my 2 pence. i think they intentionally made it terrible to get programmers
away from the html stuff. it's working, its forcing programmers into the
code behind. think about it, they could build a solid codebehind
implementation, but they couldn't build html editing robust enough? don't
make sense to me.
"Kevin Spencer" <ke***@takempis.com> wrote in message
news:#H**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Hi Steve,
There are 2 aspects to an ASP.Net page: The Page Template (.aspx file) and
the CodeBehind class (.vb or .cs file). The Page Template ideally has
almost no server-side code in it, only server-side tags. The code should almot
entirely be in the CodeBehind class definition. Where I'm going with this
is to acknowledge that VS.Net has terrible capabilities for developing HTML,
which is the vast majority of what's in the Page Template. However, it is
excellent for the CodeBehind. So, what I do is to use an HTML editor (I
use FrontPage) to compose my Page Template layout, then paste the HTML into my
ASP.Net Page Template, and code from there.
Hopefully, Microsoft will spend more time on the HTML Editor in VS.Net in
future versions. Personally, I'd like to see them integrate FrontPage,
with all of its' web site management capabilities, as well as its' HTML Editor,
into the IDE somehow.
--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
.Net Developer
http://www.takempis.com
Complex things are made up of
lots of simple things.
"Steve S" <hi***@rogersNOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:iX*****************@news01.bloor.is.net.cable .rogers.com... Whats the best way to make a site with ASP.net and Visual Studio
2003...The visual studio does not seem like the idea environment to make an ASP
page...maybe if it was just a grid on a blank white page, but
images&tables just seem impossible to work with...
