[Zope] Cut the Dreamweaver bashing ;-)

[Ron Bickers]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: zope-admin@zope.org [mailto:zope-admin@zope.org]On Behalf Of
> kosh@aesaeion.com

I haven't been following this thread, but I cannot keep myself from butting
in...

> > I'd suggest that there are a lot of people who find it easier ;-)

Easier and much more productive.  I'm one of those, and I've been doing this
professionally for 7 years.

> I'd suggest lots of people find it easier to write apps in VB then other
> languages. However that does not make VB a good choice. The programs tend
> to be slower, user more memory, be more crash prone, and have no security
> to them.

This analogy doesn't fit.  DW can be used to create equally clean HTML as
hand coding (this cannot be said for all editors).  Both methods result in
plain text files with HTML markup.  VB, by design, cannot produce what could
be done in lower level languages.

> > > It may be faster for the unskilled but it also produces worse pages.

Any tool misused can produce worse results than not using the tool at all.
User knowledge cannot be replaced by a good tool.  However, used properly, a
good tool can produce equally good results in less time.

> > It may be faster for the unskilled but it also produces worse pages.
>
> What are you basing that statement on?
>
> From looking at the source code of the page.

Then you've only looked at source code from sloppy developers, or your
standards are unrealistic.  Many of the pages I produce have little signs of
DW and do meet the specs.

> > > However I find that if you have read the html, xhtml, css,
> dom, etc specs
> > > and know them then it is faster to develop manually then using any of
> > > those helpful editors.

If you've found that to be the case, then you're free to keep hand coding.
However, I've found quite the opposite; hand coding takes far more time than
proper use of a good editor, and I'm less likely to make careless mistakes.

> Overall it comes down to a simple
> fact. If you are going to be working with a tool professionally it is your
> job to take it professionally. That means taking the time to read about
> how the tools work and what the requirements are for working in the field
> you are.

I agree 100%.  Which is why I have taken more time than my wife can stand
learning the languages I use as well as the tools I use.

> Computer programs tend to be the bug ridden pieces of crap that
> they are because so many ignore that. It is the same with web pages. I am
> sorry that it takes time to learn information but that is what it takes
> and that is what has to be done. Sure you can avoid it for a while but it
> will catch up with you.

I agree 100% with this too.  Bad pages are a result of ignorant developers
(or developers that just don't care).  They're also a result of effective
marketing that makes people believe anyone can create "great looking Web
pages" with no knowledge of HTML.  Sadly, "poor" Web pages are often the
result of working around years of different browser bugs.  I have to crap up
more pages because of browser bugs than any other reason, but that's another
story.

> > > Overall I have not liked code generation tools for
> > > any language since you spend more time cleaning up afterwards then it
> > > would take to write the code by hand.

DW creates quite clean code when configured and used properly.  This cannot
be said for all editors.

For something relevant to this mailing list... DW has been very kind to me
when using both DTML and ZPT.  It's not without its quirks, but with my
years of experience, I can use it to create clean standards-based pages that
work wonderfully in Zope in far less time than I ever could by hand.

_______________________

Ron Bickers
Logic Etc, Inc.