Hand coding websites

[Mint]

Hi Guys,First of all I this is not a competition. I just want to get some advice and some well informed opinions. I have been going throug the tutorials and I have got to the Javascript section and I have decided to try my hand at my first site. I have been looking at some sites for some inspiration and ideas and I have seen that some are quite aesthetically pleasing whilst also being very functional and even quite complex in some cases. So it just got me thinking......Is this all handcoded or what?I have been looking at sites like:http://www.crookedtongues.com/http://www.artzmania.com/http://www.liftsafety.com/#1http://www.vans.com/vans/index2.aspAny opinions?

[justsomeguy]

Most of the code looks like it's done by hand. It's hard to be positive, but there aren't any meta tags indicating that the pages were created with a program. The artzmania page looks weird because most of the tags are uppercase, but a few are lowercase. A program wouldn't do that, but I haven't seen anyone write HTML in uppercase. The code for lift has some comments, it looks like most of it was done by hand. The structure of the vans site looks like it was done by hand but something is generating the content.A lot of people prefer to use a program to do their layout, or some people say they use a program like Dreamweaver just for the code view (although I suspect they use the layout view, there's no reason to pay for Dreamweaver to get the code view), and other people just use a text editor like ConTEXT or PSPad, there are a ton of others. I prefer to just write it out myself.

[aspnetguy]

oolks to be hand coded as justsomeguy said. Handcoding is the best way to go. That way you can have valid code and debugging is much easier if you are the one that wrote the code.

[Mint]

Wow that is amazing...how long would that take? How long does it take to get to that level of competence? To be considered a web developer would you have to be able to hand code a site to this level? Sorry for the questions I am just trying to see what I have to do.

[sircharlo]

Just browsing the W3Schools pages helps alot. Try their tutorial for HTML and CSS. Then, take the test to see what you remember. Try making a practice page and try things on that, to see what you learned.Another practical HTML website, when you want to know specifically what a tag does, is www.htmlcodetutorial.com.

[Mint]

Just browsing the W3Schools pages helps alot. Try their tutorial for HTML and CSS. Then, take the test to see what you remember. Try making a practice page and try things on that, to see what you learned.Another practical HTML website, when you want to know specifically what a tag does, is www.htmlcodetutorial.com.

Thanks Sir Charlo...this has been bookmarked!

[user4fun]

tutorials are great,my opinion, WYSIWYG like front page are great, reason being. lesser chance of syntax error. Iam not a web developer by i am very passionate about having my own business. Since the internet is brutal and web developer charge more that i can spend.I came up with the great idea to combine them both. The main concept as colors, text, aligment, tables etc ( all the basic html stuff) are done by frontpage, additional things i hand code it using the tutorials.That way i acomplish 2 things1) lesser chance of chasing syntax errors2) I end up learing more stuff about the code when front page does it for me, and i modify it slightly according to what i have learned from the tutorials.good luck.I8 did not visit any of the sites listed, can't tell you much about it.

[Jonas]

my opinion, WYSIWYG like front page are great...

a very common misconception.

...reason being. lesser chance of syntax error.

I'd say with Frontpage there is every chance of syntax error, and invalid code.Frontpage hasn't been updated by Microsoft since 2003. If you're going for a WYSIWYG editor, I'd recommend basically anything else, primarily Adobe Dreamweaver, although expensive.

[Mint]

I came up with the great idea to combine them both.

As a newbie I am thinking that this might be the better option. I could imagine that hand coding would be good if you was working on one site all the time. However what if you were producing websites on a regular basis, maybe user4fun's approach maybe preferably with regards to time consumption.

[Jonas]

As a newbie I am thinking that this might be the better option. I could imagine that hand coding would be good if you was working on one site all the time. However what if you were producing websites on a regular basis, maybe user4fun's approach maybe preferably with regards to time consumption.

Actually if you were producing websites on a regular basis, hand coding would be EVEN MORE important, because when you want to maintain them or update them you'll have to switch back and forth, and you can't rely on the code in the file you have to be read the same in the software you have updated inbetween. Plus the more you produce, the more you'll be required to produce cross-browser standards-compliant code, and that is far easier to do by hand once you get into it. If you're planning to spend a considerable amount of time on this (say as a steady job), you might as well do it proper from the start.

[user4fun]

Frontpage hasn't been updated by Microsoft since 2003.

True, but frontpage (with exception of microsoft servies) automatically creates the html code for tablesforms like input type= "button" , <br> <b> easy font color code tcvery basic stuff that is still used and all browers recognize and will continue to recognize untill some genius comes up with some thing different, and talks all operatng system developers to use it. By that time, you can just talk into a microphone and the computer will develope the site for you.

[boen_robot]

True, but frontpage (with exception of microsoft servies) automatically creates the html code for tablesforms like input type= "button" , <br> <b> easy font color code tcvery basic stuff that is still used and all browers recognize and will continue to recognize untill some genius comes up with some thing different, and talks all operatng system developers to use it. By that time, you can just talk into a microphone and the computer will develope the site for you.

Dreamwaver can do that too, and without THAT high risk of invalid code, so why not use it instead?

[Mint]

Actually if you were producing websites on a regular basis, hand coding would be EVEN MORE important, because when you want to maintain them or update them you'll have to switch back and forth, and you can't rely on the code in the file you have to be read the same in the software you have updated inbetween. Plus the more you produce, the more you'll be required to produce cross-browser standards-compliant code, and that is far easier to do by hand once you get into it. If you're planning to spend a considerable amount of time on this (say as a steady job), you might as well do it proper from the start.

OK I see the importance of hand coding. Thanks for you input.

[user4fun]

Dreamwaver can do that too, and without THAT high risk of invalid code, so why not use it instead?

lol, cause i got frontpage for free when i was in college, lol

[vchris]

Handcoding is better than any WYSIWYG application. See the formula below.Handcoding > *

[Synook]

Well, I would say try not to use WYSISYG at all costs. In fact, handcoding in my opinion is faster because you don't have to fiddle through masses of GUI elements just to get a simple element down. If you can type at a rate of about 20 words / min then I would say that after a while you will find hand coding much more efficient than WYSIWYG. Also, I find using WYSIWYG editors much more irritating because they always add little things to your code that are pointless and just waste space, like the <!--DWLayoutEmptyCell--> that DreamWeaver puts into empty table cells unnecessarily. With hand coding, what you type is exactly what you will get, but in WYSISYG what you see is always not quite what you get . Don't worry, 6 months of hand coding and you will be wondering "why did I ever use WYSIWYG?"

[Mint]

Well, I would say try not to use WYSISYG at all costs. In fact, handcoding in my opinion is faster because you don't have to fiddle through masses of GUI elements just to get a simple element down. If you can type at a rate of about 20 words / min then I would say that after a while you will find hand coding much more efficient than WYSIWYG. Also, I find using WYSIWYG editors much more irritating because they always add little things to your code that are pointless and just waste space, like the <!--DWLayoutEmptyCell--> that DreamWeaver puts into empty table cells unnecessarily. With hand coding, what you type is exactly what you will get, but in WYSISYG what you see is always not quite what you get . Don't worry, 6 months of hand coding and you will be wondering "why did I ever use WYSIWYG?"

Hi Synook,When you was first starting out learning this, what sort of things did you do in order retain what you had learned?

[Synook]

Well, mostly I just kept lots of references (like the W3Schools Tag List) handy, so that as I developed my site if I forgot something I didn't have to revert to WYSIWYG - I could just look it up. Also, try writing as many page as you can, even if they have no purpose in your current projects, like div-based layouts and styled pages, just so you get the hang of it. If you see something on the web that you wonder "how was that done", look at the source, and see how it was done. Practice, and you will gradually learn the way that HTML works, and about all its parts.

[Mint]

Well, mostly I just kept lots of references (like the W3Schools Tag List) handy, so that as I developed my site if I forgot something I didn't have to revert to WYSIWYG - I could just look it up. Also, try writing as many page as you can, even if they have no purpose in your current projects, like div-based layouts and styled pages, just so you get the hang of it. If you see something on the web that you wonder "how was that done", look at the source, and see how it was done. Practice, and you will gradually learn the way that HTML works, and about all its parts.

Sounds like the best thing to do. Look what I found.....now this looks really useful!http://www.visibone.com/products/browserbo...l?via=google637Show it to anyone who might find it useful.

[Synook]

Sounds like the best thing to do. Look what I found.....now this looks really useful!

Interesting... but why would anyone buy the book when they have colour readable images of every page on their website?

[Mint]

Interesting... but why would anyone buy the book when they have colour readable images of every page on their website?

Yeh I know. That why i've saved them to print out and laminate myself..... I hope that's not wrong but it thought that's why they provide the full size images.

[primefalcon]

I'd have to say that I myself would say hand coding.Gives a bit more control over the code, and if you need to debug, you know exactly what the code is and what it does.also programs get massively upgraded and changed, and you have to keep learning aspects of that program, and what if that program gets discontinued like frontpage.If you learn and write the code yourself, that can't happen, and as for text editor, I'd recommend Crimson Editor

[DavidPr]

I hand code my websites using Notepad Editor. The price is right and I think it makes for a better website. Also, without the excess code thrown in by WYSIWYG editors, the file size of the Web page is smaller. More people still hook up to the Internet with dail-up, so keeping the size of the Web page (as small as possible) is a good idea because it'll load up quicker.

[Skemcin]

The best hand coding cross platform software I've seen in years can be downloaded at eclipse.org and its FREE.

• For all the reasons stated, hand coded is, by far, the best route.
• Finding a program (like dreamweaver or eclipse) that offers color coded tags/text and code quick features only increase your productivity.
• using a program that has both code view and design(WYSIWYG) mode and switching between them is not a good idea. Stick with one or the other. The WYSIWYG editor will still butcher your code if oyu made any edits and then save it. Don't undo your hard work by saving anything you did once switching from HTML to WYSIWYG modes. Plus, 99% of the WYSIWYGs out there do not render code according to browser standards anyway, so they inaccurately represent what will end up happening anyway - remember WYSIWYG is nothing more than a translater, it tried to render the code as you you manipulate its user interface - you will always loose alot in translation.

P.S. As far as those sites, remember the majority of "all" that code is a combination of page templates that the developer only has to code once and server side includes which make the maintenance of them site wide very manageable.

[Mint]

I see the importance of hand coding. I never knew about the extra coding that these wysiwyg software put. Very interesting. Do any of you guys develope websites for a living? I think because poeple are trying to pay the bills they just can't be bothered to go through learning this stuff. They just want to design the site and collect the money and go. Really appreciate the input guys. Peace.