[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 02 May 2003 7:28 pm, Rick Timmis wrote: > Now here's a problem > > For speed of delivering web content for our site we use WYSIWYG > > Currently Dreamweaver of Front Page offer a quick and dirty solution. very dirty - both of 'em. Unless you are prepared to use Dreamweaver as a starting point and do the rest by hand. FrontPage? forget it. The code produced by FP is so bad it is quicker to re-write the code from scratch than debug it. > Sure we could sit and hand code stuff in Bluefish or some other Code > editor, but this is a long winded process. Most things worthwhile take time to achieve. SuperTramp didn't migrate overnight, problems took time to solve and your site is no different. At the St. Austell talk, Rick mentioned how he was grateful that the job of migration had been properly allocated and supported. Same with the site - it needs the hand of a competent person to craft it and hone it. Dedicated time from an enthusiastic and willing contributor, not just a few idle moments with a mouse and Dreamweaver. > If we could find a good product running under Linux then we would grab > it with both hands. Quanta Plus? It leaves the emphasis clearly on code but with useful little add-ons. Otherwise, I use Kate for all HTML/PHP/Perl/MySQL/C++ coding now. Especially in KDE 3.1 but the KDE 3.0 version is usable. > I would be interested in your views on what you think we should use to > achieve the desired results ? Kate http://validator.w3.org/check/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0789726173/neilwilliaprogra http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201354934/neilwilliaprogra http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1565925157/neilwilliaprogra http://www.codehelp.co.uk lynx Konqueror Gimp (although the images are fine and you probably don't need to add any). Always design to the standards, not to the herd. I feel that the problems are symptomatic of a lot of the less active GNU projects. LinuxFormat have an occassional feature of projects requesting help and many (like NMS and GnuPG where I try and help) simply need better testing, documentation and reporting. It's the final mile - the hardest part of any project. The core work is done, the project works (of a fashion) but troublesome bugs show up in unlikely places due to incomplete finishing. The enthusiasm of the developer wanes, the drive is to get the product packaged and distributed. The best GNU projects get this sorted - Mozilla and GPG are good examples. The bug reporting and testing are robust and comprehensive - the developers responsive and co-operative. I subscribe to gnupg-users and it demonstrates how the Linux community is so much better at this final stage of development than any closed-source project. Problems and test results are aired in public, the developers respond in public, others contribute and the result is incorporated into the next release. It is a long process - it MUST be a long process or it simply isn't worth doing. Much like locking down a server - it requires a lot of work up-front but crucially it also requires an mandatory and ongoing commitment to maintain and problem-solve. Sounds a lot like what you are promising prospective clients, so I feel it is only fair that clients should expect the same diligence in the care of the website itself. After all, the website IS your main interface, your public face, your public-relations outlet and your online persona. That's why I might have sounded strongly critical of the first view of the site - because it concerns me enormously that a pro-Linux pro-Open Source site can so blatantly oppose the principles of the best of the Open Source community. Any blighter can write bad HTML - there is really no need to demonstrate how many poor sites are out there. What the Linux community needs is more sites that demonstrate excellence. Excellence in design, in craft, in execution and in maintenance. There is little wrong with the basic design of the site. The execution is awful because the craft has been omitted. Now it is up to the maintenance to repair the damage and make the changes behind the scenes. What the site needs is the same presentation on a standard-compliant foundation. Keep the frontage, rebuild the structure. As an absolute minimal requirement: More use of CSS (validated). Removal of all non-essential Flash. Addition of complete and inclusive, equivalent (not alternative) content for non-Flash visitors. Dynamic content (or visitors simply won't come back). Login page for existing customers, support tickets, contact forms not email links - see www.eclipse.net.uk or www.purple-paw.com for ideas.) More content. Standard compliant HTML or XHTML (preferred). This will lead to a usable Lynx environment, a working Konqueror implementation and a reputable site - you will know that problems reported to you by users with the site will be down to their browser / config. environment and you can save a lot of support time. Face it, what is the best platform to demonstrate your success at migration? Don't you want your own site to perform perfectly in your new migrated systems??? - -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.codehelp.co.uk http://www.dclug.org.uk http://www.wewantbroadband.co.uk/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQE+s/gZiAEJSii8s+MRArXJAKCG+AUDl+HoNuLPKzp3Qe+vW46AYACY43Xx C1uxwnUXR3Sm7XEKYH1/aA== =OZh0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.