Mr said:
FrontPage code is valid in IE, which covers nearly 100% of all browsers.
Are you serious? you must be, because I dont see alt.flame, alt.kook or
alt.lamer in the header.
Nearly 100% because every user, who has Opera, FF or something else,
still have, just in case IE and can see the page in IE.
Well no. Linux people generally dont have IE. I dont believe[correct me
if im wrong] that Macs ship with IE. FBSD doesnt, etc etc. If a site
doesnt work for me in my chosen browser(ffox), then it doesnt get seen.
That company then loses my business as Ill go somewhere else. The only
exceptions being places that I cant get the info/product elsewhere.
Odeon.co.uk for example, FOOLISHLY, constructed their site in JS et al.
And only after YEARS of complaints have offered a txt version. Now if I
wanted to see what was on at the cinema, thats the only site I could
find the exact details I was after, so I HAD to go fucking around with
options, settings and IE in order to see it. Should I have had that
access elsewhere, I wouldnt have used that site.
The basic word processing knowledge in FrontPage can make in 15 minutes
great looking web page, which will can be view by all Internet users.
DOCTYPE?????
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-us">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<title>New Page 2</title>
</head>
<body>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="6" width="100%"
height="318">
Properietry attributes?????
<!-- MSTableType="layout" -->
WTF, bullshit comments wasting bandwidth and increasing download times.
<tr>
<td valign="top" bgcolor="#CCFFFF">
Ok maybe Im being a bit *TOO* picky. repeated 6 char hex code that code
be chopped to 3 when using CSS... infact Ill take this EXACT copy and do
a preliminary tweak at the end of the post.
<!-- MSCellType="DecArea" -->
2 lines later, more bullshit tags.
</td>
<td valign="top" height="43" bgcolor="#CCFFFF">
<!-- MSCellType="ContentHead" -->
<h1 align="center">This is my first page</h1>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="136" bgcolor="#CCFFFF">
<!-- MSCellType="NavBody" -->
<h4 align="center">This is my menu</h4>
<ul>
<li><a href="#.htm">HOME</a></li>
Great to see the use of lists, but your demo links are wrong. you need
="#" or ="index.htm#" (which is the same as index.htm anyway), just for
future ref.
<li><a href="#.htm">TOILET</a></li>
<li><a href="#.htm">OUT</a></li>
</ul>
</td>
<td valign="top" height="275" width="655" bgcolor="#FFFFCC">
<!-- MSCellType="ContentBody" -->
You can put here Lorem ipsumYou can put here Lorem ipsumYou can
put here
Lorem ipsumYou can put here Lorem ipsumYou can put here Lorem
ipsumYou
can put here Lorem ipsumYou can put here Lorem ipsumYou can put
ipsumYou
can put here Lorem ipsumYou can put here Lorem ipsum</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>
Do you need a pro to do it? Of course not and many are doing it that way.
Clearly you do yes. As that code is neither valid, constructed
correctly, or using web technologies appropriately.
Above page will show properly in every IE, so nearly 100% people can see
it and read because on almost every machine is IE.
Ok, I shouldnt need to continue here, you've just proved that you have
no clue what so ever. 100% of people DONT use IE. IE is said to have 90%
market share. This will then vary dependant on site relevance, for
example, you will find that linux-support.com will have a MUCH LOWER %
of IE users than say, windows-update.com.
Looking at one of my nonOStargeted sites... 90% windows users, 58.1% IE
users, so not even windows users are using IE anymore. Now lets look at
this logically.
I run a business that makes £1,000,000 through my website a year.
If I code my site for IE specifically, as supported by the stats, I
could potentially lose £420,000. Now I dont know about you, but that
isnt acceptable. especially since doing correctly in the first place
would ensure such a loss wouldnt occur.
Don't worry about Linux, their browsers will see it properly too.
Perhaps that piece of badly implimented code yes. But when you start
coding real world sites with proper functionality and usability, the
fact that not specify a doctype will drop the browser into quirks mode,
in which it will follow old spec, plus the fact that youre using
proprietry attributes..... youre going to get alot of problems.
When you learn to drive, they dont just say "thats the accelerator, dont
worry about teh break", sure it might go, but when you get out on the
roads, youre gunna be fucked.
If that page will be seen by 1000 people, than who cares if valiadtes or
not?
Um if it doesnt validate, it means its not following the spec properly.
If its not following the spec then you can have all sorts of problems.
Who cares? £420k remember?...
Who cares about the code?
Someone who doesnt have a clue about webdesign or site architecture,
clearly.
The code is not a religion. Is the tool, not seen by the reader.
Ok, Im not religious, but you remind me of that bible story.. you know,
the 2 men on the beach, the one builds his sweet house, the other builds
his foundations and then the house... the big storm comes and destroys
the first mans mansion.... might have looked nice, but if it doesnt
work, whats the fucking point.
If works and loads fast, than is good.
No.
For a hobby page FronPage is a perfect tool.
NO!
Of course pros hate it because if you will use FrontPage, they will not
make any $.
No. Pro's often use dreamweaver or coldfusion with an underlying
knowledge of how to hand code.
Why you should spend money on something, which you could do yourself
having some fun with it!
Frontpage [afaik] ships with office. office costs money.
Notepad is free, HTML tutorials are free.
Go figure.
Why go to an expensive car garage to put more water in the radiator, if
you can do it yourself.
Yes, but you dont fill the radiator with water dripping from the tap of
a beer keg do you?
Further to your choice of site structure. Its a basic rule:
Tables are for displaying tabular data
CSS is for layout.
By using your table up there, you've added to the code base. Sure it
might be 5k, but when you have say a million visitors a month, that
equates to about 4.77 GIG of traffic. Bandwidth that YOU have to pay
for. Further, if youre stacking 4.77 gig of unrequired data down the
pipe, youre going to not only slow down your site, you'll increase the
server overhead also. All of which is MORE money lost, ONTOP of your £420k
------tweak------
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>New Page 2</title>
</head>
<body>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="6" width="100%">
<tr>
<td valign="top" bgcolor="#CCFFFF"> </td>
<td valign="top" height="43" bgcolor="#CCFFFF">
<h1 align="center">This is my first page</h1>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="136" bgcolor="#CCFFFF">
<h4 align="center">This is my menu</h4>
<ul>
<li><a href="#">HOME</a></li>
<li><a href="#">TOILET</a></li>
<li><a href="#">OUT</a></li>
</ul>
</td>
<td valign="top" height="275" width="655" bgcolor="#FFFFCC">
Content
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>
-- END---
Incorporate CSS and youll better yourself further.
1.09kb to 759bytes Ok, dont a MASSIVE difference, but that isnt much of
a page is it.