Photoshop------Dreamweaver

Hand coding whats the point?

really the point is filesize and just hardship on the browser.

I mean what do you think will load faster...

A 150 line head section or a 50 line head section?

A 3000 line body section or a 1000 line body section?
(both are examples I have not counted anything for these numbers, although I do know how to turn the line counter on in Ultra edit )

By looking at other peoples work I've figured out that most if not all WYSIWYG editors use the long way around to get them to the same place. The code they generate to make tables is about 1/3 larger than it should be...or more!....its big, its clunky...but if you are working in a production environment.....its FAST! So it has its benifits.

As of late however I've been tinkering with DIV tags and not using ANY tables..... and I kinda like it, if you know "where" (in pixels) you want something on the page you can put it there.

Zaq~

/me shudders at the thought of the potential flames...

Take a look @ photowebber. It's possibly the ultimate wysiwyg.

http://www.photowebber.com

Check out some of the reviews for yerself. There's always time to learn HTML later :confused:

Just my 2 dinars worth!

Thanks, I think I am going about this backward. I learned how to code by hand, and am now looking for a program to help me turn it up.
This page, www.zaqsworld.com, is completely done by hand.
This page, http://kehaulani.8m.com, is done with imageready.

I went through the table code from image ready, it is not clunky.

Version 2 just shipped.

The new version has a ton of new features including graphical (not just text) popup menus.

http://www.photowebber.com
(Check out the samples and features page.)

Chris Perkins
PhotoWebber Programmer

Given photowebbers homepage, which I briefly looked at, I can only condemn it's use.

It creates a completely image based web page; people on a slow connection have to wait an unrealistic amount of time and for any bulk of text you are adding yet more images.

HTML is not difficult. If you can't (learn to) code it then there's no point designing web pages, just go home and rethink your prospective career.

WYSIWYG programs are a reasonably soft introduction for beginners and a useful tool for people who know what they are doing.

Photoshop is not a web design program. It is naive or narrow minded to be using it as such. It is good for quick interpretation of what is on your mind to see whether it would look nice, but even Illustrator is better for quick layout design. Anything much more complex than what you can create in Illustrator is simply not an efficient design. You should use images to enhance your web pages; your designs should not be dependant on images.

So, imo Photowebber is not the ultimate WYSIWYG editor; I don't even think their homepage looks particulary professional. It is perhaps ok for creating one-page wonders. You couldn't touch a proper web page design which usually has to handle things like user interaction, database access, dynamic content etc.

I suppose it's ok as a brochure making tool... but I'm not a fan of online brochures; they are a bit pointless imo.