Re: [ProgSoc] HTML Editors (was: New Intel Logo)

[daedalus <jpw001@nospam.its.maynick.com.au>]

I'm attempting to wean ppl onto the new list caz, hence the crosspost.

On Tue, 26 May 1998 pkennedy@nospam.keycorp.com.au wrote:

> hello
> 
> }I've got a FrontPage web running on an NT box (I didn't design it, or put
> }it there in the first place, I just have to maintain it.) It sux.
> }Netscape regularly bombs (bus errors) when I try to run one of M$ .asp
> }things from the FrontPage built things.
> look up what ASP means....from this derive the conclusion that it can't
> possibly have anything to do with which browser you use

Ok, let me rephrase this. The .asp is on the webserver, IE loads and uses 
it fine, some versions of netscape bus error coredump. If it had nothing 
to do with the browser, both should fall over. I'd say it is a problem 
with netscape.

I'm simply providing an example where stuff done with FrontPage didn't 
run correctly under netscape, but did on other browsers.

> }version control? RCS.
> }> automated maintenance,
> }
> }eh? Is this some whizzbang thing the rest of we sysadmins haven't heard
> }of? Something which updates page data automagically? please explain.
> }
> }What, like cgi? perl? /bin/sh? Again, pls explain.
> ok was not talking specically about FP there.....but web development
> packages vs. just a text editor

Erm, that doesn't answer my question, but ok.

> }navigation control,
> }
> }otherwise known as a file system.
> no as in managing links between pages, updating links as filenames change
> etc etc

Aha. Yes, I'll agree, it does keep track of linkages and 
data/namechanges. I can't recall incidents where I've needed to change 
numerous linkages in a way which couldn't be handled simply with multiple 
string search/replaces from commandline perl. Correct design should 
minimise drastic changes of this nature.

> }in-built search/index.
> }
> }grep.
> get real....i meant a search facility for the site
> although a Perl CGI search engine using grep is interesting :)

Oh, like a lexical scanner? Yeah, a cgi program. And perl is damn fast at 
pattern matching, and easy to use.

> }I disagree with the principle of this comment. Agreed, no tool is
> }perfect. Coding by hand, in whatever language, still provides the
> }tightest, cleanest, most stable and maintainable code, if done correctly.
> ok, take 5 days to write something
> i'll write it in 2 and with less effort.....we'll see who has the contract

I'll attempt to contain myself here. Yes, you may well be able to write 
something in half the time, but a contract is about more than that. I 
have to support numerous systems written by contractors which have little 
or no documentation, aren't very fault tolerant, conform to few standards 
and are generally a waste of time, money and resources.

If I'm going to make something that has to be maintained I prefer to do 
it so that it is well documented, works well, is robust and fault 
tolerant, conforms to standards and will still be there running well long 
after I'm gone. That'll get me repeat business and provide a good 
reference site for further contracts.

I'd rather people speak of something I put in as: "Oh, <that system>. 
Yeah, it just runs."

> i suppose you're going to tell me can write a whole C application in one
> line? :)

#include "previously.written.module.c"

What do you think is happening when you use a similar feature in 
FrontPage? Someone had to write it at some time.

> }These 4GL type programs allow you to create quick, average code. Check
> }the source output by FrontPage. It's a mess. And all those <bot> or
> }whatever they are tag things that get put in there. wtf? How am I
> }supposed to copy HTML to a unix webserver?

> who cares what it looks like! you shouldn't ever look at raw HTML
> and as for using a unix webserver....welll....i'll stay clear of that one
> you can however use FP and not include stuff which requires FPServer
> Extensions

Example: I can't work out how a system works from the near lack of 
documentation for a system and need to for some reason. Last resort? Look 
at the code. What you've said is that the layout of the source code is 
unimportant, so long as the compiled code works. What if someone else has 
to maintain your code and prefers to use vi? Or doesn't have FrontPage? 
Or FrontPage isn't working at the time? etc. Adhering to a coding 
standard (comments, clear layout, etc) makes life easier for those who 
have to maintain your code in the future.. surely this is stuff you've 
already heard.

> }Oh, and there's a "feature" on one page I maintain where FP was used to
> }create little java applets for the equivalent of Javascript
> }onmouseover/onmouseout stuff. A whole Java applet. For each button. Slow
> }to load? You better believe it. Coded by hand, I'd have to write 1 applet
> }with a bit of code to handle each button and what they do. It'd run
> }faster, be smaller and quicker to load and less taxing on the user's
> browser.
> yes, in that area it's basically made easy for dummies, and i'd say to sell
> MS web servers
> the nav buttons it produces are not as good as doing your own rollovers
> depends how good you are at it, and how much time you want to spend

Yup. That's pretty much my whole point. If you want something quick and 
dirty, using something like FrontPage is the way to go, but I find that 
when I want to _know_ that it's going to work, it's better to do it with 
more control.

> }Code, if done right, should be easily maintainable and stable. Using a
> }package like FrontPage doesn't make good code, it just does things
> }quickly for those with little knowledge. I can create good stuff with vi,
> }a browser and gimp (Gnu Image Manipulation Program) just as quick. And my
> }code will run under unix, NT or whatever webserver you want.
> ohhhh ok sorry that's why most web design is done like that
> sorry i must have overlooked that :)

Maybe I've just had to deal with more contractors who don't really know 
what they're doing than you have. Lucky you. You haven't had to spend 
weekends fixing dodgy html written by so-called 'professional' 
web-designers. Trust me, there are a lot of them out there.

> }I wouldn't call using FrontPage smarter. I'd call it lazier. It has its
> }place for those who don't know all the tags (and can't look them up
> }quickly in an online reference). Those who can't conceptualise what a
> }page is going to look like without having it displayed there in front of
> }them the whole time (though u just need a browser beside your vi session
> }under x to do the same thing).
> oh man...that's the wrong attitude
> i know all the tags, but i wouldn't waste me time creating and maintaining
> a site using bloody vi and gimp
> this is commercial reality, not some one off hobby

I think you've lost the thrust of my argument somewhere. I'm not 
attacking FrontPage as a personal choice for you, I'm saying I prefer the 
benefits I get from vi to those offered by FP and accept the cons of that 
decision. For the way I do things, it is the best solution. You obviously 
do things differently. I never said there was anything wrong with that.

As for commercial reality, it's full of people claiming to know how to do 
a great deal and in my experience few of them deliver a product which is 
up to scratch. I have to support these things as a part of my job. I'm 
immersed in commercial reality up to my eyebrows every day.

> }There's nothing _wrong_ with using FrontPage. It just appeals to a
> }certain type of person. I happen to prefer being able to control exactly
> }what is going to happen on my page without having to go through 5 menus
> }and get asked 'Do you really want to?' all the time. It's like the
> }difference between C and oh.. I dunno.. Eiffel? C assumes you know what
> }to do, Eiffel assumes you don't.
> fair comment....most MS products cater for a broader range of people, those
> who just aren't smart enough to use a CLI
> 
> }Either way, if you do it right the first time, your maintenance should be
> }as low as it can be.
> what was that you said before .... RCS?
> just today i had to change every page in a 100 page site because the
> managment didn't like a few words and some of the images......had nothing
> to do with it being right.....things change, shit happens....

Depending on what it was, if it was something repetative (like changing 
references to "Mayne Nickless Logistics" into "Mayne Logistics") I'd just 
use perl. If it's something semi-random, you'd still have to open every 
page and edit it. If you know your editor (vi, FP, emacs, whatever) it'll 
probably take you just as long as anyone else doing the same thing, no 
matter what package you use.

Those are the jobs that suck. :)

> thanks for duel Justin :)

No sweat :)

+---------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|      Justin Warren        | justin.warren@nospam.its.maynick.com.au        |
|   Systems Administrator   | daedalus@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au             |
| Mayne Nickless Express IT | http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/~daedalus |
+---------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT after you...  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+




--
You are subscribed to the progsoc mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a
message containing "unsubscribe" to progsoc-request@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au.
If you are having trouble, ask owner-progsoc@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au for help.

This list is archived at <http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/lists/progsoc/>