Making Appropriate Electronic Publishing Decisions

Digital Output Options*




Page Image


Good: Fast, cheap, easy, certain of design, integrates well with existing process
Bad: Not easily improvable, not easily "chunkable," static, hard to index, hard to link to or from, retains page as conceptual model




"Raw" HTML


Good: Fast, cheap, easy (from WP file), easily indexed by search engines
Bad: Usually not pretty, "chunkable" as chapters only, may see higher expectations ("why not better"?)




Enriched HTML


Good: Fairly easy with minimal investment; easily indexed by outside world; can often be done by typesetters at minimal cost; tailoring for content possible.
Bad: May face higher expectations; some learning curve; some unpredictable new challenges;




Content Coding


Good: Flexible, extensible, future-enhanceable, self-defining
Bad: More costly (now), requiring higher quality control, new skill sets






* Distribution Medium--as in CDROM vs Web--is ignored as an issue; print, being well established, is also ignored.

Copyright © 1999 Michael Jensen (