Who do I believe?

I'm still trying to get the basic layout of my first proper site sorted out,
but I'm finding the advice on this site bewildering. It seems that although
I've bought the latest version of the top web design package, there are lots of
features in it that everyone tells me not to use. If they're so bad why are
they still in there? Examples: I read a tutorial about frames - I paid to go on
an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site with
frames. Great - I can cope with that, so I went back and designed my first
draught with frames. Then I read various documents which say -don't do it!
Frames area bad idea! So I find an extremely good tutorial on tables which
makes sense, so I redesign my site with tables. Then I read -don't use tables!
Old fashioned! Better with CSS.! Two days of reading about CSS and I still
can't see how to design with it - is it just that those that love code can't
bear to see anyone use something graphical and simpler? And now I just worked
out how to add drop down menus, and added them to my menu bar, only to have
someone say - don't use drop down menus! Bad idea! etc, and these are people
affiliated to Macromedia! So why do they put features in you shouldn't use?
Could we have a new version called Dreamweaver lite that is cheaper and doesn't
contain any old fashioned options that I'll get laughed at for using?

OMG you sound like you just been in the wrong place at the wrong time. I
suggest you to get started (by any means necesary) and then just modify it
as you expertise grows. The reason for 'dont do that' is becase we all
have a secret society where we decide what to do and then change our
minds.....hahaha. joke

Well actually we do have a society but is not secret, is called W3C which
is a consortium to make web standards. Right now the standard is XHTML 1.0
soon it will change to XHTML 1.1 which se still dont know how it might
change the web.

CSS will make your life easier even if you dont believe it right now. CSS
is a great tool and you should use it simply because if your site grows,
the desing would become a hassle to manage (in case you decide to change).

Please go to w3schools.com and try to do the CSS tutorial, this will get
you started. Dreamweaver manage CSS really well. You can also find lots of
information at the devnet area of Macromedia.

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:09:00 +0000 (UTC), aterrill
<webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote:

I'm still trying to get the basic layout of my first proper site sorted
out,
but I'm finding the advice on this site bewildering. It seems that
although
I've bought the latest version of the top web design package, there are
lots of
features in it that everyone tells me not to use. If they're so bad why
are
they still in there? Examples: I read a tutorial about frames - I paid
to go on
an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site
with
frames. Great - I can cope with that, so I went back and designed my
first
draught with frames. Then I read various documents which say -don't do
it!
Frames area bad idea! So I find an extremely good tutorial on tables
which
makes sense, so I redesign my site with tables. Then I read -don't use
tables!
Old fashioned! Better with CSS.! Two days of reading about CSS and I
still
can't see how to design with it - is it just that those that love code
can't
bear to see anyone use something graphical and simpler? And now I just
worked
out how to add drop down menus, and added them to my menu bar, only to
have
someone say - don't use drop down menus! Bad idea! etc, and these are
people
affiliated to Macromedia! So why do they put features in you shouldn't
use?
Could we have a new version called Dreamweaver lite that is cheaper and
doesn't
contain any old fashioned options that I'll get laughed at for using?

--
Alexandro Colorado
------------------------------
Support Engineer
InterAKT Online
http://www.interaktonline.com
Tel: 40(21) 312.5312

"aterrill" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote

I'm still trying to get the basic layout of my first proper site sorted
out,
but I'm finding the advice on this site bewildering. It seems that
although
I've bought the latest version of the top web design package, there are
lots of
features in it that everyone tells me not to use. If they're so bad why
are
they still in there? Examples: I read a tutorial about frames - I paid to
go on
an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site with
frames. Great - I can cope with that, so I went back and designed my first
draught with frames. Then I read various documents which say -don't do it!
Frames area bad idea!

There is nothing really wrong with using frames, some layouts may actually
benefit from a frame layout - not many though When people here
recommend *not* to use frames is generally to newbies who don't understand
what problems may exist when using them. If you have done a course and feel
comfortable with a framed site, then no problems, do it - no rule that says
you can't.

So I find an extremely good tutorial on tables which
makes sense, so I redesign my site with tables. Then I read -don't use
tables!
Old fashioned! Better with CSS.!

Hopefully you are talking about James' tutorial at dwfaq. Stick with that.
There are way too many css-p zealots out there. Nothing wrong with using a
table layout. What you need to learn is the basics of CSS - so that you can
style various elements on the page, eg: font, margins, padding, background
color or background images etc., You then combine tables and throw in lots
of css for styling you will be fine.

Once you have learned the basics of css, move onto simple examples of
setting out a page completely with css - that is, no tables. Take a look at
this site for basic css info - where most of us learned the basics
www.mako4css.com

Two days of reading about CSS and I still
can't see how to design with it - is it just that those that love code
can't
bear to see anyone use something graphical and simpler? And now I just
worked
out how to add drop down menus, and added them to my menu bar, only to
have
someone say - don't use drop down menus! Bad idea! etc,

Dropdown menus are not bad, it depends on *how* you build them. You were
probably given a few links about this - follow the advice it is very well
intended. Once you learn how to build your own dropdowns (using DW plus the
methods you learn elsewhere), you will be an expert and won't need something
like the DW popups or FWs popups.

Dreamweaver lite that is cheaper and doesn't contain any old fashioned
options that I'll get laughed at for >using?

No one here would laugh at you - we've all been in your place at one time.
We all try and give useful advice and steer you in the right direction,
particularly after we have already learned the lessons the hard way :-)

Stick around and you will learn a lot from the regulars here and welcome to
the wonderful, wild and wacky world of web dev!! :-)

--
Nadia
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver
---------------
Free Templates | Free Nav Bar Sets
http://www.DreamweaverResources.com
Dropdown Menu Designs | CSS Layouts
Ecommerce - YVStore | SEO Articles
Table Tutorials | Background image Tutorials
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.perrelink.com.au
------------------------------------------------
MM Dreamweaver Tutorials
http://macromedia.com/devnet/mx/dreamweaver/
------------------------------------------------

aterrill wrote:
I read a tutorial about frames - I paid to go on

an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site with
frames.

The bottom line is they just cause more problems that you really need to
concern yourself with. Web design and geting everything to play nicely
cross-browser is difficult enough without the added problems encountered
when using frames. So my philosophy is avoid anything which may cause
potential issues which can be easily avoided.

Heres some information about whay you maybe should consider them to be
problematical

http://apptools.com/rants/framesevil.php




So I find an extremely good tutorial on tables which

makes sense, so I redesign my site with tables. Then I read -don't use tables!
Old fashioned!

Tables are fine to use. Albeit in moderation. Lots of nesting (inserting
one table inside another) used to be the 'given' method of construction.
With css styling and the near death of NN4x you can mostly avoided this
now. If you keep the tables clean, lean and simple you will have no
problems.


is it just that those that love code can't

bear to see anyone use something graphical and simpler?

Not really. The point is if you soley rely on the graphical interface to
design its extremely difficult to get everything exactly as you want. At
some stage you will need to delve into the code to add or remove things
which you simply cant do in design view.


And now I just worked

out how to add drop down menus, and added them to my menu bar, only to have
someone say - don't use drop down menus! Bad idea!

If you are talking about the inbuilt menus which ship with Dwthen yes
these are bad. They are rely on javascript to call the links to the
page. Since the links are never pret on the page a search engine spider
will not be able to proceed much further than your gatway page.

I believe there are other probelms associated with thses menus as well
which would keep me away form using them.

Go to www.projectseven.com Look under tutorial>navigation for the simple
and positioned menu tutorials. this is the corrcet way to proceed.


So why do they put features in you shouldn't use?

A product is driven by market forces. They include these features
because you can easily construct a page (not that it will work
correctly) but none the less it will get you something on the page fast,
which a lot of people unknowing andinexperienced require or think they
require until someone enlightens them. It shifts units from the shelf
and MM are very happy.

Could we have a new version called Dreamweaver lite that is cheaper and doesn't
contain any old fashioned options that I'll get laughed at for using?

Good idea.

Were still in the hands of browsers though.


"Alexandro Colorado" <acolorado (AT) interaktonline (DOT) com> a écrit dans le message
de news: opsg8x1tgsrohbc4 (AT) acolorado (DOT) ..

OMG you sound like you just been in the wrong place at the wrong time. I
suggest you to get started (by any means necesary) and then just modify it
as you expertise grows. The reason for 'dont do that' is becase we all
have a secret society where we decide what to do and then change our
minds.....hahaha. joke

Well actually we do have a society but is not secret, is called W3C which
is a consortium to make web standards. Right now the standard is XHTML 1.0
soon it will change to XHTML 1.1 which se still dont know how it might
change the web.

CSS will make your life easier even if you dont believe it right now. CSS
is a great tool and you should use it simply because if your site grows,
the desing would become a hassle to manage (in case you decide to change).

Please go to w3schools.com and try to do the CSS tutorial, this will get
you started. Dreamweaver manage CSS really well. You can also find lots of
information at the devnet area of Macromedia.

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:09:00 +0000 (UTC), aterrill
webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote:

I'm still trying to get the basic layout of my first proper site sorted
out,
but I'm finding the advice on this site bewildering. It seems that
although
I've bought the latest version of the top web design package, there are
lots of
features in it that everyone tells me not to use. If they're so bad why
are
they still in there? Examples: I read a tutorial about frames - I paid
to go on
an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site
with
frames. Great - I can cope with that, so I went back and designed my
first
draught with frames. Then I read various documents which say -don't do
it!
Frames area bad idea! So I find an extremely good tutorial on tables
which
makes sense, so I redesign my site with tables. Then I read -don't use
tables!
Old fashioned! Better with CSS.! Two days of reading about CSS and I
still
can't see how to design with it - is it just that those that love code
can't
bear to see anyone use something graphical and simpler? And now I just
worked
out how to add drop down menus, and added them to my menu bar, only to
have
someone say - don't use drop down menus! Bad idea! etc, and these are
people
affiliated to Macromedia! So why do they put features in you shouldn't
use?
Could we have a new version called Dreamweaver lite that is cheaper and
doesn't
contain any old fashioned options that I'll get laughed at for using?




--
Alexandro Colorado
------------------------------
Support Engineer
InterAKT Online
http://www.interaktonline.com
Tel: 40(21) 312.5312

If they're so bad why are

they still in there?

Very good point. Maybe its too expensive to nuke things like timelines etc,
I don't know.

an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site with
frames.

You wasted your money, frames are the plague

Then I read -don't use tables!

Tables are fine.

Old fashioned! Better with CSS.!

Valid point

someone say - don't use drop down menus!

They can be used and are used all over the place, but they are crap.

So why do they put features in you shouldn't use?

Beer abuse?

Could we have a new version called Dreamweaver lite

I think most people use it that way, I have never touched things such as
timelines or I have never used Layout mode.


Are you still confused?

Cheers

Pablo



"aterrill" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> a écrit dans le message de news:
cmsssc$pkt$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...

I'm still trying to get the basic layout of my first proper site sorted
out,
but I'm finding the advice on this site bewildering. It seems that
although
I've bought the latest version of the top web design package, there are
lots of
features in it that everyone tells me not to use. If they're so bad why
are
they still in there? Examples: I read a tutorial about frames - I paid to
go on
an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site with
frames. Great - I can cope with that, so I went back and designed my first
draught with frames. Then I read various documents which say -don't do it!
Frames area bad idea! So I find an extremely good tutorial on tables
which
makes sense, so I redesign my site with tables. Then I read -don't use
tables!
Old fashioned! Better with CSS.! Two days of reading about CSS and I still
can't see how to design with it - is it just that those that love code
can't
bear to see anyone use something graphical and simpler? And now I just
worked
out how to add drop down menus, and added them to my menu bar, only to
have
someone say - don't use drop down menus! Bad idea! etc, and these are
people
affiliated to Macromedia! So why do they put features in you shouldn't
use?
Could we have a new version called Dreamweaver lite that is cheaper and
doesn't
contain any old fashioned options that I'll get laughed at for using?

Pablo wrote:

If they're so bad why are

they still in there?


Very good point. Maybe its too expensive to nuke things like timelines etc,
I don't know.


an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site with
frames.


You wasted your money, frames are the plague

Then I read -don't use tables!

Tables are fine.


Old fashioned! Better with CSS.!


Valid point


someone say - don't use drop down menus!


They can be used and are used all over the place, but they are crap.



So why do they put features in you shouldn't use?


Beer abuse?


Could we have a new version called Dreamweaver lite


I think most people use it that way, I have never touched things such as
timelines

They did nuke timelines at one ponit and quickly reinstaed them when
droves of users, who had updated to a newer version of the product,
complained.

YOu're caught again. Build your site with tables. Learning how to build
solid and stable tables is one of the most important things a new web
developer can do. At the same time, begin using CSS to style your text. As
you use CSS you will discover the many extraordinary powers that this tool
provides you and, over time, you will begin to replace your reliance on
tables with CSS structures. This will not happen overnight.

While Alexandro's advice is good (albeit a bit ideal) I think you will find
this recommendation to be practical and pragmatic.

And above all, don't use Frames, and don't use the DW/FW pop-up menus.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage!
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================

"aterrill" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote

I'm still trying to get the basic layout of my first proper site sorted
out,
but I'm finding the advice on this site bewildering. It seems that
although
I've bought the latest version of the top web design package, there are
lots of
features in it that everyone tells me not to use. If they're so bad why
are
they still in there? Examples: I read a tutorial about frames - I paid to
go on
an official Macromedia course where I spent two days designing a site with
frames. Great - I can cope with that, so I went back and designed my first
draught with frames. Then I read various documents which say -don't do it!
Frames area bad idea! So I find an extremely good tutorial on tables
which
makes sense, so I redesign my site with tables. Then I read -don't use
tables!
Old fashioned! Better with CSS.! Two days of reading about CSS and I still
can't see how to design with it - is it just that those that love code
can't
bear to see anyone use something graphical and simpler? And now I just
worked
out how to add drop down menus, and added them to my menu bar, only to
have
someone say - don't use drop down menus! Bad idea! etc, and these are
people
affiliated to Macromedia! So why do they put features in you shouldn't
use?
Could we have a new version called Dreamweaver lite that is cheaper and
doesn't
contain any old fashioned options that I'll get laughed at for using?

Crickey, maybe it was a mass mailing campaign by Jon Parkhurst



"Osgood" <notavailable (AT) atthisaddress (DOT) com> a écrit dans le message de news:
cmsvog$svc$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...

Pablo wrote:



They did nuke timelines at one ponit and quickly reinstaed them when
droves of users, who had updated to a newer version of the product,
complained.

No, it was for a very good reason - they had sites that they had to maintain
that used timelines. Nuking the feature meant that they couldn't maintain
the sites.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage!
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================

"Pablo" <dell (AT) takeoutdellwebsites (DOT) com> wrote

Crickey, maybe it was a mass mailing campaign by Jon Parkhurst



"Osgood" <notavailable (AT) atthisaddress (DOT) com> a écrit dans le message de news:
cmsvog$svc$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...
Pablo wrote:



They did nuke timelines at one ponit and quickly reinstaed them when
droves of users, who had updated to a newer version of the product,
complained.