HTML or WYSIWYG?

racram · 15-04-2010 8:05pm #1

Hi,

I'm designing a website at the moment, doing it all in HTML and CSS code myself via notepad++. I'm not a web designer but through books and over the Internet I have a pretty good understanding of all the basics. Today I was talking to a graphic designer that recommended that I should use a WYSIWYG package and I was mad to do it the way I have been.

Is she right and if so can anyone recommend a good and easy software (preferably open source) that I should use or am I just as well to continue on myself? I only have two pages up at the moment so it's very basic. www.eventsbygalanta.ie

Would really like advice or feedback,

Thanks

Carmel

DonkeyStyle \o/ · 15-04-2010 9:25pm

It depends really... was it advice tailored specifically to your situation, or a blanket statement?

In terms of converting an existing design to html/css, or you otherwise know exactly what you want, doing it by hand is fine if it suits you... loads of people do it, myself included.
You get fast at visualizing what your css is going to do, and eye-balling how many px you need to shift something.
You grow a WYSWYG editor in your head, and you can check your changes in a browser.

If you're starting with the html/css and trying to come up with the initial design that way, then yeah there might be a case for falling back to WYSWYG so you can play around with the options and experiment inside a faster feedback loop.
In which case you should really be falling even further back to a proper graphics package, doing all your layout there, then hand coding it when you know what you want.

It depends why she said it... but I don't agree with it as an absolute rule.
A lot of people think you need a mac to do anything creative and would argue with you till they're blue in the face.

I think the major advantage of hand-coding it is that when it comes time to do something more scripted, you know where you're going and you already have the structure in your head... you won't have to sift through a load of markup you've never seen before.
Also very handy when something goes wrong with the layout... knowing every bit of css involved and exactly what it's for.

And sometimes you're boxed in by a CMS... say you need to make a layout edit inside of a wordpress post, or theme a cafepress store... knowing exactly how to get what you want inside of these confines is extremely handy.

racram · 15-04-2010 9:36pm

Thanks DonkeyStyle. I really enjoy the challenge doing it through HTML and CSS and your right, I can now visualize how it will look as I'm writing it (Or how it should look??). The designer who suggested WYSIWYG to me uses dreamweaver and just thought I was mad taking the time to write every page via HTML!

Thanks again.

16-04-2010 9:49am

It's hard to know what the designer meant without knowing how they work. Some people use Dreamweaver as a 'drawing tool' and get into a big mess and produce bad code, that's not recommended. I use Dreamweaver much the same way you use Notepad++ but take advantage of seeing my code changes 'live' rather than constantly refreshing a browser. Dreamweaver also has a much better workflow (integrated FTP etc..) that can speed things up considerably.

The way you're doing it is fine, it's a good way to learn HTML & CSS, and learn it well. Down the road, I would suggest investigating more integrated software like Dreamweaver, Aptana Studio(that's free), Eclipse etc... that will speed up your workflow and repetitive tasks consdierably. Notepad++ is ideal for beginners and for small projects.

sheesh · 19-04-2010 2:22pm

Also remember that you won't be doing every page by hand you will be reusing alot of the code and changing bits that need to be changed.

Also if you write the code yourself you will know it off by heart so updating and adding new code later on will be way easier than if you rely on a wysiwyg editor, real handy if you are doing your own site. knowing the code is important.

tricky D · 19-04-2010 2:33pm

Imo WYSIWYG is kinda misleading. More apt might be WYSIWYMG (what you see is what you might get) as browsers have various rendering engines which leads to inconsistent renderings. Also throw in the box model problem for extra inconsistency.

That said, WYSIWYG editors can be good shortcutting some things that take longer handcoding. Some also have some great tools like multi-line Find and Replace and other neat stuff (some already noted).

DonkeyStyle \o/ · 19-04-2010 2:52pm

tricky D wrote: »

Some also have some great tools like multi-line Find and Replace and other neat stuff (some already noted).

Notepad++ has regular expression find & replace, which I wouldn't be without!

Nulty · 19-04-2010 3:33pm

I always prefer WYSIWYG. Dreamweaver has a live view and F12, templates, ftp get and put, code colour, Spry (if your not a javascripter), in-built site management, automatic entire-site link updates, links with graphic programmes (PS and FW), works well with PHP and Db.

You can always 'draw' and alter the code behind the scenes. Thats recommended even by Adobe. They don't expect you to draw a web site and never look at the code.

racram · 19-04-2010 6:21pm

Thanks for all your replies. I downloaded Aptana Studio and I really love using it. I'm sticking to doing my own code, I maybe limited at the moment but I'll learn.

Thanks for your input:)

HTML or WYSIWYG?

Comments