469,602 Members | 1,537 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,602 developers. It's quick & easy.

web site programs

I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs. Which is the way to go for
professinal quality code?

Ron Bott

Jul 20 '05 #1
19 2154
>From: ro*****@yahoo.com (Ron*Bott)
I'm curious what you design professionals
are using to create web pages with, text
editors or WYSIWYG programs. Which is
the way to go for professinal quality code?


Learn HTML and use a Text Editor!

Web Design-Magic-Painting-Junking-Games
INFO 2000 For You
http://www.davmagic.com

Jul 20 '05 #2
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web
pages with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs. Which is the way to go
for professinal quality code?


I use Dreamweaver - but mostly for the site management side of things. Most
of the coding I do by hand in the code view.

For professional quality code, no WYSIWYG compares with hand-coding
(assuming you know what you are doing ;-) ).

--

Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
Jul 20 '05 #3
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.
The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.
Which is the way to go for professinal quality code?


If by professional you mean what you see on msnbc.com, or other such
sites, then use Dreamweaver. It will turn out the same lousy code the
big sites use.

If you mean quality code as used on sites like w3.org, use a text editor.

--
Brian
follow the directions in my address to email me
Jul 20 '05 #4
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.
The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.
Which is the way to go for professinal quality code?


If by professional you mean what you see on msnbc.com, or other such
sites, then use Dreamweaver. It will turn out the same lousy code the
big sites use.

If you mean quality code as used on sites like w3.org, use a text editor.

--
Brian
follow the directions in my address to email me
Jul 20 '05 #5
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.
The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.
Which is the way to go for professinal quality code?


If by professional you mean what you see on msnbc.com, or other such
sites, then use Dreamweaver. It will turn out the same lousy code the
big sites use.

If you mean quality code as used on sites like w3.org, use a text editor.

--
Brian
follow the directions in my address to email me
Jul 20 '05 #6
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.
The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.
Which is the way to go for professinal quality code?


If by professional you mean what you see on msnbc.com, or other such
sites, then use Dreamweaver. It will turn out the same lousy code the
big sites use.

If you mean quality code as used on sites like w3.org, use a text editor.

--
Brian
follow the directions in my address to email me
Jul 20 '05 #7
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.
The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.
Which is the way to go for professinal quality code?


If by professional you mean what you see on msnbc.com, or other such
sites, then use Dreamweaver. It will turn out the same lousy code the
big sites use.

If you mean quality code as used on sites like w3.org, use a text editor.

--
Brian
follow the directions in my address to email me
Jul 20 '05 #8
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.
The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.
Which is the way to go for professinal quality code?


If by professional you mean what you see on msnbc.com, or other such
sites, then use Dreamweaver. It will turn out the same lousy code the
big sites use.

If you mean quality code as used on sites like w3.org, use a text editor.

--
Brian
follow the directions in my address to email me
Jul 20 '05 #9
"Brian" <br***@wfcr.org.invalid-remove-this-part> wrote in message
news:OciRa.79374$N7.9136@sccrnsc03...
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.


The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.


that's dramatic. Do you argue when your car only gets 32mpg instead of 33?
Which is the way to go for professinal quality code?


If by professional you mean what you see on msnbc.com, or other such
sites, then use Dreamweaver. It will turn out the same lousy code the
big sites use.

If you mean quality code as used on sites like w3.org, use a text editor.


I don't see anything on w3.org that Dreamweaver couldn't handle. I find
Dreamweaver quite capable of producing clean simple HTML/XHTML compliant
code. (Just like it's capable of creating lousy code -- just like somebody
using a text editor could do.)

For the original poster: learn to hand code using a text editor. You'll
probably find yourself able to handle code tweaks faster than popping back
in DW, which can be a bit slow at times. If you're working on a larger site,
hand code your template and then use DW to pump in all your content, drop in
images, etc. Then hand code to tweak. I don't think any one tool will do it
all for you.

Jonathan
Jul 20 '05 #10
Brian wrote:

The same thing 7 times.

Once is enough ;-)

I take it you're having trouble with your newsserver?

--

Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
Jul 20 '05 #11
Mark Parnell wrote:
Brian wrote:

The same thing 7 times.

Once is enough ;-)

I take it you're having trouble with your newsserver?


<sigh> like you wouldn't believe. Sorry, everyone. I don't know
who's the culprit, either. Mozilla? Isp? The news reader kept
hanging, leading me to believe the message never went through. When I
checked back in later, my message wasn't there. Resend. Same thing.
Arggghh! I did cancel most of the reposts. Again, very sorry.
(Now, will this message go through?...)

--
Brian
follow the directions in my address to email me

Jul 20 '05 #12
Brian wrote:
(Now, will this message go through?...)


Yes :-)

--

Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
Jul 20 '05 #13

"Steven Dilley" <st***********@compuware.com> wrote in message
news:3f********@10.10.0.241...
"Ron Bott" <ro*****@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3F***************@yahoo.com...
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs. Which is the way to go for
professinal quality code?

Ron Bott

To do a top-notch job, you generally need to finish by going over the

tags, even if you started some other way.
Dreamweaver is a good WYSIAWYG editor.
(You could also use Word or Netscape Composer).
Html-Kit is a good tag editor.


Do NOT use Word. This produces the most horrendous code I've ever seen! A
couple of months ago, I had to convert 400 Word docs to HTML. Most of the
time when I got done removing all the junk it added, the HTML doc was 90k
smaller. That's the size of an average page by itself!

Sam
Jul 20 '05 #14

"Brian" <br***@wfcr.org.invalid-remove-this-part> wrote in message
news:OciRa.79374$N7.9136@sccrnsc03...
Ron Bott wrote:
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.


The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.
Which is the way to go for professinal quality code?


If by professional you mean what you see on msnbc.com, or other such
sites, then use Dreamweaver. It will turn out the same lousy code the
big sites use.


I love seeing people bashing Dreamweaver.
Dreamweaver isn't any more or less likely to dump out "lousy code" than
someone using Notepad.
It comes down to the knowledge of the person using the tool no matter what
that particular tool is.
PS - If WFCR.org is your website, you have no room to talk about "lousy
code"
--
Karl Core

Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.
Jul 20 '05 #15
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 01:28:10 GMT, "Jonathan Snook"
<go***************@snook.ca> wrote:
"Brian" <br***@wfcr.org.invalid-remove-this-part> wrote in message
news:OciRa.79374$N7.9136@sccrnsc03...
Ron Bott wrote:
> I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
> with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs.


The web is not wysiwyg. Any program which claims to be wysiwyg is a
fraud. imho.


that's dramatic. Do you argue when your car only gets 32mpg instead of 33?


My web site viewed in Lynx looks nothing like it does in any wysiwyg
editor I've ever seen. If the site is the least bit complex, then the
same can be said for WebTV and Netscape 4 (among others). I haven't
looked at web sites with a Palm Pilot or similar, but I bet the same is
true there too. My web site may also look very different when viewed by
someone with some user stylesheet rules.

I think the point Brian was making is that you can't predict what
conditions your site may be viewed under, so anything that claims to
show you what your site "looks like" is at best telling part of the
story.

And if my car was claimed to get 33mpg (with no disclaimers) and it only
got 25 because I always drive in the city, then you can bet I'd argue.

--
Greg Schmidt (gr***@trawna.com)
Trawna Publications (http://www.trawna.com/)
Jul 20 '05 #16

"Greg Schmidt" <gr***@trawna.com> wrote in message
news:dp********************************@4ax.com...
I think the point Brian was making is that you can't predict what
conditions your site may be viewed under, so anything that claims to
show you what your site "looks like" is at best telling part of the
story.
Maybe I've just come to expect that WYSIWYG doesn't mean "exactly what you
get". In fact, what file format is EXACTLY the same on all platforms in any
program used to access that file?
And if my car was claimed to get 33mpg (with no disclaimers) and it only
got 25 because I always drive in the city, then you can bet I'd argue.


I think that's funny but somehow I don't think you were joking. Why in the
world do we need disclaimers on everything? If I make a product I'll just
put this in the documentation: "This may not work exactly like you thought."
Anyways, I'm getting completely off topic so I'll stop now. :)

Jonathan
Jul 20 '05 #17
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 01:31:36 GMT, "Jonathan Snook"
<go***************@snook.ca> wrote:
"Greg Schmidt" <gr***@trawna.com> wrote in message
news:dp********************************@4ax.com.. .
I think the point Brian was making is that you can't predict what
conditions your site may be viewed under, so anything that claims to
show you what your site "looks like" is at best telling part of the
story.
Maybe I've just come to expect that WYSIWYG doesn't mean "exactly what you
get". In fact, what file format is EXACTLY the same on all platforms in any
program used to access that file?


That's quite right. Word and the like are also not true WYSIWYG
applications (Acrobat is close). The term originated with applications
(e.g. desktop publishing) that showed exactly the same on the screen as
you got when you printed it. (Remember that this was before there were
many real cross-platform apps or file formats.) The previous generation
(e.g. word processors) were still operating in a text-based world so
they couldn't do things like show different fonts on the screen, and
hence you actually had to print it to SWYG.
And if my car was claimed to get 33mpg (with no disclaimers) and it only
got 25 because I always drive in the city, then you can bet I'd argue.


I think that's funny but somehow I don't think you were joking.


It was not intended to be completely serious, but rather to show a hole
in your analogy. Cars are always sold with two mileages quoted (highway
and city) for just this reason. If Dreamweaver or others claimed to be
"WYSI close to WYG in modern browsers on desktop computers", or came up
with some catchy new phrase that had this meaning, then there would be
no problem. But (to get back on topic) HTML editing apps which claim to
be WYSIWYG give the naive user false expectations, and the result is web
pages that break badly outside of the narrow scope that they were
targeted at.
Why in the
world do we need disclaimers on everything? If I make a product I'll just
put this in the documentation: "This may not work exactly like you thought."
Anyways, I'm getting completely off topic so I'll stop now. :)


I blame it on the lawyers. I believe that almost every disclaimer you
see is the result of a lawsuit that someone lost because the disclaimer
wasn't there on an earlier version and some moron hurt themselves using
the microwave to dry their underwire bra while in the bathtub, but they
got a better lawyer than the microwave or bra or bathtub company did.
(Again, only half kidding)

Disclaimer: Word, Acrobat and Dreamweaver are probably all registered
trademarks of somebody or other and I'm very sorry that I've used them.
:-)

--
Greg Schmidt (gr***@trawna.com)
Trawna Publications (http://www.trawna.com/)
Jul 20 '05 #18

"Tim Lister" <ta*@pacific.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f****************@news.pacific.net.au...
Brian <br***@wfcr.org.invalid-remove-this-part> wrote:
... snip ...
EightNineThree wrote:

>I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages>with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs. ... snip ... Dreamweaver isn't any more or less likely to dump out "lousy code" than
someone using Notepad.
... snip ...
I retract the statement about lousy code. It's true that I'm judging
Dreamweaver based on the sites I've seen coded with that program, and
that it is not necessarily a fair criteria with which to judge the
software.

... snip ...

hey, guys, HTML was designed to give text STRUCTURE, not presentation.

No shit, really?
What does that have to do with Dreamweaver?

Dreamweaver can be OK, if you get some eggspurt to set it up with the
right default templates to match the needs of your audience (e.g:
accessibility), and apply the flashy tricks as a coat of paint over
the top, so if they stop working, you don't have to care, because the
page is strongly structured in depth.
I guess that "eggspurt" would be me.

the "Best in 800x600 IE6.0" brigade are a bit precious,
WTF does "Best in 800x600 IE6.0" have to do with Dreamweaver?

this is helped by using PHP and MySQL to manage content and
auto-snapshot the dataset as pages of html that only change when the
database entries change.


Again, WTF does PHP and MySQL have to do with Dreamweaver?

I manage over 760 pages (not counting the near infinite dynamic pages
created via db queries) on the internet with PHP/ MySQL, ALL OF THEM having
some involvement from Dreamweaver and ALL OF THEM valid HTML 4.01 or XHTML
1.0 (150+ of them strict and laid out with CSS).

Again, I love people who try to bust on Dreamweaver - especially when their
sites look like yours.

Get it through your head: Any tool will create a mess in the hands of the
wrong mechanic. But a good mechanic can do whatever he needs no matter what
tool he uses.
--
Karl Core

Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.
Jul 20 '05 #19
"Ron Bott" <ro*****@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3F***************@yahoo.com...
I'm curious what you design professionals are using to create web pages
with, text editors or WYSIWYG programs. Which is the way to go for
professinal quality code?

Ron Bott


Professional code and quality code don't always (in fact, rarely) go
together. Remember, a professional web designer is just a person who gets
paid to produce web pages. It doesn't mean that they're any good at it.

You've probably realised that you've kicked off the perennial 'Dreamweaver
vs. Notepad' debate again; see also 'PC vs. Mac', 'Unix vs. Windows', 'Atari
vs. Amiga', et al...it's been going on for years, and it doesn't really
answer your question.

Dreamweaver is the defacto standard for web developers *who use a web
development tool* ...and there are lots of people who *do* just use textpad.

In the real world, use whatever you're comfortable with and whichever you've
got. If you have Dreamweaver, use it; if you have Notepad, use that. It's
not important how you get the code written in the first place, but what the
code looks like when it's finished. Whichever tool you use, supplement it
with some good books.

What do I use? I use the tool/s that work for me. But it won't necessarily
be the same toolset that you should use; select your own weapon, and learn
how to write standardised html. Whatever you choose, you'll eventually be
working in raw html, but there's no disgrace in getting a little help before
you're at that point. And once you get paid for your first site, you're a
professional just like the rest of us...regardless of how good your code is!

Regards,

Pete.
Jul 20 '05 #20

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

3 posts views Thread by enrio | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Dennis Marks | last post: by
10 posts views Thread by Papa.Legba.666 | last post: by
25 posts views Thread by Dave Turner | last post: by
1 post views Thread by sainik_giri | last post: by
reply views Thread by gheharukoh7 | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.