why not use MS Word to create web pages?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by code_wrong, Nov 12, 2005.

  1. code_wrong

    code_wrong Guest

    the code is pretty much unreadable but it does act pretty much as a WYSIWYG
    web page editor ... why do we not see more pages created this way? .. On the
    small test I did it does not cause Firefox any display problems ... so why
    not? .. it would be great for kids .. they already use word for word
    processing .. why not just save a document as an htm file and then post it
    onto a web site?

    cheers
    cw
    code_wrong, Nov 12, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. code_wrong

    Toby Inkster Guest

    code_wrong wrote:

    > On the small test I did it does not cause Firefox any display problems


    There is more than one brand of browser out there.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Toby Inkster, Nov 12, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "code_wrong" <> wrote in message
    news:43753bb5$...
    > the code is pretty much unreadable but it does act pretty much as a
    > WYSIWYG web page editor ... why do we not see more pages created this way?
    > .. On the small test I did it does not cause Firefox any display problems
    > ... so why not? .. it would be great for kids .. they already use word for
    > word processing .. why not just save a document as an htm file and then
    > post it onto a web site?



    Why would you teach your kids how to do something half assed, just to get
    by?

    --Tina
    Tina - AxisHOST, Inc., Nov 12, 2005
    #3
  4. code_wrong

    Neredbojias Guest

    With neither quill nor qualm, code_wrong quothed:

    > the code is pretty much unreadable but it does act pretty much as a WYSIWYG
    > web page editor ... why do we not see more pages created this way? ..


    Oh, they're out there. You just don't see them.

    > On the
    > small test I did it does not cause Firefox any display problems ...


    The first cigarette I smoked wasn't at all addictive.

    > so why
    > not? .. it would be great for kids .. they already use word for word
    > processing .. why not just save a document as an htm file and then post it
    > onto a web site?


    Kids can be dangerous when let out of their cages.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
    Neredbojias, Nov 12, 2005
    #4
  5. code_wrong

    code_wrong Guest

    "Tina - AxisHOST, Inc." <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "code_wrong" <> wrote in message
    > news:43753bb5$...
    >> the code is pretty much unreadable but it does act pretty much as a
    >> WYSIWYG web page editor ... why do we not see more pages created this
    >> way? .. On the small test I did it does not cause Firefox any display
    >> problems ... so why not? .. it would be great for kids .. they already
    >> use word for word processing .. why not just save a document as an htm
    >> file and then post it onto a web site?

    >
    >
    > Why would you teach your kids how to do something half assed, just to get
    > by?


    Well I have been unsuccessful in my search for a WYSIWYG web page editor
    that does page layout as simply as a word processor. Maybe I can just use
    tables in Composer but that is of course considered table abuse .. My target
    users are 9/10 years old .. they have barely got the hang of using the word
    processor .. it's all about fast results ... they can study the finer
    points of web development when they are older ...
    code_wrong, Nov 12, 2005
    #5
  6. code_wrong

    code_wrong Guest

    "Toby Inkster" <> wrote in message
    news:5n.co.uk...
    > code_wrong wrote:
    >
    >> On the small test I did it does not cause Firefox any display problems

    >
    > There is more than one brand of browser out there.
    >

    Yes I know there are hundreds ... all with their own quirks ... what a
    horrible mess .. I am almost glad that Microsoft dominate the market .. at
    least that gives us a baseline for which web pages can be tested
    code_wrong, Nov 12, 2005
    #6
  7. code_wrong wrote:

    > I am almost glad that Microsoft dominate the market .. at
    > least that gives us a baseline for which web pages can be tested


    <LOL!>

    --
    -bts
    -Warning: I brake for lawn deer
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Nov 12, 2005
    #7
  8. code_wrong

    JDS Guest

    On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 00:47:50 +0000, code_wrong wrote:

    > processing .. why not just save a document as an htm file and then post it
    > onto a web site?


    It may be an acceptable start into learning how the web works in a very
    general way. However there are plenty of tools available that would be
    better. Even OpenOffice produces beter HTML code, is free, and is
    basically WYSIWYG. (Not that I'm recommending Oo_Org for web development,
    but if you *must* use a word processor for this task...)

    (...hmm. I take it back. I just tested Oo_Org out, and it looks like
    Oo_Org is actually not so bad at all, but that;s another story...)

    In any case, here is my real world example of why not to use MS Word.
    This example may seem contrived, and it certainly won't affect everyone,
    but it is a real example that I actually ran across today.

    I built a CMS for a client. The CMS has a WYSIWYG widget in place of a
    <textarea> to edit the content. The client cut-n-pasted the HTML directly
    from Word into the CMS. Click Submit/update, and poof! It exploded. Well,
    not literally, but the page, which is generated by PHP, could not be
    displayed even to allow it to be edited again.

    The problem stems from the "HTML" that Word generated. MS Word uses XML
    gobbeldy gook unnecewssarily to, well, I don't know what it is supposed to
    do. In any case, the "<?" opening of the XML stuff broke the PHP page.

    Sure, I could design in some better error-checking and parsing of the
    submitted data. Sure, I could do something that allows the data to go in
    untouched. But the point is that MS Word does not generate valid, usable
    HTML.

    later...
    --
    JDS |
    | http://www.newtnotes.com
    DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/
    JDS, Nov 12, 2005
    #8
  9. code_wrong

    JDS Guest

    JDS, Nov 12, 2005
    #9
  10. code_wrong

    JDS Guest

    On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 02:25:41 +0000, code_wrong wrote:

    > least that gives us a baseline for which web pages can be tested


    that's a load of crap as well. MSIE 7 will come out and fsck up the whole
    web design shabibble once again. MSIE 5/6 hacks? Might break. MSIE 7
    hacks? Do we need them?

    --
    JDS |
    | http://www.newtnotes.com
    DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/
    JDS, Nov 12, 2005
    #10
  11. code_wrong

    kchayka Guest

    JDS wrote:
    >
    > MSIE 7 hacks? Do we need them?


    Do you really have to ask? ;)

    --
    Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
    Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
    kchayka, Nov 12, 2005
    #11
  12. ..oO(JDS)

    >The problem stems from the "HTML" that Word generated. MS Word uses XML
    >gobbeldy gook unnecewssarily to, well, I don't know what it is supposed to
    >do. In any case, the "<?" opening of the XML stuff broke the PHP page.


    Caused by 'short_open_tag', which is enabled by default.

    >Sure, I could design in some better error-checking and parsing of the
    >submitted data.


    Required.

    >Sure, I could do something that allows the data to go in
    >untouched.


    Maybe.

    >But the point is that MS Word does not generate valid, usable
    >HTML.


    Yep, but in this case it's more or less the server's fault. Short open
    tags don't go well along with XML (it's even mentioned in the manual).

    Micha
    Michael Fesser, Nov 12, 2005
    #12
  13. Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

    > code_wrong wrote:
    >
    >> I am almost glad that Microsoft dominate the market .. at
    >> least that gives us a baseline for which web pages can be
    >> tested

    >
    > <LOL!>


    I respectfully nominate that statement (not the "LOL", dammit! <G>)
    for quote of the month. :)


    --
    Blinky
    Killing all Google Groups posts.
    http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
    Blinky the Shark, Nov 12, 2005
    #13
  14. code_wrong

    Don Guest

    "code_wrong" <> wrote in
    news:437551e9$:

    >
    > "Tina - AxisHOST, Inc." <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> "code_wrong" <> wrote in message
    >> news:43753bb5$...
    >>> the code is pretty much unreadable but it does act pretty much as a
    >>> WYSIWYG web page editor ... why do we not see more pages created
    >>> this way? .. On the small test I did it does not cause Firefox any
    >>> display problems ... so why not? .. it would be great for kids ..
    >>> they already use word for word processing .. why not just save a
    >>> document as an htm file and then post it onto a web site?

    >>
    >>
    >> Why would you teach your kids how to do something half assed, just to
    >> get by?

    >
    > Well I have been unsuccessful in my search for a WYSIWYG web page
    > editor that does page layout as simply as a word processor. Maybe I
    > can just use tables in Composer but that is of course considered table
    > abuse .. My target users are 9/10 years old .. they have barely got
    > the hang of using the word processor .. it's all about fast results
    > ... they can study the finer points of web development when they are
    > older ...
    >
    >
    >


    Word was never intended by MS to be used as a tool for creating web pages,
    rather a transport medium for returning Word docs FROM html created pages,
    back INTO their original Word doc form.

    Word uses both bloated and deprecated html.
    Word has destroyed the reputation of FP all a result of knowlegeable
    webamsters believing the bloat was created by FP.

    FP is far perfect and still provides both bloated and deprecated html,
    however FP is light-years ahead of Word.

    I've spent nearly two years in Word groups in an effort to establish this
    points and have finally begun making headway and having others understand
    and pass on these same thoughts.

    If you desire to instruct children on web pages?
    The best place to begin is with some instructional pages designed for
    children;
    http://webmonkey.wired.com/webmonkey/kids/
    Don, Nov 12, 2005
    #14
  15. code_wrong

    Don Guest

    "code_wrong" <> wrote in
    news:437552a3$:

    >
    > "Toby Inkster" <> wrote in message
    > news:5n.co.uk...
    >> code_wrong wrote:
    >>
    >>> On the small test I did it does not cause Firefox any display
    >>> problems

    >>
    >> There is more than one brand of browser out there.
    >>

    > Yes I know there are hundreds ... all with their own quirks ... what
    > a horrible mess .. I am almost glad that Microsoft dominate the market
    > .. at least that gives us a baseline for which web pages can be
    > tested
    >
    >


    Here's the kind of crap MS teaches people!

    Two amazing ADMISSIONS by Microsoft in this KB!

    http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=886299

    Scrolling Text
    This object was created in MARQUEE. This application is not available to
    open this object. Make sure the application is properly installed and
    that it has not been deleted, removed or renamed."
    Note This behavior does not occur on computers that are running Windows
    XP without SP2 installed.

    Note This behavior also occurs if you use Word as your e-mail editor.

    CAUSE
    The ActiveX controls were disabled in Windows XP SP2 because they pose a
    security risk. There is no supported workaround to enable this
    functionality in Microsoft Office.
    end of quote

    1) MS offered the MARQUEE banner option in free Front Page Express in the
    IE 4.01 update in 1999.
    The MARQUEE has NEVER worked in any web browser outside of MS Browsers.

    2) Microsoft both knows and realizes that ActiveX has security
    vulnerabilities and YET,
    its activity is BOTH, USED and REQUIRED on most every Microsoft web
    page!

    Sorta like the pot calling the kettle black ;-)))
    Don, Nov 12, 2005
    #15
  16. code_wrong

    Don Guest

    JDS <> wrote in
    news:p:

    > On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 00:47:50 +0000, code_wrong wrote:
    >
    >> processing .. why not just save a document as an htm file and then
    >> post it onto a web site?

    >
    > It may be an acceptable start into learning how the web works in a
    > very general way. However there are plenty of tools available that
    > would be better. Even OpenOffice produces beter HTML code, is free,
    > and is basically WYSIWYG. (Not that I'm recommending Oo_Org for web
    > development, but if you *must* use a word processor for this task...)
    >
    > (...hmm. I take it back. I just tested Oo_Org out, and it looks like
    > Oo_Org is actually not so bad at all, but that;s another story...)
    >
    > In any case, here is my real world example of why not to use MS Word.
    > This example may seem contrived, and it certainly won't affect
    > everyone, but it is a real example that I actually ran across today.
    >
    > I built a CMS for a client. The CMS has a WYSIWYG widget in place of
    > a <textarea> to edit the content. The client cut-n-pasted the HTML
    > directly from Word into the CMS. Click Submit/update, and poof! It
    > exploded. Well, not literally, but the page, which is generated by
    > PHP, could not be displayed even to allow it to be edited again.
    >
    > The problem stems from the "HTML" that Word generated. MS Word uses
    > XML gobbeldy gook unnecewssarily to, well, I don't know what it is
    > supposed to do. In any case, the "<?" opening of the XML stuff broke
    > the PHP page.
    >
    > Sure, I could design in some better error-checking and parsing of the
    > submitted data. Sure, I could do something that allows the data to go
    > in untouched. But the point is that MS Word does not generate valid,
    > usable HTML.
    >
    > later...



    The solution for this is to have the client:
    1) Copy and paste from Word and into NotePad
    2) Copy and paste from within NotePad to the CMS page.
    3) Clean code with all formatting removed.

    MS-anything to MS-anything carries the bloated baggage.
    Don, Nov 12, 2005
    #16
  17. JDS <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 02:22:35 +0000, code_wrong wrote:
    >
    >> Well I have been unsuccessful in my search for a WYSIWYG web page editor

    >
    > Free, powerful, flexible, MS OFfice compatible:
    >
    > http://www.openoffice.org/


    No, it produces even worse "HTML" than MS Word. As a word processor, it's
    probably quite sufficient for most people's abilities and skills. After all,
    nobody uses more than 10 % of the features of Word. And people who would need
    a spelling checker don't use one. (OpenOffice lacks [useful] spelling
    checkers for most languages of the world.)

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
    Jukka K. Korpela, Nov 12, 2005
    #17
  18. "code_wrong" <> wrote:

    > the code is pretty much unreadable but it does act pretty much as a
    > WYSIWYG web page editor ...


    Why "but"? You listed two separate problems.

    _Advanced_ authors can use even WYSIWYG editors, if they know what they are
    doing. Novices should stay away from them.

    > why do we not see more pages created this
    > way? ..


    People who want WYSIWYG use FrontPage,

    > On the small test I did it does not cause Firefox any display
    > problems ...


    This most probably describes the inadequacy of your testing more than
    anything else.

    > so why not? .. it would be great for kids .. they already
    > use word for word processing .. why not just save a document as an htm
    > file and then post it onto a web site?


    Why should they create web pages without understanding what they are doing
    and how the web works? To be _very_ ashamed after 10 years when they
    understand that but cannot remove their old pages from the archives that
    are publicly available?

    As WYSIWYG tools in general, using Word for web authoring can be quite useful
    and appropriate when carried out by a competent and careful person. For one
    thing, Word has good spelling (and grammar) checking capabilities, though you
    are apparently not interested in such matters. Word can also turn
    preformatted text into a table, add language markup, etc. Of course, being
    competent and careful includes using "Save as filtered" and cleaning up the
    result by removing the <style> element that contains CSS-like mess, and
    writing a good style sheet instead.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
    Jukka K. Korpela, Nov 12, 2005
    #18
  19. code_wrong

    Toby Inkster Guest

    Don wrote:

    > The MARQUEE has NEVER worked in any web browser outside of MS Browsers.


    Your information is somewhat out of date. MARQUEE has worked in Opera
    since version 7.0 in Jan 2003; it was added to Mozilla between the 1.0
    and 1.1 releases in Jul 2002; it has always been in Phoenixbirdfox (or
    whatever it's called now) as that branched off the main Mozilla trunk in
    Sept 2002.

    Of course, that still doesn't make it a good idea to *use* it.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Toby Inkster, Nov 12, 2005
    #19
  20. code_wrong

    Toby Inkster Guest

    code_wrong wrote:

    > I am almost glad that Microsoft dominate the market .. at least that
    > gives us a baseline for which web pages can be tested


    We already have a baseline: http://validator.w3.org

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Toby Inkster, Nov 12, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Sharon
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    592
    Sharon
    Jul 27, 2005
  2. Mr. SweatyFinger

    why why why why why

    Mr. SweatyFinger, Nov 28, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    863
    Mark Rae
    Dec 21, 2006
  3. Mr. SweatyFinger
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,764
    Smokey Grindel
    Dec 2, 2006
  4. Nathan Sokalski
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    994
    Gaurav Vaish \(www.Edujini-Labs.com\)
    Jan 10, 2007
  5. Nathan Sokalski
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    273
    Nathan Sokalski
    Dec 21, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page