Forum Moderators: open
1. Is there any way to convert relative links to absolute links in a quick way? I have found out that when I right click to add link, FP automatically puts in a relative link, which may have screwed up my rankings in Google. While I can manually add http://www.example.com/ in front of every hyperlink I add, this will become very annoying instead of having it automated. Anyway to get around this?
2. The "rewrite engine on" is not compatible with frontpage extentions, and this is very annoying, since I want to permanently redirect my non www domain to my www. I can't figure this out, and having frontpage as an editor is screwing me with this. Anyway to get around this?
3. I use a custumized frontpage theme, but this code isn't w3c compliant. Does dreamweaver produce html compliant code?
4. Are there any other html editors on the market thats better than frontpage or dreamweaver?
Thanks everyone!
My site just got dropped from Google, and although an easy editor is important to me (FP 2003 is great), being in Google is even more important. There are a few annoyances that FP has, that may even have screwed my rankings.
Unlikely.
1. Is there any way to convert relative links to absolute links in a quick way? I have found out that when I right click to add link, FP automatically puts in a relative link, which may have screwed up my rankings in Google.
Again, unlikely, unless Googlebot is having trouble crawling your site for some reason. (GoogleGuy said that the other day that, if relative links are working, they aren't worth worrying about.)
For what it's worth, I've got a 4,300-page site that uses relative links and is maintained in FP2003, and Googlebot has no trouble deep-crawling my site.
There's a lot of grasping at straws going on after the Bourbon update (as there is after every major update). Instead of changing your editing program or making wholesale changes to your site, you should wait until the update is over (within the next two weeks or so, according to GoogleGuy) before trying to figure out what went wrong. If you have a clean site with useful content, the problem is probably at Google's end, not yours. And in any case, FP2003 isn't likely to be the culprit.
While I can manually add http://www.example.com/ in front of every hyperlink I add, this will become very annoying instead of having it automated. Anyway to get around this?
You can use FP's search and replace, although be sure that you've backed up your site before making any changes in case you do something careless and screw up hundreds of links. With search and replace, you'll probably need to make your changes one directory at a time. (Be sure to check the "in source code" box so the search-and-replace routine can find the links.)
2. The "rewrite engine on" is not compatible with frontpage extentions, and this is very annoying, since I want to permanently redirect my non www domain to my www. I can't figure this out, and having frontpage as an editor is screwing me with this. Anyway to get around this?
Easy: Have your host uninstall the FrontPage server extensions, which are needed only if you're using FP message boards, search, forms, and other advanced bells and whistles (or if you want to edit your pages on the server, which probably isn't a good idea anyway).
For that matter, you don't even have to uninstall the FrontPage extensions if you aren't using anything that requires them. You won't be able to use FP's publish routine if you mess with .htaccess manually, but you can easily upload your pages via ftp instead.
3. I use a custumized frontpage theme, but this code isn't w3c compliant. Does dreamweaver produce html compliant code?
Google doesn't care if your site is w3c-compliant.
4. Are there any other html editors on the market thats better than frontpage or dreamweaver?
Depends on what you want. I use HomeSite for extended search and replace and as a text editor for editing .htaccess, but that's just me. You should use a program that you feel comfortable with and that fits your needs. I like FrontPage because its interface is perfectly suited to my editorial mindset and the kind of pages that I create. If I were a graphic artist, I'd probably use Dreamweaver. If I were an HTML coder who was getting paid by the hour, I'd probably use HomeSite.
Again, don't rush out and make changes just for the sake of doing something. It's highly unlikely that your problems in Google have anything to do with relative vs. absolute links or how you're editing your pages. (For what it's worth, I lost 70-95% of my Google referrals between March 23 and May 21. Now I'm back to the record or near-record levels that I was seeing back in February and early March, and my use of FrontPage and relative links hasn't changed since I launched my current site in October, 2001. Major changes for the better or the worse have occurred at Google's end, not mine.)
FWIW, a site I am involved with has been created, expanded and revamped using FP 98 as a basic editor.
The site doesn't utilize FP extensions. The pages do get some tweaking in the code visible mode, but not a lot. The site also has simply oodles of relative links, but there are some absolute links in the mix as well. The code does not validate, though it does come fairly close sometimes. Other things simply have taken priority over getting the code perfect.
[added] all pages are sent to the server via ftp rather than via the FP publish feature [/added]
Notwithstanding such alleged danger, danger will robinson, 'errors', the site has pages which have sat quite rock steady in G since June 2003 on page 1 and in the top 5 for numerous useful terms for the site's subject matter.
The site is an info site. Perhaps because it is neither commerce, nor even geared to paying its own way, is why it goes unaffected, but whatever the cause, it has sailed merrily along through every update the past two years, even the more recent ones which have hurled other sites into the abyss.
As the old saw goes, unless you're in Africa, when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras.
Good luck to you.
Easy: Have your host uninstall the FrontPage server extensions, which are needed only if you're using FP message boards, search, forms, and other advanced bells and whistles (or if you want to edit your pages on the server, which probably isn't a good idea anyway).
I like the synchronize option alot, its very convenient to sometimes work directly on the server, and then synchronize. Although this would be the only reason to use frontpage extensions since I do not use any of their extra "bells and whistles". Do you need these extensions for shared borders?
Would it be ok if I was to use Dreamweaver as an FTP? Or would this be a bad practice?
One other question I have. I am trying to get away from using the shared borders function, and would like to create my own templates. For example, some groups of pages, I would like different "shared borders" and with Frontpage's built in shared borders function, I can't do this. Do you guys know how I can make a shared border without using microsofts built in function?
Do you need these extensions for shared borders?
No. You don't need them for include files, either.
Would it be ok if I was to use Dreamweaver as an FTP? Or would this be a bad practice?
I'll leave that one to someone who's used Dreamweaver's ftp. (I'd guess yes, though I prefer WS_FTP Pro myself, if only out of habit.)
One other question I have. I am trying to get away from using the shared borders function, and would like to create my own templates. For example, some groups of pages, I would like different "shared borders" and with Frontpage's built in shared borders function, I can't do this. Do you guys know how I can make a shared border without using microsofts built in function?
You can use include files. From the "Insert" menu, select "Web component." When the dialogue box appears, select "Included content" and then "Page." Browse to the page that you want to include, and you're done.
Note: I use shared borders myself. I've never had a problem with them (at least, not yet, and I've been using FrontPage since version 1.1. about nine years ago).
If I were developing in FP I, too, would ftp with a standalone ftp program if I were having problems. Definitely not with DW.
