 |
 |
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:37 PM, Riley Childs <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > designate someone to be the "copy editor", > Well, I kind of got the impression from the original question that this was kind of out of the question. However, I think it might be useful to look at development practices for a solution: for example, we don't merge anything to master that hasn't been code reviewed (well, that's not 100% true, but anything of significance), it seems like something similar could exist for your web content. Nothing goes live without being peer reviewed and it's up to the author to get a reviewer if they want to release the content, which at least then makes multiple parties responsible for what goes up. People can still abuse the system, but that's a human management issue, at that point, not a technological one. -Ross. From: Nathan Rogers<mailto:[log in to unmask]> > Sent: 4/17/2014 10:16 PM > To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] distributed responsibility for web content > > It sounds like what you need to do is a bit of guerrilla education for > people on good methods of writing for the web versus things that are not > appropriate for a professional setting. I have dealt with (and still am) a > similar situation. The best approach I find is often to do a better version > without stomping on their changes, talk to them, and explain why it is a > better approach. Eventually if you are lucky they will have that ‘Aha’ > moment. > > On Apr 17, 2014, at 9:13 PM, Miles Fidelman <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > > Simon LeFranc wrote: > >> There is no one person in the organization with the time or authority > to act as editorial overseer. What are some techniques for ensuring that > the site maintains a clean, professional appearance? > >> > > > > Give up and let chaos reign supreme? > > > > Miles Fidelman > > > > -- > > In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. > > In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra >