RE: A disagreement on one point:
>
>>It's like those web-page creators who
>>feel they're better than other
>>people simply because they write
>>their own HTML code with
>>Notepad.
>>
>>Here's a clue for those people:
>>Nobody cares.
>>
>>PAS Doctrine: Never take pride in
>>doing unnecessary work.
>
>
>Why Notepad is infinitely better than
>any program out there:
>It only puts in what you
>want it to.
>There is no replacement for hand-coding,
>nothing compares to it.
Rosh, let me ask you something:
What is easier, typing out code or deleting it? If you don't want some code in your HTML, delete it, it's a hell of a lot easier than typing it out.
How about the annoying task of adding pull-down menus or other such code. Yeah, Copy and Paste works, but why bother when it is easier to do it with an editor?
I do find notepad best for working with some aspects of coding, notably adding a news table, but for most else, I'd rather just have my program do it for me.
>True, I might use FP occasionally
>for high-volume jobs, but then
>I will have to go
>back in and edit out
>the 100 useless tags it
>puts in.
That's what FrontPage does, that's what Microsoft products do. I find Dreamweaver's tag combining to work fine for removing unneeded tags.
>Same thing with ANY other WYSINWYG/WYSIWYG
>editor out there. They
>all hav one big fault,
>and that is because they
>put too much useless shit
>in.
But what will save you the most time? And since when has it become a real concern to tighten up HTML code? I know there's no excuse to not optimize code, but hell, HTML isn't exactly the most compactable language either.
>Though, HTMLPad is a good program,
>and I actually recommend beginning
>HTML authors to use that
>instead of Notepad.
I recommend Dreamweaver.
-Xotor-
[div align=center]
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]