Easily implemented improvement?

[dogbertbh]

It's like we all bought this great new screwdriver and EVERYONE loves it.

Then someone says "But someday I'm gonna need to put in a LOT more screws - can't you turn this into a screw-gun so I can do that later?"

The manufacturer says "We made a screwdriver, you'll have to do them by hand"

But the people who need the screw-gun continue to ask to have it made into one so it fits their needs. When it's recommended they buy an actual screw-gun, they explain that it would be too heavy and they don't really want to use one.

It does the job it was intended to do. No less and certainly more than I ever expected.

But it is what it is. It's a WYSIWYG website development tool.

PLEASE don't water it down trying to make it into things I don't need to make it suit your needs. You can use Dreamweaver or GoLive or any number of Pseudo-WYSIWYG design tools and leave the simple web design to those of us who NEVER EVER EVER want to see the code.

[stuart1980]

Or you could employ someone else to look at the code... (-:

[ss-kalm]

Or you could employ someone else to look at the code... (-:

Why????? - we neither want nor need to look at the code ............

[remi]

@Keith and Bobby: The message is clear: You don't need, don't like and will not look at the HTML code. That's 100% ok, nobody is saying a bad word about this and there is no reason to be concerned from your side. Ok?

The only thing we should try to change after more than three weeks of such discussions is, that you're also trying to accept the standpoint and needs of others the same way as others are accepting your point of view. It's only fair.

Remi

------------------------
Disclaimer 1:
I don't use Xara Web Designer, therefore it could be, that my answer may not consider the current features of Xara Web Designer.

Disclaimer 2 (necessary these days):
I'm not implying anything I haven't said.

[ss-kalm]

....You don't need, don't like and will not look at the HTML code.............that you're also trying to accept the standpoint and needs of others the same way as others are accepting your point of view. It's only fair.

Actually Remi, your making an assumption that isn't true ... I started developing websites in 1995 by writing the "code" out in windows notepad, and have grown from there. I am quite comfortable "slinging code" (even if a little behind the times these days).

The point that I am trying to get over is that for simple sites (and I feel the need to stress simple, because I feel that is where XWD is targeted and that is where I think Xara is aiming) that you really don't need to see the code.

However I appreciate that for a more complex site then you do need the code. I would not dream of doing one of my larger sites (100+ pages) in XWD as I feel they would probably choke. The thing is, I don't think that that is Xara's target demographic for XWD and I am trying to respond accordingly. I fully understand and to some extent agree with your point of view!

You can't have a meaningful discussion if everyone agrees. Sometimes, by taking a contrary stance, you can learn something from the responses, and I am learning a lot on these forums. I really don't mean to antagonise, I'm just saying what I feel. I apologise if I have caused offence.

[pauland]

We're all grown-ups here. Do we really need colour coded text and capitals to try and get a point across? I don't think so.

I suspect the core demographics for XWD is not a web designer who "needs to be at least partially aware of some coding issues to maximize the website they are designing with XWD". Most XWD users are just very pleased they can develop a website at all let alone fuss over intricasies of HTML tags.

Give Xara and covoxer a break. They've done an amazing job. It doesn't have to be perfect (for a first release, anyway.. ;-) ).

[Scotty]

Hi,
I agree with pauland, let the 'coders' code if they want, and lel web designer code away till hes/her hearts content. Xara has done a great job with designer for first realease!!!
I went to the w3c website and had a look at the recommendations before them...if coders want to sift through all that and then work in 'notepad' have fun!!
I would imagine the coders stick with the html4.01 recommendations and haven't realy examined the new stuff.
I wouldn't want too!!
The big companies can pay the large amount they pay for some one to do that.
Jim