Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 47
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    275

    Web designers....which one you belong to?

    I saw this on another forum so I thought it would be fun to do it at WHT

    How much do you know about HTML?
    After some reading there's this list of "generations" of web designers

    a) Old School Style, those who learned html in the hard way, by using notepad and all the code is done there, even now notepad is their favorite editor for coding.

    b) WYSIWUG School Style, Dreamweaver & Front page Lovers!, those who think that adding a bold style means to click on the B bold button, and that also suffer when they have to add an external Javascript.

    c) W3C School Style, they preach w3c standarts everyday, they have as default webpage the W3C Validator.

    so..which one you feel related to?

    I have a little bit of all, started as WYSIWUG then I moved on to W3C style and added some of the old school style, i'm actually using notepad and validate all my coding on w3c

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    5,441
    I use a nice text editor (emeditor.com) and code to standards, but I don't really like w3c.

    So where do I fit in?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    State of Disbelief
    Posts
    22,953
    WYSIWUG?
    WYSIWYG
    What You See Is What You Get.

    I use DW, but tweak it quite a bit. Mostly I use CSS now for layout where possible, and DW is not the best for that. I go back and forth between TopStyle and Note Tab Pro.
    Having problems, or maybe questions about WHT? Head over to the help desk!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    WYSIWYG = What You See Is What You-and-only-you Get

    A and C

    Dreamweaver's ok in code view, but I prefer Homesite to it still.
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    EIB Network
    Posts
    474
    I use dreamweaver because it is quick and is easy on the carpal-tunnel. But I am a die-hard 'C' because I MUST adhere to standards. I hate running my pages through validators and seeing red errors. I hand code a lot, but DW8 is so beautiful that it really is a gem.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,910
    I'm pretty much with WYSIWYG and Old School.

    I use Dreamweaver primarly which is a powerful application, but it's good to actually know some HTML to fix anonying problems that Dreamweaver can create...
    Patrick William | RACK911 Labs | Software Security Auditing
    400+ Vulnerabilities Found - Quote @ https://www.RACK911Labs.com

    www.HostingSecList.com - Security notices for the hosting community.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    275
    okey..I had a grammar mistake, thanks for remind me in that peculiar way lol.. I can't edit the first post tho

  8. #8
    I hope no one uses a WYSIWYG to design/develop in the professional industry. DW is alright in code view. I use BBEDIT

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    State of Disbelief
    Posts
    22,953
    It's used by pros all over the world. Of the WYSIWYG editors, it's one of the best...but not perfect, that's for certain.
    Having problems, or maybe questions about WHT? Head over to the help desk!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    EIB Network
    Posts
    474
    Cheeto... I would hope all pro designers would use DW. I would not hire a designer on my staff who was not proficient in DW, strictly for reasons of efficiency. Hand coding sites is okay, but your time is better spent doing other things. You don't have to accept whatever code is created for you in WYSIWYG, as you should always skim through and hand-edit any particular coding faults that occur. But WYSIWYG has come so far as of recent that the old stereotyping of these applications is non-sensical.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by seodevhead
    Cheeto... I would hope all pro designers would use DW. I would not hire a designer on my staff who was not proficient in DW, strictly for reasons of efficiency. Hand coding sites is okay, but your time is better spent doing other things. You don't have to accept whatever code is created for you in WYSIWYG, as you should always skim through and hand-edit any particular coding faults that occur. But WYSIWYG has come so far as of recent that the old stereotyping of these applications is non-sensical.
    I wish this was true. I wish any of this was true. Unfortunately, even the best WYSIWYG editors are still critically flawed in many ways. The flaws don't generally show up until you try browsing in different environments, under different circumstances, but the best markup produced by a WYSIWYG editor will be much less efficient, and typically less user-friendly and SE friendly than the best markup producable by hand.

    The biggest issue is speed. It takes time, but I've found hand coding to be much faster than WYSIWYG editing, simply because done properly, you'll end up producing less code, and your only limitation then is typing speed. I'm simply not a fan of purchasing software that does a worse job than me, that I then have to clean up after. It just doesn't make sense.

    I've seen many job descriptions where either WYSIWYG developers or hand coders could apply. I've also seen many where they say WYSIWYG developers need not apply. But I've never seen someone excluded from a job with hand coding skills...
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  12. #12
    This is a delayed response to SEOdevheads message:

    Seodevhead – I will agree that people should be proficient with DW, but not all work places have that as their standard editor. It is a must that a person should know how to hand code a full site if they are going to be in the industry. WYSIWYGS have come far, but I feel that I don’t have much control over my code when using them. Also if you are proficient with coding it shouldn’t take a long time for you to layout a page, I think it is quicker to hand code over a WYSIWYG. I don’t like all the extra code that is added when using a WSYIWYG either.


    The_pm – good points.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    EIB Network
    Posts
    474
    Cheeto/the_pm... i may be wrong, you both make good points. If you can type code faster than you can work with DW, then by all means, CODE!!! I like dreamweaver for the abilities to quickly hyperlink, add images, simple stuff like that.. I use all the keyboard shortcuts, which really speed things up like using shortcuts in Photoshop. Like you said Pm, there are still flaws with progs like DW, but if you generally create simplistic styled webpages without all the bells & whistles, the new DW8 does surprising well as far as code cleanliness. I think there is an art in and of itself in using DW... to getting the code you want. But like you said, why bother if hand coding is fast enough. I apologize for my ill-conceived statments. Good points.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Surrey BC
    Posts
    1,319
    Old skool way as you would call it and I LOVE tables I tried to get use to DW but found working with it pretty irritating. I'd rather copy and paste in Textpad.

  15. #15
    I'm a mix of b and c. I started out in Dreamweaver, but have become more standards aware over the years.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    153
    B and C for sure! I self-taught HTML years ago, then at College I learned CSS (the wrong way...). Finally, I'm switching to XHTML, always sticking to web standards.
    Michele Bugliaro Goggia, designer SUP in visual communication
    webmaster: www.ufopsi.com

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    44
    I am option C.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    99
    a bunch of B, and increasing amount of A, and a good bit of C

    I started several years ago sort of hobby/interest like with basic editors, then left it all behind, then started up again a few years ago and started a business. I started then with DW.

    As I've progressed and my sites have become more complex (I develop nearly exclusively XHTML/CSS/table-less) I've used less of the WYS features and have been writing more code in code view and previewing in multiple browsers. Actually, most of my sites now just don't render correctly in design view.

    At the end of the day, it comes down to whatever gets the job done with the most value for the client and yourself.
    SEO Focused Web Design - Identity Developments - it's not about websites, it's about your identity.

    || The game has changed..... Internet Marketing 4 Ps 2.0 ||

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Barcelona, Spain
    Posts
    3,397
    I prefer DW8 in codeview. It's colorcoding is just unbeatable.
    hi there!

  20. #20
    I guess i'm A and B.

    I use dreamweaver (to hand code). I agree, the colouring is so much easier ^^

    But yes, I can create an external javascript by hand coding

    Ed

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    275
    quite interesting the replys here, gives me idea about the different ways a designer works

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Oxford, England, UK
    Posts
    828
    DW doesnt deserve to be in same category than Frontpage. Frontpage is like word, DW is actually good.

    DW and W3C group for me (even if I can design in notepad alone).

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Fernandez
    DW doesnt deserve to be in same category than Frontpage. Frontpage is like word, DW is actually good.

    DW and W3C group for me (even if I can design in notepad alone).
    I prefer front page,simply because its code its cleaner than DW..have u ever seen the tables code of DW?

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    State of Disbelief
    Posts
    22,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco
    I prefer front page,simply because its code its cleaner than DW..

    Having had to clean up after many a FP site, I can't say I agree at all.
    Having problems, or maybe questions about WHT? Head over to the help desk!

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco
    I prefer front page,simply because its code its cleaner than DW..have u ever seen the tables code of DW?
    That's sort of like saying I prefer getting punched in the head more than getting kneed in the groin, because you recover more quickly. They're still both crap
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  26. #26
    I learned HTML with notpad but now I use Deamweaver.
    When I need to edit code by hand I can normally do it with out a problem.
    Last edited by Sops; 12-10-2005 at 11:55 PM.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by bear

    Having had to clean up after many a FP site, I can't say I agree at all.
    ...sames goes to DW in my personal experience!

    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm
    That's sort of like saying I prefer getting punched in the head more than getting kneed in the groin, because you recover more quickly. They're still both crap
    indeed both crap but what if i had to choose one..still FP

  28. #28
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco
    ...sames goes to DW in my personal experience!



    indeed both crap but what if i had to choose one..still FP
    You can always choose nVu. It's free and the markup is much better than those other two

    It's still not nearly as good as hand coding, but it's better than the paid crap.
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Space Coast, FL
    Posts
    160
    d) Code to w3C standards with Dreamweaver to save hours of tedious work, and laugh at those stuck with notepad.
    Loading Deck
    Freelance web designer
    XHTML CSS web sites

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by Graphicism
    d) Code to w3C standards with Dreamweaver to save hours of tedious work, and laugh at those stuck with notepad.
    stuck? I think after a while notedad simplicity is quite good to code with w3c standarts, or at least in my experiencie

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Oxford, England, UK
    Posts
    828
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco
    stuck? I think after a while notedad simplicity is quite good to code with w3c standarts, or at least in my experiencie
    I prefer to not have to preview in a browser to see my layout constantly

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Space Coast, FL
    Posts
    160
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco
    stuck? I think after a while notedad simplicity is quite good to code with w3c standarts, or at least in my experiencie
    Thats why I laugh...

    I mean lets be serious, why go through the time of setting up a document in notepad and setting out all the divs or tables when DW can do it for you, in the exact markup? Don't get me wrong I need to edit and know the code I am working with, but it looks sexier in DW than it does in notepad.
    Loading Deck
    Freelance web designer
    XHTML CSS web sites

  33. #33
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Graphicism
    Thats why I laugh...

    I mean lets be serious, why go through the time of setting up a document in notepad and setting out all the divs or tables when DW can do it for you, in the exact markup? Don't get me wrong I need to edit and know the code I am working with, but it looks sexier in DW than it does in notepad.
    If you're talking about DW code view, I'm with ya. The WYSIWYG view is garbage, but the code view is very nice.

    Still, I'm so used to Homesite, I still have to say I prefer it. It's a lot lighter than DW in CPU and RAM load, and it's the architecture on which DW's code view was built anyway. But there are some pretty darned good freeware text editors that come reasonably close...
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Space Coast, FL
    Posts
    160
    Yeah I was talking about the page view, however I use the WYSIWYG for setting up the document, placing css etc. If you design to the new standards, that being XHTML, then 90% of the time you are spent playing with CSS, which is of course text, when it comes to applying the css to your design it helps to see it on screen.

    I wouldn't consider myself a coder, more so a designer, however I design in code... if that makes any sense.
    Loading Deck
    Freelance web designer
    XHTML CSS web sites

  35. #35
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Ahh, for good visual CSS, I suggest TopStyle, which works seamlessly with Homesite (and possibly with DW?).
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Space Coast, FL
    Posts
    160
    I'm not familiar with Homesite, I've never strained away from DW, as far as I am aware DW can do all that TopStyle promises... I mean I can do XHTML Strict 1.1 with it for instance, and test it through DW for all browsers etc, it also shows me how it will look. Other nice things are it fills in the rest of the CSS string for you, for instance if you are entering a border, simply type 'bor' and it asks for a size, style and color... Homesite might do this, not sure.
    Loading Deck
    Freelance web designer
    XHTML CSS web sites

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Fernandez
    I prefer to not have to preview in a browser to see my layout constantly
    I do

    Quote Originally Posted by Graphicism
    Thats why I laugh...

    I mean lets be serious, why go through the time of setting up a document in notepad and setting out all the divs or tables when DW can do it for you, in the exact markup? Don't get me wrong I need to edit and know the code I am working with, but it looks sexier in DW than it does in notepad.
    now i laugh because of the "Sexier". I dont take off the credit of what DW can do but you know..its about preferences after all, each one of us handle this in a VERY different way (as i can tell), probablyin the future I might "upgrade", who knows

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    254
    I'm an old school designer, but I do validate pages now.. and I use dreamweaver but not because I can get help.. it just presents it visually to me better.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Surrey BC
    Posts
    1,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Graphicism
    but it looks sexier in DW than it does in notepad.
    Sexier? I'm sure your customers could care less how sexy DW looke dto you while building their site.

    I use to use Homesite quite a bit before Macromedia bought them out. Used it till about '02 when I tried Textpad. Been using it since. I acutally find working in DW irritating even in code view.

  40. #40
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Graphicism
    I'm not familiar with Homesite, I've never strained away from DW, as far as I am aware DW can do all that TopStyle promises... I mean I can do XHTML Strict 1.1 with it for instance, and test it through DW for all browsers etc, it also shows me how it will look. Other nice things are it fills in the rest of the CSS string for you, for instance if you are entering a border, simply type 'bor' and it asks for a size, style and color... Homesite might do this, not sure.
    Topstyle goes a couple steps beyond this. It presents you with a menu in one column where you can pick and choose your styles, and it comes with a handy guide that tells you which styles are supported by what browsers. It has auto complete and a preview pane to show you what you've created up to that point.

    Topstyle is a great tool for developers really getting to learn their CSS. But nowadays, I just find it to be a whole lot faster to type out what I want and not have menus open up on me while I'm typing. So, I'm strictly using Homesite. My version is 5.0, which is a few years old now. It might very well be the functionality about which you're talking in DW is part of Homesite too now. It wouldn't surprise me, since nearly everything inside DW code view origininated in Homesite anyway.
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •