a 
carefully designed GUI abstraction to a poorly chosen textual abstraction.

> What makes Director different to more typical programming IDEs?  Director has
> to appeal to both programmers & artists.  It would be a failure in its target
> market if it didn't.  By contrast, many technical specs never rise beyond an
> ASCII view of life and the universe.  So it is a self-fulfilling prophecy that
> they sometimes seem best handled using the plainest text editor available.

There is nothing wrong with handling data in a visual environment. I 
just argued against using that as an excuse for poor language design.

  Paul Prescod


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.