Forum Moderators: open
Also, what affect does using FP Extensions have on the server if it's Linux/Apache, and for using .htaccess?
Thanks.
Personally, I prefer FTP to "publishing". For one thing, you don't end up with all that vti_cnf junk.
On another FP site I cannot log in to the site through the control panel - there's a message that says it's because there's non-HTML code on the site.
Instead of it taking me no more than 5 minutes to pop in and make a minor change to a page right on the server, I have to download it, change it on my hard drive, upload the page "partially" done, send an email, then the web designer has to actually do the page because I have a problem with the <!--msnavigation--> and FP borders since I will NOT buy and start using Front Page. It gets all messed up if I even try. Then I have to get an email back, go back and check the page and send an email back that it's OK.
So what would take 5 minutes or less takes a few sessions and probably ends up running at least 30 minutes, more like an hour altogether with going back and forth on it. All for something even as minor as changing a word in a page title or adding an alt attribute.
I can understand the reason for using the borders for the navigation IF the entire site can be updated on the server without having to re-upload - just like with SSI, which is "normal," although it could end up being costly not to be using SSI if I decide to bill for a minimum for any changes to a page because of all the trouble I have to go through with it - which I am seriously considering doing. I simply can't understand why FP borders have to be used instead of SSI - which I could work on in 5 minutes instead of it taking minimum 30 minutes when I have to start emailing for changes to be made.
I have no idea what's to be gained by insisting on using FP extensions instead of FTP like everyone does. What do Front Page Extensions do that FTP doesn't, that makes people insist on using it? What's the advantage or benefit?
That's because they are not related, like the preoverbial chalk and cheese.
FTP is simply a File Transfer Protocol and it matters not what you are transfering.
FP Extensions on the other hand are a form of scripting engine that allow you to do nifty things when designing a site using FP such as site search, nav borders, inserting today's dates, inserting time sensitive material, and so on. If you use FP extensions then you must upload using the Publishing function of FP. If you FTP it then most of the extensions won't work.
However, the FP extensions themselves can cause problems for non FP users as you point out Marcia. These incompatabilities seem to have precipitated a general ill will towards FP itself. The Extensions have also caused problems with SERPs with bloated and non-standard code although I am seeing less problems these days as the engines get better.
However, having said all that, the only FP Bot I use or would recommend using is the "Include Page", kind of like a poor man's SSI.
Onya
Woz
>>today's dates
One line of code on an Apache server.
>>inserting time sensitive material
There is none - it's straight ecomm.
I can't understand the insistence on using the Extensions if it's ending up costing a site owner so much more money in the long run and cutting into their bottom line, unless there's really some valid justification.
>>nav borders
>One line of code with SSI, one entry in .htaccess
But then, you know how to do that. FP was originally designed as a Point and Click alternative to allow people with limited programming skills the ability to do some of the stuff those that have the skills do. To use your example, Nav borders are easy for anyone with programming or scripting skills in almost any language. But for those who don't have the skills, FP offers a way to click a few buttons and have the same results.
FP is what it is, a tool to do a job and nothing more. Whether it produces a good final product is very much dependant on the wielder of the tool and the opinion of the viewer. And, as opinions will never agree ...
>I can't understand the insistence on using the Extensions
That is something only your designer can answer.
Onya
Woz
FP extensions provide simple easy to use mechanisms for creating various elements of a website without needing more in-depth programming knowledge.
A classic example are web based forms that generate emails containing the contents. FP extensions allow the web designer to do this in a few clicks, no need to learn Perl or PHP, or some other scripting method.
I have taken a number of sites that someone else historically developed in FP for SEO projects. They are a nightmare! The usual reason is that the designer didn't know HTML, has never heard of SSI, PHP or Perl. All the designer was capable of was dragging and dropping in FP. Yes, the sites work, sometimes they even look okay, but from a coding stand point they are generally horrible.
Before someone says I am tarring all FP users with the same brush, let me say that the problem is not inherent with FP, it is with the users.
You can use FP and code in standard HTML by hand if you wish, but in my experience most FP users do not!
In your case the fact the designer is insisting on using FP extensions would scare the life out of me. It suggests they are inexperienced.
I would ask to see a site they had developed before, and then take a look at the code. WYSIWYG generated FP websites can need a lot of cleaning up before you even start to work on the SEO.
Newer versions of FP are a little better than previous versions. But poor, difficult to read, excessively padded code is still an issue.
Then you have another problem, will the designer also be the person maintaining this site while you are the SEO?
If so, and they intend to maintain it using FP you are likely to find all your work being destroyed as soon as they WYSIWYG edit it in FP.
If the designer falls into the WYSIWYG category user and they insist on using FP and its extensions for the initial development then I would insist that they allow you to do all on-going maintenance from the point you start to do the SEO.
In addition I would add 30 minutes of time per page for the initial clean up job. If they don't agree I wouldn't take the job.
>Also, what affect does using FP Extensions have on the server if it's Linux/Apache, and for using .htaccess?
Can't help you with that one. I've always removed all FP extensions from sites and put in place more standard scripts & SSI before installing the sites on my server.
>What do Front Page Extensions do that FTP doesn't, that makes people insist on using it? What's the advantage or benefit?
It's not a comparison of FTP to FP, you can FTP an FP generated site if you wish. The publishing element of FP is a pain to use for anyone that knows how to install a website by hand/FTP.
The primary argued advantage of using FP is speed and ease of use for the designer.
I still hand code everything, I don't see the speed issue at all, I spend more time thinking about what I am doing that typing or clicking anyway...so speed doesn't work as an argument for me.
Ease of use, yup, it is definitely easy to use, but if the owner wants a professionally designed website and is prepared to pay for promotion, surely they should be employing a designer that doesn't need to use a tool designed for/aimed at beginners?
Personally I hate to see FP used for professional development....2c :)
