Forums | MacLife

A program like Dreamweaver is good because it gives you (nearly) instant gratification. You can quickly throw something together and have it work. There's something incredibly valuable in that... it's not a tangible thing but it is really hard to deny it.

A WISYWIG program is bad for the exact reason you brought up. It obfuscates the coding process. You're still learning, but not at the same rate or in the same depth as you would by going through and doing it by hand. Additionally, tools like Dreamweaver tend to write sloppy code and you'll undoubtedly be picking up some bad habits along the way.

It's a tough call, sometimes but I'd generally recommend just diving in and doing it by hand.


As to the other question, I'm a BBEdit fanboy. I've even got my "It still doesn't suck" T-shirt. BBEdit is sort of like TextEdit/Notepad/Simpletext on steroids. At its core, it's just a simple text editor. You type stuff in. That's it.

It's got a number of handy features built in. For the use you're describing, you'd appreciate things like:
- Palettes with all your commonly-used tags available
- FTP upload and download
- Automatic doctype
- Form-based syntax - just type in the stuff you want and it will spit out the proper code, which you can then see and learn from.

There are also a lot of free editors which people here swear by. I'd try one of those first (if I didn't already get BBEdit through work). See what you like.

Last edited by BadMrMojo (2005-05-03 12:57 pm)

I find that DreamWeaver's AutoComplete for tag names and CSS properties is helpful. But there are many other options and $400 to learn the markup is a little silly... You can use any text editor you want and I have found that there are quite a few good candidates in the sticky at the top of the forum...

But for now you shouldn't need anything like DreamWeaver. Most of us don't need it, we just like it. Especially because the Mac and PC versions function similarly and are layed out in similar ways...

I hand-code all my HTML in Dreamweaver also. Like Scott, I love the code auto-complete. The fact that DW adds the </*> tag whenever I open a <*> means that I have far fewer badly-formed HTML errors when I'm done. However, unlike Scott, I hand-code all my CSS. I use CSSEdit for that, though. It offers the same kind of auto-complete as DW does with HTML. When I get going in CSSEdit, I can absolutely fly with my coding. It also "knows" what values can go with what attributes for those times that I've forgotten.

But anyway, you're talking about HTML. Yes, it's great to know the language and you should, by all means, read that book and get as much out of it as you possibly can. However, there's nothing wrong with using coding aides like DW and CSSEdit (and dozens of others like them). When used properly, even the worst WYSIWYG editor can be a boon to your productivity.

to learn HTML you don't need any of the above.
I started learning by using Netscape free composer then viewing the code and seeing what does what. I only later got a book.
I still write all my code by hand using BBedit lite - it doesn't have any auto complete and a lot of the time I don't close tags, don't write the write doc etc.. but I can usually locate the problem and fix it.
It is much more gratifying to say you write the code your self - though take longer and usually not much better then the code that is written with other app. the real advantage is the ability to edit to the core.

zakatak wrote:

Redstone wrote:

It is much more gratifying to say you write the code your self - though take longer

Actually it's most gratifying to get it done in the time constraints you have and then to know that you did it correctly and not get fired for taking too long than it is to feel all high & mighty because you can use notepad and you memorized every css command available...

I agree totaly.  I could care less how the code gets there.  If there was a GUI that allowed me create html correctly and faster than by hand, I would use it in a heart beat.

But as it stands, with the auto-complete most things are faster in code view than using the GUI menus.  I am all about doing it quickest way possible.  (all else being equal)

guys, the real reason I code by hand is because I didn't know better and can't really afford or justify spending of software that will help - so I was trying to justify it by some fake principals..
I still use bbedit lite for crying out loud.

there is nothing wrong in using a software to help you code your way too achieving what you want!!

All of the "WYSIWYG" programs will do something unexpected once in a while. If you know a bit of HTML it's easy to fix it. The thing I like best about Dreamweaver is its split window that shows the code and the result simultaneously. It's often as easy or easier to just go and work on the code instead of trying to figure out what I did wrong trying to use the "WYSIWYG" part of the app.

MattElmore wrote:

skedit www.skti.org

small footprint, excellent autocomplete

good stuff

Hey!  Nice app.  And great price point as well.

maxintosh wrote:

I have my pasta absolutely plain, or sometimes a bit of butter (not enough to make it pool up at the bottom, JUST RIGHT) and no oil either.

Ditto, though I like it with a some garlic in the butter.  But I do enjoy a good tomato sauce now and then.

skEdit is pretty good to me. The only crash I get is that if I eject a network volume without closing the project first. skEdit will promptly freak out if I do that.

Having HTML Tidy built in and a routine to clean up Word HTML is really nice.

Last edited by Gipetto (2005-05-05 9:55 pm)

Gipetto wrote:

Oooh, now that I have Tigger I'm gonna have to give TextMate another try. It liked to freak out when loading info from networked drives, I wonder if that is better on Tigger.

Tigger

Tigger 2