FP - go on - persuade me!

J

Jim Scott

I used to use FP and was quite happy with it. However my ISP doesn't use FP
extensions and is tight with webspace so I need to keep unnecessary stuff
to a minimum. The more I leaned about HTML, the more I became concerned
about the stuff that FP puts in that I don't really need. What are all
those oddly named folders about and why are they there? Can I stop FP doing
that?
I went back to the start and rebuilt my site using various softwares and
settled for Nvu. Nvu is good. I particularly like the ability to validate
each page as I go along. However it too has its faults. If your website
has folders, you need to be careful where you let it upload to as it uses
the last folder you used; frustrating, but not the end of the world. You
must be careful not to overload it or it goes into a sulk and stops
working. Generally it does well, but where FP comes into its own is it's
ability to check links and compare local web to uploaded web, for orphans
and duplicates. Without FP, I have to use three other pieces of software to
do this.
I won't go through and list my needs as they must be clear. I like FP, but
cannot, or have not been able to, find a way of using its good features
without installing its bad ones. Am I asking too much?
 
T

Thomas A. Rowe

FP creates the hidden _vti folder to manage the content of your web site. These folders are never
publishing between locations.

The FP extensions on the live/remote server will create and manage them as needed.

If there are no FP extensions on the live/remote server and you publish via FP's FTP mode then the
_vti folder are not created on the live/remote server.
--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
==============================================
If you feel your current issue is a results of installing
a Service Pack or security update, please contact
Microsoft Product Support Services:
http://support.microsoft.com
If the problem can be shown to have been caused by a
security update, then there is usually no charge for the call.
==============================================
 
J

Jim Scott

FP creates the hidden _vti folder to manage the content of your web site. These folders are never
publishing between locations.

The FP extensions on the live/remote server will create and manage them as needed.

If there are no FP extensions on the live/remote server and you publish via FP's FTP mode then the
_vti folder are not created on the live/remote server.
Click to expand...

So the only way they could have got there would be if I had used a
different ftp client to upload eg WS_FTP?
So you are saying that if I upload my now clean tidy site, FP will add
nothing to it? Better and better.
Finally what is the best way to validate each page as I go along? Just
through my browser and W3C?
 
T

Thomas A. Rowe

See inline below

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
==============================================
If you feel your current issue is a results of installing
a Service Pack or security update, please contact
Microsoft Product Support Services:
http://support.microsoft.com
If the problem can be shown to have been caused by a
security update, then there is usually no charge for the call.
==============================================

Jim Scott said:
So the only way they could have got there would be if I had used a
different ftp client to upload eg WS_FTP?
Click to expand...

Yes or the FP extensions where applied to the site at one time and the site was created directly or
published via FP's http mode.
So you are saying that if I upload my now clean tidy site, FP will add
nothing to it? Better and better.
Click to expand...

If you will be publishing to a server that does not have FP extensions via FP's FTP upload method,
then correct.
Finally what is the best way to validate each page as I go along? Just
through my browser and W3C?
Click to expand...

I don't validate pages. I check pages in the various browsers that I expect to be visiting the site
I am working on.
 
J

Jim Scott

See inline below
Click to expand...

Okey dokey then. I have reinstalled FP and uploaded my site using it. As
you predicted there is/are no _vti folder(s), but there is one called
'private' that wasn't there before. What's that for?
 
S

Steve Easton

Actually it should be named _private

It is exactly what it says, a private folder that is not publicly
accessible.

It's normally used to store hit counter counts, form results pages and
so on.
You can also use it to store page templates and such ,so they're
accessible if / when you're editing on line via http://

hth

--
Steve Easton
Microsoft MVP FrontPage
95isalive
This site is best viewed............
........................with a computer
 
T

Trevor L.

FWIW,
I use a server without FPSE and I use FP to upload in FTP mode. It works
well, I would almost say perfectly, for me.

I have no problems with extra folders, so far as I can tell by looking at
the site in FP or otherwise.

So, Jim , if you have any problems, they may be ones I have faced and
resolved. (That is, feel free to repost.)
 
J

Jim Scott

FWIW,
I use a server without FPSE and I use FP to upload in FTP mode. It works
well, I would almost say perfectly, for me.

I have no problems with extra folders, so far as I can tell by looking at
the site in FP or otherwise.

So, Jim , if you have any problems, they may be ones I have faced and
resolved. (That is, feel free to repost.)
Click to expand...

I agree. The thing FP does best is its FTP upload and its ability to point
out broken links and orphaned files all in one go.

It was, in retrospect NOT the program to build my first website with
although I did this with ease. I must have used HTTP uploading as all the
_folders ended up on the website and some of my markup was really poor as I
knew no better. Having started again from scratch, I hope I have the skill
to use correct markup although I will use W3C for this; it's just a pity
that is not built in.
 
C

Cheryl D Wise

The _vti folders are there to store data used by FP in managing links, etc.
in your site. That's where all that link, orphan files and other report info
comes from. I didn't see the earlier bits of this thread so I don't know
what version of FP you are using but you can configure FP 2003 (and in most
cases the earlier versions) as well to write code that is basically W3C
compliant IF and this is a big IF you do not use the webbots that require
the FPSE to run.

That means form handlers primarily and web components but also the
navigation bots. You do have to spend a few minutes configuring the Tools |
Page Options settings but that is a one time thing. Frequently mark-up
errors in FP come from people editing and not deleting all the html element
mark-up. That's how empty and invalidly nested tags usually get there.

Making sure you use mark-up instead (dropdown box at the far left of the
format toolbar) instead of font tags (using the font size, bold buttons on
the format toolbar) will result in cleaner and more compliant code as well.

FWIW, most people with their first website have lousy mark-up regardless of
what they use to create it. There is only so much a program can do in the
hands of someone who has no clue about what they are trying to do. With time
and curiosity enough to want to learn most people get better and those that
don't quit.

--
Cheryl D. Wise
MS FrontPage MVP
http://mvp.wiserways.com
http://starttoweb.com
Online instructor led web design training in FrontPage,
Dreamweaver and more!
 
M

Murray

How utterly diplomatic, Cheryl. I completely agree with you.... (for what
that's worth!)

--
Murray
============

Cheryl D Wise said:
The _vti folders are there to store data used by FP in managing links,
etc. in your site. That's where all that link, orphan files and other
report info comes from. I didn't see the earlier bits of this thread so I
don't know what version of FP you are using but you can configure FP 2003
(and in most cases the earlier versions) as well to write code that is
basically W3C compliant IF and this is a big IF you do not use the webbots
that require the FPSE to run.

That means form handlers primarily and web components but also the
navigation bots. You do have to spend a few minutes configuring the Tools
| Page Options settings but that is a one time thing. Frequently mark-up
errors in FP come from people editing and not deleting all the html
element mark-up. That's how empty and invalidly nested tags usually get
there.

Making sure you use mark-up instead (dropdown box at the far left of the
format toolbar) instead of font tags (using the font size, bold buttons on
the format toolbar) will result in cleaner and more compliant code as
well.

FWIW, most people with their first website have lousy mark-up regardless
of what they use to create it. There is only so much a program can do in
the hands of someone who has no clue about what they are trying to do.
With time and curiosity enough to want to learn most people get better and
those that don't quit.

--
Cheryl D. Wise
MS FrontPage MVP
http://mvp.wiserways.com
http://starttoweb.com
Online instructor led web design training in FrontPage,
Dreamweaver and more!
Click to expand...
 
J

Jim Scott

The _vti folders are there to store data used by FP in managing links, etc.
in your site. That's where all that link, orphan files and other report info
comes from. I didn't see the earlier bits of this thread so I don't know
what version of FP you are using but you can configure FP 2003 (and in most
cases the earlier versions) as well to write code that is basically W3C
compliant IF and this is a big IF you do not use the webbots that require
the FPSE to run.

That means form handlers primarily and web components but also the
navigation bots. You do have to spend a few minutes configuring the Tools |
Page Options settings but that is a one time thing. Frequently mark-up
errors in FP come from people editing and not deleting all the html element
mark-up. That's how empty and invalidly nested tags usually get there.

Making sure you use mark-up instead (dropdown box at the far left of the
format toolbar) instead of font tags (using the font size, bold buttons on
the format toolbar) will result in cleaner and more compliant code as well.

FWIW, most people with their first website have lousy mark-up regardless of
what they use to create it. There is only so much a program can do in the
hands of someone who has no clue about what they are trying to do. With time
and curiosity enough to want to learn most people get better and those that
don't quit.
Click to expand...

Hi Cheryl
Thanks for replying.
I am on XP SP2 with FPXP (that's 2002 I think)
I think I changed the Format toolbar icons to those I use, so the dropdown
box at the far left of that toolbar you refer is not there, or was never
there in FP2002.
I thought I might be able to achieve my aims by unchecking some boxes in
Page Options/Compatability, but which ones?
 
C

Cheryl D Wise

Then it has gotten turned off somehow because it was there in FP 2002 and
even 2000. Since I never owned 98 or 97 I can't say about those versions. If
you run Steve's FPCleaner it should restore it.
http://www.95isalive.com/fixes/fpclean.htm

I don't have FP 2002 installed anymore but look first you want (which if I
recall correctly is under Tools | Site Settings |Advanced tab) check the
box to leave the HTML alone. You also need to turn off the proprietary
featured under Tools | Page options (no java or vml graphics for example),
set the compatibility to custom. I really can't remember the rest since I
haven't used 2002 since 2003 came out and haven't even had it installed on
my system since for at least 8 months.


--
Cheryl D. Wise
MS FrontPage MVP
http://mvp.wiserways.com
http://starttoweb.com
Online instructor led web design training in FrontPage,
Dreamweaver and more!
 
J

Jim Scott

Then it has gotten turned off somehow because it was there in FP 2002 and
even 2000. Since I never owned 98 or 97 I can't say about those versions. If
you run Steve's FPCleaner it should restore it.
http://www.95isalive.com/fixes/fpclean.htm

I don't have FP 2002 installed anymore but look first you want (which if I
recall correctly is under Tools | Site Settings |Advanced tab) check the
box to leave the HTML alone. You also need to turn off the proprietary
featured under Tools | Page options (no java or vml graphics for example),
set the compatibility to custom. I really can't remember the rest since I
haven't used 2002 since 2003 came out and haven't even had it installed on
my system since for at least 8 months.
Click to expand...

Thanks for you help so far.
In 2002 I cannot find a command 'Site Settings' to "leave the HTML alone"
although I have "preserve existing HTML" in Page Options/HTML source.

In Page Options/Compatibility the tick boxes are: ActiveX controls,
VBscript, Javascript, Java applets, Dynamic HTML, Frames, CSS 1 and 2,
Active server pages, VML graphics. Currently ticked are VBscript, Dynamic
HTML, Frames, Css 1 and 2, Active server pages. Can you confirm this is ok?
 
T

Thomas A. Rowe

In FP2000 / FP2002, Site Settings = Web Settings

Preserve Existing HTML is not an option in FP2003, as it is now the default function of FP.

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
==============================================
If you feel your current issue is a results of installing
a Service Pack or security update, please contact
Microsoft Product Support Services:
http://support.microsoft.com
If the problem can be shown to have been caused by a
security update, then there is usually no charge for the call.
==============================================
 
J

Jim Scott

In FP2000 / FP2002, Site Settings = Web Settings

Preserve Existing HTML is not an option in FP2003, as it is now the default function of FP.
Click to expand...

Thanks Thomas
Cheryl was having trouble remembering what was (or in my case 'is') on
FP2002.
Feel free to chip in this thread as I'm sure she won't mind.
To recap I'm trying to use FP2002 to produce validatable mark-up and would
like to disable any FP 'bits' that would prevent that (for the time being
anyhow).
 
C

Cheryl D Wise

Definitely not since I know Thomas has the older versions installed.<g>

Memory, especially ones that are a few years old are only a starting place
and not to be totally relied upon, at least in my case.

Dynamic HTML should be used with care, most of it won't validate, disable
VBScript and Java applets. You don't want to use VBScript in your web pages
by leaving asp checked you should still be able to use it in asp which is
the only place it should be used. Frames are a personal choice but I find
very few reasons to use them. About the only time I find them to be worth
the trouble they can cause is with photo galleries. Note that you need to
make sure you use a valid frameset doctype if you use frames (this does not
apply to iframes, just 'regular' ones.)

--
Cheryl D. Wise
MS FrontPage MVP
http://mvp.wiserways.com
http://starttoweb.com
Online instructor led web design training in FrontPage,
Dreamweaver and more!
 
J

Jim Scott

Definitely not since I know Thomas has the older versions installed.<g>

Memory, especially ones that are a few years old are only a starting place
and not to be totally relied upon, at least in my case.

Dynamic HTML should be used with care, most of it won't validate, disable
VBScript and Java applets. You don't want to use VBScript in your web pages
by leaving asp checked you should still be able to use it in asp which is
the only place it should be used. Frames are a personal choice but I find
very few reasons to use them. About the only time I find them to be worth
the trouble they can cause is with photo galleries. Note that you need to
make sure you use a valid frameset doctype if you use frames (this does not
apply to iframes, just 'regular' ones.)
Click to expand...

Thanks Cheryl.
I'll play with FP a while longer.
Since I lsst used it I have been using Nvu (formerly Netscape Composer). I
find it much easier to work with, perhaps because it is not so
sophisticated. It does, however have a built in link to W3C, which is
handy.
On the other hand its FTP client is very basic and it's easy to upload
files to the wrong folder if you are not awake.
If I don't use FP for anything else, its FTP facilities leave every other
application standing.
 
C

Cheryl D Wise

Personally I can't imagine going back to FP 2003 and I tried Nvu for a
comparison of CSS editiors for a local user group. Didn't care much for it
even as a text editor for CSS. I positively disliked Netscape Composer so
that may explain why I didn't care for it. I prefer TopStyle or RapidCSS for
CSS.

Everyone has their own way of working though.

--
Cheryl D. Wise
MS FrontPage MVP
http://mvp.wiserways.com
http://starttoweb.com
Online instructor led web design training in FrontPage,
Dreamweaver and more!
 
Top