web page x4

**handrawn** · 28 March 2008, 05:33 PM

thanks for the tip on name tagging png

**ss-kalm** · 28 March 2008, 05:56 PM

Instead of forcing the user to name it as a png, why can't the extruded jpg be (force) saved as a png in the HTML conversion too? Bearing in mind that the jpg has been seriously amended in the design process.

It's actually useless as it stands as a page design!

**Charles Moir** · 28 March 2008, 06:31 PM

Yes Keith I sort of agree, we could look at this. In fact extruded shapes are exported as PNGs by default, it's only ones with JPEG on the face that are saved as JPEGs. And if you have an extruded photo, with nothing underneath or near it (behind it) then a JPEG would be more suitable.

But I guess the answer is that in this case we default to PNG not JPEG, and let user force it to a JPEG if they want to save space. That will produce more reliable results (no background parts included in the image), but at the price of larger file size.

**BobInce** · 28 March 2008, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by Charles Moir

But I guess the answer is that in this case we default to PNG not JPEG [for extruded images]

Ah. Yes, that seems a sensible approach.

BTW speaking of choosing web page export format, could I suggest defaulting to pixel units even if the text is a whole number of points? As mentioned in the Release Notes, 'pt' units are almost always the wrong thing.

**samrc** · 28 March 2008, 07:07 PM

Just a note re the CODE.
I hear some real snobbery in some of the posts. Sounds like it's notepad for serious websites and anything less is built by people that have never seen code.

Please don't underestimate the builders of small sites. Many choose to use html generator software instead of html editors. A good portion of them don't know code, don't want to know code. BUT there is a very high percentage that do know some coding and choose to use generators for speed and ease. Often pieces of code are added to the page to create other functions that are not offered by the generators.

Those of us that know how to code often choose alternative methods to build web pages. Having XARA's new ability to create a quick graphically created page is just another resource we can choose.

I wish it could be expanded to allow an INSERT HTML box that would be loaded into the page code directly. This would allow the page builder to pass code (to insert iframe, date modified, etc) into the page code intact.

Concerning naming a picture PNG, what would happen if you have multiple objects? Only one could be NAMED PNG.

**steve.ledger** · 28 March 2008, 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by samrc

Just a note re the CODE.
I hear some real snobbery in some of the posts. Sounds like it's notepad for serious websites and anything less is built by people that have never seen code.
BUT there is a very high percentage that do know some coding and choose to use generators for speed and ease. Often pieces of code are added to the page to create other functions that are not offered by the generators.

I fully concur, TG is not a place for such elitism or discrimination.
I'd imagine for many, Xtreme4's export to HTML is going to be the feature to upgrade for. Additionally, that such exported html is editible in popular Design&Code view editors such as Dreamweaver, can mean page layout and getting the job done has just got faster. An important step in the right direction.

**ss-kalm** · 28 March 2008, 07:44 PM

I agree - I use FrontPage because it's quick ....

**handrawn** · 28 March 2008, 08:06 PM

well I'm not a web designer - but I have done a lot of coding of one sort or another - I do not want to do any more - because drawing's more fun - to borrow a slogan from another app.

this feature, together with the repel text, is going to be very useful indeed I am sure

**Tao jones** · 28 March 2008, 08:18 PM

Hi Miro, I think your webpage got lost in the talk of html...it looks fantastic, if I can get a webpage out like that from X4 I will be very happy...t

Originally Posted by minimiro

www.minimiro.com

cost me around one night with Xtreme 4 :-D

its only a part from final release... but now I can to create my webpages by my self

how exactly I want and direct from Xara, no programmers needed for this stuff ...

one of bigest updates for me from the time when Xara added CMYK suport

**BobInce** · 28 March 2008, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by samrc

what would happen if you have multiple objects? Only one could be NAMED PNG

No, Xtreme names can apply to any number of objects.

Originally Posted by sledger

getting the job done has just got faster

But potentially getting the job done rather poorly. This isn't snobbery, it's a fact, and it's not in any way Xara's fault: HTML simply isn't a WYSIWYG language.

Xtreme does its best in the circumstances, but you have to understand that there is not a perfect match between the world of the web and the world of static graphics, and trying to author for one in tools designed for the other is going to need painful compromises. You might not immediately notice the problems, but someone browsing your site with a different window size, different font size or different OS will.

Output from Xtreme is a good choice when you are trying to produce fixed-size, primarily graphical pages. For text-heavy pages that have to be accessible for people to actually read on the web, not so much.