Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: open
I have this problem with Frontpage 2000.
I've never used shared border in Frontpage before, but I did yesterday, adding top, bottom, left and right shared border. Inside
the shared borders are tables and flash files.
When I save the file... it takes like 3 seconds to save, usually it's like 0.1 sec (just 1 click)
Then I close that page, and it says , "save changes to C:\documents\blablabla\mydomain.htm"
that's funny, because I just saved it, why does it ask me to save again.
Did I do something wrong here?
Anyway, when I want to Publish web,
I chose "Publish changed pages only "
then it tries to connect with the server,
and it says : "The server "" timed out. The current request did not complete successfully."
I tried a few times, and it's the same.
But when I chose "Publish all pages, overwriting any already on the destination", it works, but it takes a long time because
every page is re-published.
Is there a way to fix this?
I really want to use shared border so that I can put banner ads on every page.... but publishing all pages everytime I update something will take a lot of time,
I only have 5 pages now, but later on, i might have 50 pages or more.
Another question :
on Frontpage, after saving, I went to Preview and preview in browser, everything is right where they are.
but on the internet, viewed with IE7, everything is correct, but somehow, the left shared border would appear white on a blue
page background, that is weird, why do they differ like that from the preview in frontpage to after it's published?
Does anyone know why that is?
Thank you thank you thank you for the helpp in advance :D
Unlike an asp or php include, shared borders, shared templates and dynamic web templates in front page are all connected. If you update the border, you should get a screen saying to the effect "20 pages are connected to this page - do you want to update them now?" You MUST say yes then publish the whole site, or at least the pages connected to the shared border. If you, say, update the shared border then just publish it, the other pages will not update unless you go live to the site and tell it to update all connected pages. So, in short, when you change a "shared" anything, you do change all the pages. If you have the capability of using asp or php includes, or even shtml (SSI) includes, I suggest that you switch now rather than wait until your site is too big. And if you have $99 to spare, you may want to upgrade to Expression Web which offers more flexibility than FP.
As for the background-color issue, I cannot say without seeing the CSS and HTML.
[edited by: Marshall at 3:34 am (utc) on Sep. 19, 2007]
I have this problem with Frontpage 2000.
One way to solve most of the problems you are going to encounter is to upgrade to at least FrontPage 2003. And if you feel brave, you could upgrade to Expression Web which is the replacement for FrontPage.
I've never used shared border in Frontpage before, but I did yesterday, adding top, bottom, left and right shared border.
Ouch! I have an old topic around here where I state that there should be an eletric jolt that the user gets when they try to used Shared Borders. Those things are the bane of every web designer. The ones producing it and the ones receiving it.
You are better off using FrontPage includes if you stick with FrontPage 2003 or earlier. Actually, the include method carries over to EW also.
Is there a way to fix this?
I don't want to tell you yes. I'd rather tell you no. :)
I really want to use shared border so that I can put banner ads on every page.
Trust me, you don't want to use Shared Borders. Try using the include method instead.
Thanks for the reply,
about the background color issue, I went to _borders and looked at the html of the left border,
it turned out it says something like <body color blabla> so i changed it to just <body> and when i published the site, it works
fine now :)
But since shared border is not adviseable, plus I just found out that my webhosting company doesn't support shared border in frontpage, (but it worked when i published it) , so, I'd like to know more about this include page :)
Expression Web sounds interesting, but unfortunately it's not listed as one of the supported 'third party design tool' on my
Plus my webhosting company only supports frontpage 2000 - 2002. So I can't upgrade to 2003.
pageoneresult, I read your post about frontpage includes at [webmasterworld.com...]
where you showed the example using asp.
since I'm not sure if my webhosting company has asp....I'd like to do it perhaps in php or htm perhaps,
just don't really know how to...
You wrote about developing a sub-directory called /nav/.
so... if i were to do it in php,
and so on?
Where do I create this sub directory called /nav/.?
I was reading around , that the php can be messed up if put in frontpage...
So... in order to do it,
I should just publish frontpage normally, without top,left,right,bottom border.
And just go to the webhosting control panel to add the php script?
But on reading :
jimbeetle said :
"Now, you can use PHP in FP, just configure your .htaccess to parse .htm or .html pages. Grab a copy of the PHP Rocket plug-in for FP and you can develop on your local machine."
but then awells 527 said :
"I use FP for all of my websites that use PHP almost exclusively. It doesn't mess with my code when I use includes just like you posted. "
My webhosting company doesn't allow access to .htaccess
Okay......... basically......... I'm blabbering... with lack of knowledge of course.
So... I just tried using frontpage only and this is what I did....
open frontpage, create a table for content, and below the table, I add a flash image for ad banner
saved it as top.htm
I didn't create a subdirectory as you mentioned. I only created a page called top.htm
and i made another page, my content page
So I went to - insert - component - include page - typed top.htm
it says this on the html page : <!--webbot bot="Include" U-Include="top.htm" TAG="BODY" -->
and that's it? it's done
so... before I run around the house declaring success
(yes i'm that pathetic haha)
is that the 'correct' way to do?
and my webpage will be 'safe' from possible future errors?
so i don't have to add php/asp? (still dunno how)
If this works, then I'll probably stick with this for now and develop the website content , and learn more computer language in
the near future.
If I were to use both top and left for "include page"
Is it possible to create 2 different left.htm?
If I were to have different category in my website.
eg. www.mydomain/car.htm and www.mydomain/radio.htm
and if I wanted 2 different left sides for those 2 different category.
All I have to do is create leftcar.htm and leftradio.htm
and insert include page into the corresponding page right?
Will this cause confusion/bugs when published?
or can I have as many different "include pages" inserted on different pages?
Pardon my lack of knowledge of all kinds of computer programming :)
I'm sorry if I ask too many questions :)
When using include page on Frontpage 2000.
When website visitor opens www.mydomain/PAGE1.htm
it loads everything in it, (which has the content which has tables and images, and the TOP "include page" that has gif file and flash image)
now , when the visitor opens www.mydomain/PAGE2.htm
will the browser re-loads the TOP 'include page' ?
or it will only load the content part of the page?
another question again :D
this is about putting a flash image (fade in - fade out flash image) on frontpage.
When I put 2 or more of the same flash image side by side.
The last one added is placed lower on the side.
but when it's published, it's in the correct form where the flash images appear in one row.
Is this how it works with adding flash image on frontpage?
is it just how it's seen in normal view on frontpage?
There's nothing wrong with what I did?
Last one question,
when you add flash image on normal view in frontpage,
When I add another flash image above it, they sort of overlaps and started blinking like crazy.
Again.... when published or preview in browser, they look fine.
So... nothing to worry about?
That's ok right? because after published, it's shown in the correct position.
Thank you Thank you Thank youuuu :)
As for webbot includes, those are client side includes. One thing you have to be careful with are links. If you are using relative URL's, without FP extensions on the server, they may not adjust fer the page they feed into. So if you include page is not on the same level as the file it is in, your links may be off one level. It may be better to use absolute URL's if possible.
Since you do not have htaccess, if you use php or asp includes, you would have to change the extensions on your pages. Your other choice is Server Sire Includes (SSI) which end in a .shtml extension. This works well too and most hosting companies support SSI. If you are not planning on writing any asp or php code, the shtml is probably your best choice (IMHO).
One advantage to FP 2003 and WE is the Dynamic Web Template (DWT). For this you do not necessarily need FP extensions if you do all the updates off-line then upload the page via FTP. Of course, you have to upload ALL the pages that are connected to the DWT when you make changes, but it will automatically adjust links and you do not have to worry about includes or files extensions. Without FP extensions on your server, you would *have* to make all changes off-line then do the upload. Depending on your internet connection and number of pages, this could take a while.
As for EW, one thing I like about it is that it highlights errors (including spelling) in your CSS and HTML tags. Another nice feature is it has about ten table-less template layouts which provide the minimum code for the layout, allowing you to do the rest. And it does allow you to edit php without messing it up. There are other features too, but no need to go into detail here.
In the end, whatever you are most comfortable with is the way to go. And as long as it works... :)
And layouts may not always look right in design view, but they do fall into place if they are coded correctly.
Did I cover everything?
Thanx again for such a quick reply :D
I went browsing around about absolute and relative url.
(yeappp... didn't know what those are)
So... please correct me if I'm wrong.
This is from Frontpage 2000 help :
When you create hyperlinks in FrontPage, you do not need to know the destination URL — you can simply browse to the page or file in a web, file system, or on the World Wide Web, and then FrontPage will provide the correct URL. When you create a hyperlink to a destination in the same web, FrontPage will create a relative URL.
So if I want to create a hyperlink to a destination in the same web,
it's better to make it an absolute URL?
So instead of just choosing which of my page I'd like to link, I should just type the whole thing, eg. [mydomain.com...]
Is this correct?
Again... thanx heaps :)