1

I am currently putting together verbiage for a website redesign and I am finding it difficult to determine the best format for submission. The content needs to be reviewed by stakeholders and submitted to translators, web designers, and IT.

Is there a standard document that writers currently use?

Note: The new site design is not yet completed. We are expected to write a document that details content which will be carried over as well as new content.

4
  • Welcome to the site! I've wondered much the same thing; generally I've used Word files to take advantage of the track changes features, but it's a little clumsy since it involves an extra copypasta step. Oct 22 '14 at 16:21
  • I'd suggest Word as well for the same reasons. Oct 22 '14 at 17:28
  • Thanks for the comments, and word is my preferred choice as well, but for example how do you layout the content when a page has mutiple sections in the body and the reviewer cannot visualize how it will fill a page (one of my current issues)?
    – Ben
    Oct 22 '14 at 18:34
  • 1
    A reviewer of content has no input into layout. The web designer will lay it out him/herself, and at that point can print to PDF for the IT person. Oct 25 '14 at 0:09
2

I do not fully understand your question. Do you already have a working site which is incomplete, but some of the content and design is already there? Are you in a pure planning phase?

Well, nonetheless let me give you an answer. I do not know how much of your part is 'to program' that website, but I am a programmer, so I tell you my favorite approach. And that is: Use the smallest available 'chunk' which can represent your website (in a browser) and continually improve from that base. Then whatever part is finished, can be reviewed by the stakeholders easily using a browser.

That would mean the website must be built in some way. Which means that you need some kind of sources to build the site (content, style info). That source (like source code) should be best available in human readable file formats (Word format <> human readable).

If you have sources in human readable formats, you can use source control software (SVN, Git) to store these sources. Everyone can change them. The changes are kept in a history, can be reviewed, tracked, committed, rejected.

Source does not necessarily means HTML code or something like this. People who are only interested in the content, should be able to only see and touch the content files. The build process has to care about putting these files into something that is visible in the browser (html, php, I do not want to go in the details, this is not StackOverflow).

I love tracking all changes using source control, but I know that managers can be easily horrified by this (like I can be horrified by Word documents). So a lot of people have to agree to this concept.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.