After all, if the future of the web can be divined we will all be building nothing but Word Press sites in a matter of a couple of years anyway, right?
My web class is underway. As I was prepping a few of the assignments I came up against this question, "Which is more valuable: building static pages or building templates for dynamic content?" Personally, as I develop pages for Multnomah University I can't afford to trap that content into one location. The true value of mark up in my opinion is that it frees your content to be re-purposed.
By and by, the development necessary to utilize dynamic content seemed too focused in web development and beyond the scope of my class. But I still wonder if conceptually students wouldn't be better served to see a website's design as just a temporary skin housing external content. For example when discussing CSS and CSS page layout (love it or lump it) one of its tenants is how easily a site is redesigned without changing the (x)html structure, however, another strength is that CSS is agnostic to the content involved. Thus, when building out a design we style a content block with every detail of our style guide and it is ready for any dynamic content that might come its way. In this sense, it might be that a static page is no more than a dynamic page with you as the manual cms.
Just some questions to mull before you scrap it all and do nothing but xslt.
When was the last time you built a static page? Does is still have value and where?