A question about the code

[Soquili]

If someone creates a website using say Dreamweaver and they hand that off to a client to maintain. Doesn't the client usually use the same program? Probably because the developer specified that is what was used.

If you use Web Designer and inform the client that is the program used to create the site. Would they not be inclined to purchase that application. For one reason it is more affordable.

Another point to consider, it is much easier for a client to learn and use Web Designer than Dreamweaver.

Of course there are some clients that would not maintain the site in either case.

[Spinny]

Good points, certainly. I'm a software engineer by education and background and when I think of maintaining code it's with an IDE that's little more than a text editor with some debugging tools. I guess visual HTML development tools are more commonplace than I expect.

[nickydude]

I was taught HTML in Notepad so I've always looked at it from a coder's standpoint. Time to get all WYSIWYG methinks.

[Soquili]

I agree Spinny. I've used IDE tools for decades and actually like touching the code.

However not many of us are left that like digging into the guts of things.

People want to drop images, type a little text and make it look pretty without getting their hands dirty.

There is a symbiosis in that some people create the templates and some people use the templates. Mutual co-existance.

[Spinny]

I hear you. SOme of my concern about WD came from a few years back when I played with a WYSIWYG web designer called Cute Site Builder. The code it generated was a patchwork nightmare with frames, no style sheet, three versions of each page (never did untangle why) and not a hint of w3 compliance. Guess it's made me skeptical of such things.

I picked up a copy of CoffeeCup's Visual Site Designer the other day, and it's nice (and standards compliant) but my impression is you lay out the basic visual elements in the WYSIWYG editor, generate the code with the style sheet stuff automagically created for you (saves tedious counting and measuring), and then if you want to add the good stuff you switch to their HTML editor, which is like a coding IDE.

Again, that colored my attitude about what WD will bring to the table: it sounds like it's supposed to be a one-size-fits all solution and I'm not sure I believe in those. I'm always ready to learn differently.

[behzad]

so in another word your saying the code that this program produces will drive seasoned programmers mad trying to sort things out or the other way around?

[Soquili]

As moderator of the MenuMaker and WebStyle forums many of the questions I have answered over the years dealt with how to integrate the output of those applications with Dreamweaver and Frontpage, and to a lesser extent other WYSIWYG editors. In 2004 when MM and WS were released they integrated easily. As newer versions of DW and FP were released things didn't always go as planned.

Usually the answer was to hand edit the DW or FP generated code to include the line of code to place the javascript files for MM and WS menus.

Web Designer has the capability for people to create web pages more visually than any other WYSIWYG program I have encountered. The placeholder feature should allow practially any snippet and plug-in available more easily than other programs.

I have great expectations for Web Designer. So far my tests have not disappointed me.

My pre-release copy may not have all the added features. Just today there were updates to the information at http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dcz...btkrj&hl=en_GB

[Soquili]

Behzad that is NOT what has been said.

Web Designer code is easily read and understood by seasoned HTML coders.

[nickydude]

I did this with WebStyle. Used a template then changed it in DreamWeaver. No doubt I'll do the same here, which is good.

[Spinny]

so in another word your saying the code that this program produces will drive seasoned programmers mad trying to sort things out or the other way around?

No, not at all. I spoke negatively about the code that CSB created, but the other two mentioned here (the CoffeeCup one and Xara's WD) produce w3-compliant code. That means anyone who knows the HTML standard well should have no problem understanding the code directly without needing to resort to the original tool.

Another question: does Xara's WD produce/use a proprietary-format working file during development (and export the HTML when asked), like pretty much every other design tool out there, or does it operate directly on the native HTML at all times (which so far as I know no program does)?