Deamweaver 8

['sNiek]

Soon Dreamweaver 8 will be released:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/d.../?promoid=BINR

Has anyone used/seen a beta-version? According to the site it has an
approved css-suport.

--
Niek

[Harlan Messinger]

'sNiek wrote:

Soon Dreamweaver 8 will be released:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/d.../?promoid=BINR

Has anyone used/seen a beta-version? According to the site it has an
approved css-suport.

"Approved"? By whom?

['sNiek]

Harlan Messinger schreef:

'sNiek wrote:

Soon Dreamweaver 8 will be released:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/d.../?promoid=BINR

Has anyone used/seen a beta-version? According to the site it has an
approved css-suport.

"Approved"? By whom?

By nobody, I meant improved... sorry!

--
Niek

[Matt Silberstein]

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:01:30 -0400, in
comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.stylesheets , Harlan Messinger
<hm************ *******@comcast .net> in
<3m************ *@individual.ne t> wrote:

'sNiek wrote:

Soon Dreamweaver 8 will be released:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/d.../?promoid=BINR

Has anyone used/seen a beta-version? According to the site it has an
approved css-suport.

"Approved"? By whom?

It is funny how the mind works. I read it as "improved", what I am
sure he meant, the first time. I just did not see the typo.
--
Matt Silberstein
And now our bodies are oh so close and tight
It never felt so good, it never felt so right
And we're glowing like the metal on the edge of a knife
C'mon! Hold on tight!
C'mon! Hold on tight!

Though it's cold and lonley in the deep dark night
I can see paradise by the dashboard light
Paradise by the dashboard light

Jim Steinman

[Gérard Talbot]

'sNiek wrote :

Soon Dreamweaver 8 will be released:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/d.../?promoid=BINR

Has anyone used/seen a beta-version? According to the site it has an
approved css-suport.

MacroMedia does not believe in valid code. They prefer to use invalid
markup code to create a webpage promoting their product.

MacroMedia believes in non-resizable secondary window; that's the way
MacroMedia promotes accessibility.

MacroMedia believes in non-scrollable secondary windows; it's their way
to say "Make your visitors fit into *your* well-crafted-with-DreamWeaver
popup window."

MacroMedia believes in browser sniffing based on user agent string
detection. MacroMedia does not believe in object/feature detection. And
they are teaching you how to do the same for your visitors.

MacroMedia believes in shock-wave flash, whether the user likes Flash or
not. And they want you to do the same.

MacroMedia believes in webpages that takes forever to load, in font size
of 10px for navigation links, in webpages design that rely on an insane
amount of stylesheets, hundreds css rules, thousands of declarations and
blatant over-constrained designs.

MacroMedia believes in generous amounts of document.write( ), spacer gifs
now called flash pixels, believes in classitis designs and in the reign
of "javascript :" pseudo-links.

MacroMedia does not believe in user community driven software nor in
compliance with W3C web standards. MacroMedia believes $399 US to be a
fair price for purchasing a single licence for DreamWeaver 8.

MacroMedia has been a pionneer on making inaccessible webpages, on using
deprecated techniques, on imposing Flash to visitors, on promoting and
reusing forever deprecated coding techniques, on using again and again
obsolete MacroMedia functions for years and years.

And they'll keep on doing all of this with their future webpage which
will be promoting DreamWeaver 9 for only $399 too.

Gérard
--
remove blah to email me

['sNiek]

Gérard Talbot schreef:

MacroMedia
MacroMedia
MacroMedia
MacroMedia
MacroMedia
MacroMedia
MacroMedia
MacroMedia
MacroMedia
MacroMedia

I gather that you're not a Macromedia fan :-)

I think dat DW is one of the best 'WYSIWYG'-editors available, surely it
has it's minr points (oke, quite a bunch). But it has features to
build complex websites and using multiple templates and/or library-items
(I hate that name).

Anyway, you can give me a hint on a good alternative?

--
Niek

[Gérard Talbot]

'sNiek wrote :

Gérard Talbot schreef:

MacroMedia MacroMedia MacroMedia MacroMedia MacroMedia MacroMedia
MacroMedia MacroMedia MacroMedia MacroMedia

I gather that you're not a Macromedia fan :-)

I've never use it actually. But I've seen the code it generates hundreds
and hundreds of times on the web.
I think dat DW is one of the best 'WYSIWYG'-editors available, surely it
has it's minr points (oke, quite a bunch).
The problem is not so much the weaknesses, flaws, limitations of a tool
as much as the competence, experience, abilities of its user to begin
with. I certainly could be able to use DW 8. But I am able to avoid
using it entirely.
One thing I would definitely not use are the pre-made javascript/DHTML
functions it offers. The web is full of functions starting with "MM_"
and most of them are wrongly, badly written and people never question
these functions *because they do not understand these functions at all
to begin with*. They only look for the results. So with time, people
using DW become less and less web authors and more and more DW "operators" .

But it has features to build complex websites and using multiple templates and/or library-items (I
hate that name).

Anyway, you can give me a hint on a good alternative?

Nr 1 alternative: hand code. That's right. Start learning and
understanding what you write. I see hundreds of benefits: you'll
actually manage, update, upgrade your webpages a lot better. In the long
run, your webpages will be/should be more accessible, web standards
compliant, interoperable across platforms, media, devices, etc.

Nr 2 alternative: Nvu 1.0 <http://www.nvu.com/>. Free, user-community
driven, highly web standards compliant. Together with the CSS built-in
editor (CaScadeS), Venkman javascript debugger and DOM inspector, you
get very powerful tools for any kind of DHTML website.

Gérard
--
remove blah to email me