When i started making webpages like when i was 8 yrs old. i used hot dog html editor. then i found frontpage was easier so i used that. then i found it was really annoying.<br />
<br />
since then i have only been using notepad but everyone else i know and even my dad says i should use frontpage because its faster and eisier. <br />
<br />
i have a debate with them often and although the new frontpage is better than the old one i cant help but feeling prouder when i write a page from scratch with notepad.<br />
<br />
so my question is am i wasting my time or doing much better for myself by using a text editor.<!--content-->I think you should stick with notepad if you can write code from scratch.<!--content-->when it comes to it its all down to you really isnt it, wether you would rather use frontpage or wether you would like the satisfaction of seeing something you've made from scratch without any help from a program.<br />
<br />
notepad is brilliant for writing code yourself (if you can do it) and i swear by it
<!--content-->there are text editors that will allow you to see different colors for different types of code which help alot. <br />
<br />
P.S. Joe, why no mIRC?<!--content-->there are text editors that will allow you to see different colors for different types of code which help alot. <br />
<br />
P.S. Joe, why no mIRC? cool, what text editors are they then? they sound handy!<br />
<br />
also there is a program around called CSE HTML Validator which comes in useful when it comes to writing HTML.<br />
<br />
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.htmlvalidator.com/">http://www.htmlvalidator.com/</a><!-- m --><br />
<br />
check it out, its very handy<br />
<br />
hockey, i just went on there, look on the snowball thread and you will see lol
<!--content-->I can't remember which they were.<br />
<br />
I'm in there too joe, maybe you're connected through the wrong server or something.<!--content-->i will try searching for them on <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.Download">www.Download</a><!-- w --> <!--more-->.com or something like that, if i find any decent ones i will report back here<br />
<br />
i was, i was on the irc//delnet server lol.<!--content-->Originally posted by pika! <br />
so my question is am i wasting my time or doing much better for myself by using a text editor. And the answer is a definite maybe.<br />
<br />
It all depends on what you need at the time and how much time you have. I use both BBEdit and Dreamweaver, after a fashion. If I have the time to code a page by hand, I will. It depends, too, on the complexity of the page. <br />
<br />
However, if I need a page 'right now', I use Dreamweaver. It's faster, it's easy for me to use and I don't have to muck about, double-checking the coding/spelling. (Being Canadian, I sometimes forget that HTML is governed by American spelling rules. *G*)<br />
<br />
New things like trying .asp pages and when I first started learning CSS, I hand-coded. It's my way of learning how things fit together. My own pages, though, and anything that requires Java-script, usually gets done in Dreamweaver. For me, it's faster and less frustrating. <br />
<br />
If you're doing your own pages and there's no serious time limit, then by all means, hand code. But you may find later on, that you want to spend more time on the content, rather than the mechanics of a page. An editor is fine for that. <br />
<br />
In some ways, it's kinda like knowing how to drive, but taking the bus so you can do something else in the 'extra time' you have. <br />
<br />
Good luck!<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->i use html-kit. it has some colorizing in the coding...<br />
<br />
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.chami.com">http://www.chami.com</a><!-- m --><!--content-->As this is sort of a hobby, I only use notepad. But I've tried several editors and Crimson Editor (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.crimsoneditor.com/">http://www.crimsoneditor.com/</a><!-- m -->) is nice and easy to use.<!--content-->frontpage is def fisher price web design tool, Its horrible. If you can write in basic code then do it but your will save so much time using dreamweaver or something like that. Good luck<!--content-->dreamweaver is as bad as fonrtpage. don't use either one or you will spend most of your time removing invalid code.<!--content-->Originally posted by scoutt <br />
dreamweaver is as bad as fonrtpage. don't use either one or you will spend most of your time removing invalid code. No more time than the conscientious designer will spend double-checking the spelling, grammar and punctuation of code, I should think. <shrug> At least with invalid code, you know what you're looking for. *g*<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->Originally posted by Pegasus <br />
No more time than the conscientious designer will spend double-checking the spelling, grammar and punctuation of code, I should think. <shrug> At least with invalid code, you know what you're looking for. *g*<br />
<br />
Peg just copy the text into something like MS Word and get it all right in there and then just copy it back into your code,
easy done <!--content-->That works for the content, Joe, but not for things like closing tags, attributes, CSS instructions and so on. If you're in a hurry, those are usually the first things to get mucked up, especially tags. I've lost count of the number of posts we've answered that have something simple as a missing tag or misspelled attribute/value as the problem. *g* Come to think of it, I've lost count of the number of times I've had that happen to me - letters transposed or not the same case as the file they're linked to, forgotten things like > or forgetting the closing tag altogether. <br />
<br />
These are things that an editor does automatically, the basic mechanics of building a page. It's easier to find the tags that don't belong than it is to find a spelling mistake (usually transposed or missing letters) or a ; that should have been a : <br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->ok, maybe the spelling does work for the content but if you ARE missing closing tags and things like that ive found that the CSE HTML Validator program is very handy for showing things like that.<br />
<br />
i suppose no matter how you design pages, you will always encounted problems, wether it be missing tags or spelling mistakes in content. but i guess thats the whole idea of designing a website, nobody is perfect so everyone will have a mistake somewhere at some time or another.<br />
<br />
which makes making a valid website that people like a rewarding experience<!--content-->And each revision of the page is better than the last. *g* I can live with that.<br />
<br />
Actually, when I'm coding by hand, I usually drag the thing through DW before I go to the validators. *lol* Okay, so I'm a bit strange, but I hate having someone else's computer find out that I've forgotten how to write </body> or something equally foolish.<br />
<br />
Everyone's different, and in some ways, the method doesn't really matter, hand coding or editor. So long as the page looks good and works properly for all your visitors.<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->I myself also like to use notepad for just about everything, But when i need to change alot of data like variable names it can become very painstaking for the eyes to find all those little adjustments, So in that case i use Editpad lite, Has a search & replace feature which is really handy, It can also show line numbers which i wish notepad could but anyway thier my 2 first choices... jaeman<br />
<br />
Try Editpad Lite (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.editpadlite.com/">http://www.editpadlite.com/</a><!-- m -->)...<!--content-->I use web2ftp.de cause I know enough German to understand the site. That is a web ftp and you can connect to any ftp from there. Once you login there is a list of your files/folders and you can edit them right from there. So that is what i use 98% of the time<!--content-->First off all, I have to agree with a couple of people. Pegasus' idea of whether one should use a coding prog to create a web site or manual coding. The question isn't "to be or not to be" but rather, how much time do you have? Next, I want to re-iterate Scoutt's comment:<br />
dreamweaver is as bad as fonrtpage. don't use either one or you will spend most of your time removing invalid code. <br />
DweabWreamer is crap, as FrontPage is. <br />
<br />
I personally use, <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.evrsoft.com's">www.evrsoft.com's</a><!-- w --> FREE text editor. Not to make a sales speach about it, but three quick wonderful attributes:<br />
<br />
i. color coded text<br />
ii. manual coding ability<br />
iii. no time to code? point/click everything with it's awesome menu. (GUI is viewable in 4 different levels, depending on your preference: beginner/intermediate/advanced/professional<br />
<br />
<br />
Gandalf<br />
<!--content-->hmm i find for very graphical pages are better made in dreamweaver sice you can see it as you go along easier.<br />
<br />
as for content. this is not an issue since it doesnt go with my style. first i make the page then i insert the top virtual and bottom virtual. its all done seperatly. im talking about actually for the design.<!--content-->
<br />
since then i have only been using notepad but everyone else i know and even my dad says i should use frontpage because its faster and eisier. <br />
<br />
i have a debate with them often and although the new frontpage is better than the old one i cant help but feeling prouder when i write a page from scratch with notepad.<br />
<br />
so my question is am i wasting my time or doing much better for myself by using a text editor.<!--content-->I think you should stick with notepad if you can write code from scratch.<!--content-->when it comes to it its all down to you really isnt it, wether you would rather use frontpage or wether you would like the satisfaction of seeing something you've made from scratch without any help from a program.<br />
<br />
notepad is brilliant for writing code yourself (if you can do it) and i swear by it
<!--content-->there are text editors that will allow you to see different colors for different types of code which help alot. <br /><br />
P.S. Joe, why no mIRC?<!--content-->there are text editors that will allow you to see different colors for different types of code which help alot. <br />
<br />
P.S. Joe, why no mIRC? cool, what text editors are they then? they sound handy!<br />
<br />
also there is a program around called CSE HTML Validator which comes in useful when it comes to writing HTML.<br />
<br />
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.htmlvalidator.com/">http://www.htmlvalidator.com/</a><!-- m --><br />
<br />
check it out, its very handy
<br /><br />
hockey, i just went on there, look on the snowball thread and you will see lol
<!--content-->I can't remember which they were.<br /><br />
I'm in there too joe, maybe you're connected through the wrong server or something.<!--content-->i will try searching for them on <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.Download">www.Download</a><!-- w --> <!--more-->.com or something like that, if i find any decent ones i will report back here
<br /><br />
i was, i was on the irc//delnet server lol.<!--content-->Originally posted by pika! <br />
so my question is am i wasting my time or doing much better for myself by using a text editor. And the answer is a definite maybe.<br />
<br />
It all depends on what you need at the time and how much time you have. I use both BBEdit and Dreamweaver, after a fashion. If I have the time to code a page by hand, I will. It depends, too, on the complexity of the page. <br />
<br />
However, if I need a page 'right now', I use Dreamweaver. It's faster, it's easy for me to use and I don't have to muck about, double-checking the coding/spelling. (Being Canadian, I sometimes forget that HTML is governed by American spelling rules. *G*)<br />
<br />
New things like trying .asp pages and when I first started learning CSS, I hand-coded. It's my way of learning how things fit together. My own pages, though, and anything that requires Java-script, usually gets done in Dreamweaver. For me, it's faster and less frustrating. <br />
<br />
If you're doing your own pages and there's no serious time limit, then by all means, hand code. But you may find later on, that you want to spend more time on the content, rather than the mechanics of a page. An editor is fine for that. <br />
<br />
In some ways, it's kinda like knowing how to drive, but taking the bus so you can do something else in the 'extra time' you have. <br />
<br />
Good luck!<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->i use html-kit. it has some colorizing in the coding...<br />
<br />
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.chami.com">http://www.chami.com</a><!-- m --><!--content-->As this is sort of a hobby, I only use notepad. But I've tried several editors and Crimson Editor (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.crimsoneditor.com/">http://www.crimsoneditor.com/</a><!-- m -->) is nice and easy to use.<!--content-->frontpage is def fisher price web design tool, Its horrible. If you can write in basic code then do it but your will save so much time using dreamweaver or something like that. Good luck<!--content-->dreamweaver is as bad as fonrtpage. don't use either one or you will spend most of your time removing invalid code.<!--content-->Originally posted by scoutt <br />
dreamweaver is as bad as fonrtpage. don't use either one or you will spend most of your time removing invalid code. No more time than the conscientious designer will spend double-checking the spelling, grammar and punctuation of code, I should think. <shrug> At least with invalid code, you know what you're looking for. *g*<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->Originally posted by Pegasus <br />
No more time than the conscientious designer will spend double-checking the spelling, grammar and punctuation of code, I should think. <shrug> At least with invalid code, you know what you're looking for. *g*<br />
<br />
Peg just copy the text into something like MS Word and get it all right in there and then just copy it back into your code,
easy done <!--content-->That works for the content, Joe, but not for things like closing tags, attributes, CSS instructions and so on. If you're in a hurry, those are usually the first things to get mucked up, especially tags. I've lost count of the number of posts we've answered that have something simple as a missing tag or misspelled attribute/value as the problem. *g* Come to think of it, I've lost count of the number of times I've had that happen to me - letters transposed or not the same case as the file they're linked to, forgotten things like > or forgetting the closing tag altogether. <br /><br />
These are things that an editor does automatically, the basic mechanics of building a page. It's easier to find the tags that don't belong than it is to find a spelling mistake (usually transposed or missing letters) or a ; that should have been a : <br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->ok, maybe the spelling does work for the content but if you ARE missing closing tags and things like that ive found that the CSE HTML Validator program is very handy for showing things like that.<br />
<br />
i suppose no matter how you design pages, you will always encounted problems, wether it be missing tags or spelling mistakes in content. but i guess thats the whole idea of designing a website, nobody is perfect so everyone will have a mistake somewhere at some time or another.<br />
<br />
which makes making a valid website that people like a rewarding experience
<!--content-->And each revision of the page is better than the last. *g* I can live with that.<br /><br />
Actually, when I'm coding by hand, I usually drag the thing through DW before I go to the validators. *lol* Okay, so I'm a bit strange, but I hate having someone else's computer find out that I've forgotten how to write </body> or something equally foolish.
<br /><br />
Everyone's different, and in some ways, the method doesn't really matter, hand coding or editor. So long as the page looks good and works properly for all your visitors.<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->I myself also like to use notepad for just about everything, But when i need to change alot of data like variable names it can become very painstaking for the eyes to find all those little adjustments, So in that case i use Editpad lite, Has a search & replace feature which is really handy, It can also show line numbers which i wish notepad could but anyway thier my 2 first choices... jaeman<br />
<br />
Try Editpad Lite (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.editpadlite.com/">http://www.editpadlite.com/</a><!-- m -->)...<!--content-->I use web2ftp.de cause I know enough German to understand the site. That is a web ftp and you can connect to any ftp from there. Once you login there is a list of your files/folders and you can edit them right from there. So that is what i use 98% of the time<!--content-->First off all, I have to agree with a couple of people. Pegasus' idea of whether one should use a coding prog to create a web site or manual coding. The question isn't "to be or not to be" but rather, how much time do you have? Next, I want to re-iterate Scoutt's comment:<br />
dreamweaver is as bad as fonrtpage. don't use either one or you will spend most of your time removing invalid code. <br />
DweabWreamer is crap, as FrontPage is. <br />
<br />
I personally use, <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.evrsoft.com's">www.evrsoft.com's</a><!-- w --> FREE text editor. Not to make a sales speach about it, but three quick wonderful attributes:<br />
<br />
i. color coded text<br />
ii. manual coding ability<br />
iii. no time to code? point/click everything with it's awesome menu. (GUI is viewable in 4 different levels, depending on your preference: beginner/intermediate/advanced/professional<br />
<br />
<br />
Gandalf<br />
<!--content-->hmm i find for very graphical pages are better made in dreamweaver sice you can see it as you go along easier.<br /><br />
as for content. this is not an issue since it doesnt go with my style. first i make the page then i insert the top virtual and bottom virtual. its all done seperatly. im talking about actually for the design.<!--content-->