S
Scruff
Why do any of the "elitist" web designers regard FP as a creator of dirty
html?
What does than mean, and is it true?
Thanks
html?
What does than mean, and is it true?
Thanks
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
T
Thomas A. Rowe
Ask the "elitist" to define "Dirty HTML"
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
M
MD Websunlimited
Some folks believe that generated HTML should pass specific HTML verification engines if is doe not then the page is considered
dirty.
In my early days I learned a single lesson that has served me well -- there are those things that are efficient but what good is
something that is efficient but is not effective. An example would be the CEO of a company needs a report, it may be efficient to
run the report when all reports are ran instead of stopping some other processing but then it would not be very effective if you
wish to respond to the CEO.
The bottom line is if it works on your target audience then it is an effective page; it may have to many <font> tags or this and
that and it may take an extra two seconds to display but who cares.
P.S. I believe you'll also find that those same folks take longer to get the task at hand accomplished ;>)
--
Mike -- FrontPage MVP '97-'02
J-Bots 2004 102 Components For FP
http://www.websunlimited.com
FrontPage Add-ins Since '97 FP 2003 / 2002 / 2000 Compatible
Download the Trial http://www.microsoft.com/frontpage/downloads/addin/launchupdate/download.asp
dirty.
In my early days I learned a single lesson that has served me well -- there are those things that are efficient but what good is
something that is efficient but is not effective. An example would be the CEO of a company needs a report, it may be efficient to
run the report when all reports are ran instead of stopping some other processing but then it would not be very effective if you
wish to respond to the CEO.
The bottom line is if it works on your target audience then it is an effective page; it may have to many <font> tags or this and
that and it may take an extra two seconds to display but who cares.
P.S. I believe you'll also find that those same folks take longer to get the task at hand accomplished ;>)
--
Mike -- FrontPage MVP '97-'02
J-Bots 2004 102 Components For FP
http://www.websunlimited.com
FrontPage Add-ins Since '97 FP 2003 / 2002 / 2000 Compatible
Download the Trial http://www.microsoft.com/frontpage/downloads/addin/launchupdate/download.asp
S
Scruff
Poor answer.Thomas A. Rowe said:Ask the "elitist" to define "Dirty HTML"
S
Scruff
Thanks, Mike
You've explained it perfectly and I appreciate the ed.
You've explained it perfectly and I appreciate the ed.
verification engines if is doe not then the page is consideredMD Websunlimited said:Some folks believe that generated HTML should pass specific HTML
there are those things that are efficient but what good isdirty.
In my early days I learned a single lesson that has served me well --
CEO of a company needs a report, it may be efficient tosomething that is efficient but is not effective. An example would be the
processing but then it would not be very effective if yourun the report when all reports are ran instead of stopping some other
wish to respond to the CEO.
The bottom line is if it works on your target audience then it is an
the task at hand accomplished ;>)effective page; it may have to many said:that and it may take an extra two seconds to display but who cares.
P.S. I believe you'll also find that those same folks take longer to get
T
Tom Gahagan
Is that the html from an adult site?
< duck >
Tom Gahagan
Oh me... I hope he does not say that my answer is poor too.... what would I
do? roflmao.......
< duck >
Tom Gahagan
Oh me... I hope he does not say that my answer is poor too.... what would I
do? roflmao.......
T
Thomas A. Rowe
It is not a poor answer, as the people that say FP generates "Dirty HTML" should be able to explain
exactly what they mean by the statement, and should be able to support it, which would have
eliminate you coming here to ask what they meant.
Mike did provide a good answer, however that is his take on what they meant, to truly know what they
meant, means you would have to ask those that made the statement.
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
exactly what they mean by the statement, and should be able to support it, which would have
eliminate you coming here to ask what they meant.
Mike did provide a good answer, however that is his take on what they meant, to truly know what they
meant, means you would have to ask those that made the statement.
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
T
Thomas A. Rowe
Your is a very poor answer! <vbg>
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
M
Murray
P.S. I believe you'll also find that those same folks take longer to get
I disagree. I understand the standards (sorta) and code to them. I test,
but not over the top. My pages are finished in half the time they required
before I took the time to understand the benefits of standards coding.
However - in my mind, "dirty HTML" means more than code that doesn't
validate - it means code that contains frank errors. These errors may not
be seen in a browser, and they many not cause error messages, but they are
nasty, ew, dirty anyway. I mean things like this -
<td align=right><a href="foo.html">link</a></font></td>
There are two errors there - a) an attribute without quotes, and b) a
terminating tag without the corresponding opening tag. Why worry about
this? Well, for me, every byte of weight is something I jealously guard. A
nasty tag adds weight to the page. It MUST come out.
Earlier versions of FP were rather legendary for doing things like this. FP
2003 can produce completely clean pages if you let it.
the task at hand accomplished ;>)
I disagree. I understand the standards (sorta) and code to them. I test,
but not over the top. My pages are finished in half the time they required
before I took the time to understand the benefits of standards coding.
However - in my mind, "dirty HTML" means more than code that doesn't
validate - it means code that contains frank errors. These errors may not
be seen in a browser, and they many not cause error messages, but they are
nasty, ew, dirty anyway. I mean things like this -
<td align=right><a href="foo.html">link</a></font></td>
There are two errors there - a) an attribute without quotes, and b) a
terminating tag without the corresponding opening tag. Why worry about
this? Well, for me, every byte of weight is something I jealously guard. A
nasty tag adds weight to the page. It MUST come out.
Earlier versions of FP were rather legendary for doing things like this. FP
2003 can produce completely clean pages if you let it.
S
Scruff
Thomas A. Rowe said:It is not a poor answer, as the people that say FP generates "Dirty HTML" should be able to explain
exactly what they mean by the statement, and should be able to support it, which would have
eliminate you coming here to ask what they meant.
I already had their explanation. I wanted to hear an FP experts view on the
subject.
By posting here, I wasn't asking them, I was asking the experience in this
NG. As a "MVP", I would certainly expect an attempt at an answer instead of
a poor attempt at humorous cynicism/sarcasm.
Mike did provide a good answer, however that is his take on what they meant, to truly know what they
meant, means you would have to ask those that made the statement.
At least I know his "take" on it. You've spent more time saying something
else other than sharing your knowledge. Mike's been here for years and has
always lent advice and a helping hand. He knows his stuff and I will
certainly take his word as accurate.
S
Scruff
So like Mike said, if it adds an extra second or two, so what?Murray said:I disagree. I understand the standards (sorta) and code to them. I test,
but not over the top. My pages are finished in half the time they required
before I took the time to understand the benefits of standards coding.
However - in my mind, "dirty HTML" means more than code that doesn't
validate - it means code that contains frank errors. These errors may not
be seen in a browser, and they many not cause error messages, but they are
nasty, ew, dirty anyway. I mean things like this -
<td align=right><a href="foo.html">link</a></font></td>
There are two errors there - a) an attribute without quotes, and b) a
terminating tag without the corresponding opening tag. Why worry about
this? Well, for me, every byte of weight is something I jealously guard. A
nasty tag adds weight to the page. It MUST come out.
Earlier versions of FP were rather legendary for doing things like this. FP
2003 can produce completely clean pages if you let it.
"Jealously guarding every byte just reeks of 'elitism'!"
D
David Baxter
Okay, then try this as an answer:
I've never heard the specific term "dirty HTML" and I don't know what
that means. The usual term used to criticize FP is "code bloat" or "HTML
bloat". As I have said on numerous occasions, this is virtually always
said by people who have never used FP or even opened the box -- it's a
myth propagated mostly by DreamWeaver zealots (not that there is
anything wrong with DreamWeaver but there is a lot wrong with zealots).
FP does not produce code that is any more bloated or any less clean than
any other WYSIWYG editor. Those who say it does are propagating a myth,
pure and simple, and an inaccurate one at that.
I've never heard the specific term "dirty HTML" and I don't know what
that means. The usual term used to criticize FP is "code bloat" or "HTML
bloat". As I have said on numerous occasions, this is virtually always
said by people who have never used FP or even opened the box -- it's a
myth propagated mostly by DreamWeaver zealots (not that there is
anything wrong with DreamWeaver but there is a lot wrong with zealots).
FP does not produce code that is any more bloated or any less clean than
any other WYSIWYG editor. Those who say it does are propagating a myth,
pure and simple, and an inaccurate one at that.
T
Thomas A. Rowe
If you truly wanted the opinion of the FP users here, why didn't you ask for it directly, instead,
you come here and want someone to defend against some lame statement.
I have never heard the term "Dirty" HTML before, and quick search on the internet turned up nothing
as well.
If you have been around as long as Mike, myself and others, as you seem to claim, then you should
have known the answer, if you are truly a FP user.
So Mike has been around a long time, so have I, so what? However Mike, Murray and myself and many of
the other regulars, don't hide who we are when posting, and I use a direct functional email address,
unlike you.
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
you come here and want someone to defend against some lame statement.
I have never heard the term "Dirty" HTML before, and quick search on the internet turned up nothing
as well.
If you have been around as long as Mike, myself and others, as you seem to claim, then you should
have known the answer, if you are truly a FP user.
So Mike has been around a long time, so have I, so what? However Mike, Murray and myself and many of
the other regulars, don't hide who we are when posting, and I use a direct functional email address,
unlike you.
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
S
Scruff
Great, Thank you!
David Baxter said:Okay, then try this as an answer:
I've never heard the specific term "dirty HTML" and I don't know what
that means. The usual term used to criticize FP is "code bloat" or "HTML
bloat". As I have said on numerous occasions, this is virtually always
said by people who have never used FP or even opened the box -- it's a
myth propagated mostly by DreamWeaver zealots (not that there is
anything wrong with DreamWeaver but there is a lot wrong with zealots).
FP does not produce code that is any more bloated or any less clean than
any other WYSIWYG editor. Those who say it does are propagating a myth,
pure and simple, and an inaccurate one at that.
S
Scruff
Um, Tom?
I did ask directly;
starting things off on the right foot!
I certainly didn't make up the term "dirty html", and I'm surprised you
haven't heard of it either.I googled it too (first page)
Javascript and wysiwyg : remove dirty HTML word tags - Wysiwyg ...
It's been thrown at me a few times, when I was choosing programs, in forums
that involve dreamweaver and other programs. Most anyone that doesn't use FP
seems to think it is second rate, and when I have pushed back the argument
seems to evolve around "dirty html". I posted here to get the FP Pro's take
on what that is all about.
And while have been on this NG for years under various names, I certainly
don't hide my id. My name is Tim Buck and my email addy is
[email protected]. I use Scruff in other NG's that aren't always so
kind as this one.
Now, I have received four replies with intelligent input to my question,
sans yours.
I don't claim to be an expert on FP but I have built and maintain 5 web
sites for clients. I can get around FP ok. I have bought J-bots from Webs
unltd as well as other apps I have found here. I get a lot of info here and
this, without a doubt, the best ng on fp there is. The cool thing about FP
is you barely have to even know html, and I really qualify in that category.
Mike and Murray have helped me numerous times. I have saved most of their
helpful posts and have collected a nice little library of information from
here for reference.
Rarely do I get flip answers to questions I ask here, but I did get one from
you!
I did ask directly;
to which you so eloquently answered "go ask an elitist". That is certainly"Why do any of the "elitist" web designers regard FP as a creator of
dirty html? What does than mean, and is it true?
Thanks"
starting things off on the right foot!
I certainly didn't make up the term "dirty html", and I'm surprised you
haven't heard of it either.I googled it too (first page)
Javascript and wysiwyg : remove dirty HTML word tags - Wysiwyg ...
It's been thrown at me a few times, when I was choosing programs, in forums
that involve dreamweaver and other programs. Most anyone that doesn't use FP
seems to think it is second rate, and when I have pushed back the argument
seems to evolve around "dirty html". I posted here to get the FP Pro's take
on what that is all about.
And while have been on this NG for years under various names, I certainly
don't hide my id. My name is Tim Buck and my email addy is
[email protected]. I use Scruff in other NG's that aren't always so
kind as this one.
Now, I have received four replies with intelligent input to my question,
sans yours.
I don't claim to be an expert on FP but I have built and maintain 5 web
sites for clients. I can get around FP ok. I have bought J-bots from Webs
unltd as well as other apps I have found here. I get a lot of info here and
this, without a doubt, the best ng on fp there is. The cool thing about FP
is you barely have to even know html, and I really qualify in that category.
Mike and Murray have helped me numerous times. I have saved most of their
helpful posts and have collected a nice little library of information from
here for reference.
Rarely do I get flip answers to questions I ask here, but I did get one from
you!
T
Thomas A. Rowe
Tim,
First, I really didn't consider my first reply to your post as being "flip", because I would have
done exactly as I told you to do, I would ask the people making the statement to describe what they
meant, I would not go and post to a FrontPage newsgroup to ask, as it is not the FP users making the
statement.
I don't think anybody that participates in this newsgroup, considers themselves to be an "elitist"
but I could be wrong, in any case I don't know any "elitist" web designer, never heard of any, and
most likely don't want to meet one.
As far as I am concerned, FP can be used to develop any web site, that any other HTML editor can
develop. The key in developing a web site is not the tool used, it is the knowledge of HTML and the
skill to put all of the elements together, and in today's internet the ability to code using
server-side scripting and databases.
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
First, I really didn't consider my first reply to your post as being "flip", because I would have
done exactly as I told you to do, I would ask the people making the statement to describe what they
meant, I would not go and post to a FrontPage newsgroup to ask, as it is not the FP users making the
statement.
I don't think anybody that participates in this newsgroup, considers themselves to be an "elitist"
but I could be wrong, in any case I don't know any "elitist" web designer, never heard of any, and
most likely don't want to meet one.
As far as I am concerned, FP can be used to develop any web site, that any other HTML editor can
develop. The key in developing a web site is not the tool used, it is the knowledge of HTML and the
skill to put all of the elements together, and in today's internet the ability to code using
server-side scripting and databases.
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
W
Windsun
No it is not.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M
Murray
<shrug>
OK.
OK.
K
Kevin Spencer
I did ask directly;
You said "any of the 'elitist' web designers" - which alone is a
non-starter. Define "elitist." And tell us how you discovered that "any" of
them (the 'elitist' web designers) "regard FP as a creator of dirty html?"
In other words, there is no pre-defined group called "the elitist" and among
web designers there is a fair amount of diagreement abouit quite a few
things. Therefore, the statement is self-contradictory, confusing, and
misleading. It makes a blanket assumption that somehow you've discovered a
special group of designers called "elitist" and a blanket assumption that
all ("any") members of this group have the same opinion regarding "dirty
html" which you didn't define, and is not a standard term.
Now, Tom has been an MVP for almost as long as there has been a FrontPage
product, and is one of the kindest and most generous contributors to this
newsgroup. So, you're not likely to make any points with the group by
attacking him, any more than you would make points by attacking the Pope.
And I'm not even a Catholic! ;-)
--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
What You Seek Is What You Get.
You said "any of the 'elitist' web designers" - which alone is a
non-starter. Define "elitist." And tell us how you discovered that "any" of
them (the 'elitist' web designers) "regard FP as a creator of dirty html?"
In other words, there is no pre-defined group called "the elitist" and among
web designers there is a fair amount of diagreement abouit quite a few
things. Therefore, the statement is self-contradictory, confusing, and
misleading. It makes a blanket assumption that somehow you've discovered a
special group of designers called "elitist" and a blanket assumption that
all ("any") members of this group have the same opinion regarding "dirty
html" which you didn't define, and is not a standard term.
Now, Tom has been an MVP for almost as long as there has been a FrontPage
product, and is one of the kindest and most generous contributors to this
newsgroup. So, you're not likely to make any points with the group by
attacking him, any more than you would make points by attacking the Pope.
And I'm not even a Catholic! ;-)
--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
What You Seek Is What You Get.
S
Scruff
I am not attacking anybody. I just asked a simple question
But it seems that you and Tom are having a shot at me.
Anyway, I have my answer, given by those capable of answering.
Next time I would suggest just saying that you don't know an answer, instead
of
getting all defensive about FP, which by the way, I think is the best.
But it seems that you and Tom are having a shot at me.
Anyway, I have my answer, given by those capable of answering.
Next time I would suggest just saying that you don't know an answer, instead
of
getting all defensive about FP, which by the way, I think is the best.