From:   GORDON::BARNES        6-FEB-2001 11:46:38.32
To:     COCKCROFT
CC:     BARNES
Subj:   1st. Assignment

Dear jeremy,
From my perspective I would award 5 marks to all the candidates, except
possibly:
4.5 for Seidl in that the title was not very obvious (admittedly this is a
    presentational point)
3.5 for Lacshminarayanan... since I understand the HTML was not very efficient
    and the list of hoped achievements from the course were hidden and almost
    zero, though overall the web-document came up quite happily on my browser.
Feel free to round up/down to integers.
Yours, Paul Barnes

ACTION

After discussions with PB, the following actions were taken by JKC:

(a) Agree that the title given by Seidl was not very sensible for the browser window bar, nonetheless a title was given: so will add to comments, but will not deduct mark.

(b) Although the HTML produced by Lacshminarayanan does work, the point is that the HTML still has many technical errors: a full mark should therefore be deducted. This is particularly pertinent in the light of the HTML submitted for the 2nd assignment.

Back