FrontPage Gets A Redesign

XML, XSLT and maybe, VALID code output.

[digitalghost]

"We've heard in the past that customers felt our code wasn't transparent enough, that we generated messy code," she said. "We've really focused on generating clean, industry-standard HTML code."

Full Story [zdnet.com.com]

I'm hoping industry-standard means valid. ;)

[pageoneresults]

I'm hoping industry-standard means valid. ;)

Hey dg, don't be baggin' on my editor of choice!

It would be nice if any of the WYSIWYG editors out there produced valid code, unfortunately they do not. It all comes down to the user and their understanding of what can and cannot be done.

I just finished up a site that is valid XHTML 1.1 and it was built entirely in FP. Yes, I do hand code, cut and paste, and quite a few other things that the typical FP user would not want to dabble in. But, in the right hands, any tool can produce valid code if used properly.

I'm definitely looking forward to the new version. I was tempted to do the BETA but figured I'd wait based on MS BETA history. ;)

[digitalghost]

I've got Frontpage, DWMX, HTMLkit and of course notepad. All of them are equally capable of creating clean, valid code, or crap.

I'm just happy that MS is aware of the problem and that they seem to want to do something about it.

Now if all the browser makers would make browsers that render valid code properly...

[pageoneresults]

Have you used the feature in FP2002 to convert to xml? It's a nifty one and it goes like this...

Right click page while in html view. Select Apply XML Formatting Rules.

I was able to take a newer site recently developed and ran it through that routine. I managed to get both XHMTL Strict 1.0 and XHTML 1.1 validation with few adjustments.

[bill]

I just finished a handful of XHTML 1.0 Strict sites on FP2002. You do have to work around some of the quirks of FP and avoid some of the tools, but I agree it can be done.

The thing that strikes me about this new valid code in FP hype we've been hearing is why have none of the FP2003 beta testers mentioned this? I know we've got a few here...how about it? Is this Redmond hype working the CNet News, or is it true?

[scockerham]

Bill,
What do you mean when you say avoid some of the tools? I am just starting to learn the code side of things. I have all kinds of questions such as:

What code should I focus on? HTML 4 or XHTML or PHP etc.

How much time should I put into learning scripting etc.

Right now I use all kinds of tools to get the desired effect I am looking for. I use frontpage, dreamweaver, and Adobe 7's tool for assembling a photo album. I take code from other websites and try to find out what part of it does the part I need and use it. Anyway I am starting to bring my websites into compliance with the standards set forth by W3 and would like to know what tools exactly will give me garbage code.

Stephen

PS. I am new to the developement side of things...I am a hardware guru. I am however running 2 IIS servers, 1 Apache server (just fired it up and got the virtual sites working, other than that I am still lost) I also have two registered name servers.

[ScottM]

I've got a copy of 2003 beta, but I haven't installed it yet.

I have been running 2003 beta office without any real problems for over a month. The only bug I've found it when copying from an email and pasting to a form on the 'net. It crashes IE6.

Other than that, I like it. One of the neat features is the sidebar clipboard that stores up to 24 items.

Maybe later this week I'll load up 2003 and give it a go.

As a quick aside, I remember someone here saying where the default meta-tags are kept and how to edit them- can someone remind me via sticky?

[bill]

Bill,
What do you mean when you say avoid some of the tools?

Sorry, I haven't been back here for a while...

Avoid the FP tools that interact with FP server extentions. Things like the FP generated navigation bars and the like...Those components/tools have been the cause of most people's complaints concering FP's sloppy code.

What code should I focus on? HTML 4 or XHTML or PHP etc.

I'd say that XHTML and CSS would be good to learn for site coding. PHP is another animal altogether.

I've got a copy of 2003 beta, but I haven't installed it yet.

I still haven't heard from anybody about this. Does FP2003 produce cleaner code out of the box?

[edited by: bill at 8:10 am (utc) on July 4, 2003]

[NeedScripts]

Well if you look at [microsoft.com...] you will believe FP is getting a real big update.... WoW .. I cannot wait to get my hands on it.... from now work will be even more fun ;)

NS

[bill]

...but as you well know, what MS says, and how the program works are not always the same ;). I just hope it lives up to half the hype it recently got about clean code.