Re: html vs. WYSIWYG

Robin:

Meaning no disrespect but this subject has been beat to death and in the
broader picture, these days, it is quite probably, no longer relevant.
WYSIWYG has come a long way from that first version of FrontPage.
After all, HTML is HTML and it does not matter a whit whether it was written
by a program's memory of an individual's memory.

Either one can write good tags and bad tags. The thing that the web author
must keep straight is WHICH ones are good and which are bad. Example:
Netscape will not support a Marquee whether it's coded by a program or by
hand. Nor--in a like manner--will IE support <blink>.

At present I am trying to encourage my 70 year old gray matter to bed down
in comfort with JavaScript. The idea of encumbering that poor old head full
of wooziness with simple HTML when FrontPage or any number of similar
programs will do it with such ease and in a very real sense, validate code
as it writes, just seems a bit silly.

In fact--I just wish I could afford FP2K. It has a Script writer that helps
embed JavaScript into the HTML. Works kind of like CoffeeCup's Style Sheet
Maker. It would sure eliminate a lot of typos.

But--This is not to say that one ignores HTML. Far from it. But trusting a
WYSIWYG to do the simple stuff allows us to concentrate on the combining of
our scripts with the HTML.

Can you just imagine having a page not "work" and have to worry--not only
whether or not the JavaScript might have an error--but also be unsure of the
simple basic HTML. A forgotten closing table tag or some such. True enough,
you can force WYSIWYG to write bad code, (or at least bad elements) but they
don't forget to close their tags. Or any of a dozen other simple boo-boos
that we humans do.

True--you could run your page through a Validator. But in a limited way, the
WYSIWYG editors already have a "Validator" built in. That's what they use to
generate the code. They even "tell" you which Standard they are using when
they write the meta tags.

I'm not trying to "knock" NotePad. However, it works best for those who
never make mistakes and have lots of time to play. Sadly, these are
unreachable areas for many of us. So we use all the help we can get.

I have yet to see FrontPage create anything in a web page that would limit
it's usefulness UNLESS someone forced the program to insert something they
should not have inserted. The only "fault" I have ever discovered in any of
the WYSIWYG editors is that the dog gone things will do what you tell them
to do.

The point is--we are getting better at using the visual editors in much the
same manner that we now use Word or WordPerfect visually. And both word
processor and web editor allow you to work directly with the text or code as
well as visually.

So--in a very real sense--it's like arguing over manual shift vs. automatic
drive. Both kinds get from point "A" to point "B" rather well these days.
Best Wishes
Ted Temer
Temercraft Designs Redding, CA
temer(at)c-zone.net
www.temercraft.com/
www.newsredding.com/


> I would like for the group to consider the following:
>
> There are many web site designers who seem to rely
> heavily on the use of
> WYSIWYG editors (cold fusion, front page, etc) to get
> web pages done. I can
> understand why some who just want to get their pages
> up fast and be done
> with it would do so. But it is increasingly becoming
> evident to me that even
> some professional designers are using this approach.
>
> There are obvious advantages to this-speed being one
> of them. However, there
> are also obvious disadvantages such as lack of control
> over the look of the
> pages and the risk of using built in HTML code that
> can't be parsed by older
> browsers thus eliminating a portion of an audience
> that may not be able to
> read  pages as the designer intended them to be
> read-or worse yet-having the
> pages totally unreadable. Also, if a designer doesn't
> know HTML how can web
> pages be edited if the need arises?
>
> What pages I have built thus far have been in HTML
> with some use of CSS and
> Java scripting.
> My view is that a good grounding in HTML is essential
> first and that the
> learning of the use of WYSIWYG  editors should come
> later as an "aid" in
> building web pages.
>
> I am interested in the groups feelings about the pros
> and cons of use of
> WYSIWYG editors.
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
> http://mail.yahoo.com/
>

HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA