View Single Post
Old 03-21-2005, 09:27 AM   #4
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1

Firstly, by the username you may have guessed, I am Jamie Harrop, the author of the article.

I would like to thank Ove for taking interest in the article and offering to reprint it over here.

Also, thank you to Mike and ranjan for your comments.

I would like to address these comments that have been made so far, so, here goes.

While I agree with much of what was said, their are other advantages to using a WYSIWYG editor.

1. Site organization
2. Dynamic site creation (database based information)
Now this is where I say my practical knowledge of WYSIWYG editors lacks compared to some people. Thanks for pointing these out Mike, I would love to say I will update the article with these added but, at the moment, it is been posted on way too many sites for me to contact one by one.

While the 2 mentioned editors are not perfect, they have come along way in adhering to standards and accessibilty guidelines.
Dreamweaver for example does have extensions available for accessiblity checking within the program.
Hopefully it was noticeable that I touched upon DW's learning curve in adhering to standards and accessibility in the article. As for FP, I couldn't find anything to say it had done so, if anybody can come up with something please let us know.

Since my company primarily does intranets I also have to look at user updating of pages. When a client of mine has their network based on Microsoft servers, it is much easier for me to write their intranet using Front Page and DWT's (templates). This way they can update their pages without messing up the underlying structure.
Now, I can't 100% understand how your company does everything with the Intranets but in my past experience, when it comes down to developing a Website they are a whole different boat than an Internet. In my experience you know exactly who your audience are with an Intranet and what software they have avaliable. If this is the case I wouldn't have any problems using a WYSIWYG editor (although, me being me I probably wouldn't due to my hatred of them).

Your turn ranjan, I would like to say you made some very convincing and valid points in your post.

Firstly I think that an editor is only as good (or bad) as the coder using it.
Bang! You hit the nail right on the head with that. You are spot on, now, I believe DW and FP are two very different programs. In my experience of what I have seen, as I said in the article if the end user knows how to handle DW then it can be a very effective tool that abides by standards and accessibility issues. As for FP, from what I have seen by solely using the WYSIWYG interface the end user finds it impossible to abide by standards and accessibility due to FP's lack of knowledge in that area.

Your saving time theory is one I cannot argue with, you win hands down! That doesn't happen often, consider yourself lucky my friend.

Your Code Library Building point, again, I can't do much in terms of defending my views, what I can say again though is that it boils down to how much experience/skill the end user as with DW.

Code scanning... most text editors have the color coding feature. Handy isn't it?

W3C Standards Checks - Some flashy text editors come with w3c validator checks, I personally use Textpad which doesn't have this feature, but, it is possible.
Jamieharrop is offline   Reply With Quote