Comments on: Are Tools Making us Dumber? (to hand code or not to hand code) http://meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/ Web design and that Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:18:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Catarina http://meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/comment-page-1/#comment-4954 Catarina Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:03:22 +0000 http://www.meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/#comment-4954 I was happy get rid of frontpage when I learned (presentational) HTML at the age of 13 (7 years ago), it was much simpler to code in notepad. I was equally happy to get rid of presentational HTML and learn CSS when I resumed my webdesign days a few months ago. Nowadays I usually code in dreamweaver because of the CSS tips that appear while typing in code view (I'm lazy :P) and that's about it. But it can be a time saver when used to create boring stuff like tables (but not for layout!!) and lists. I have a reasonable understanding of CSS, but I sometimes refrain myself from doing crazy cool designs because I don't think it's possible to code them. What I'm saying is that if I didn't know anything about CSS, I'd design pages freely and let the coders worry about it later :P But I realise I just have to study harder to be able to code whatever I come up with without crippling my imagination, and I love to code. :) I was happy get rid of frontpage when I learned (presentational) HTML at the age of 13 (7 years ago), it was much simpler to code in notepad. I was equally happy to get rid of presentational HTML and learn CSS when I resumed my webdesign days a few months ago. Nowadays I usually code in dreamweaver because of the CSS tips that appear while typing in code view (I’m lazy :P ) and that’s about it. But it can be a time saver when used to create boring stuff like tables (but not for layout!!) and lists.
I have a reasonable understanding of CSS, but I sometimes refrain myself from doing crazy cool designs because I don’t think it’s possible to code them. What I’m saying is that if I didn’t know anything about CSS, I’d design pages freely and let the coders worry about it later :P But I realise I just have to study harder to be able to code whatever I come up with without crippling my imagination, and I love to code. :)

]]> By: andyk http://meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/comment-page-1/#comment-4936 andyk Sat, 24 Feb 2007 12:35:24 +0000 http://www.meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/#comment-4936 It depends on how you define a web designer... if it's someone who JUST designs basic websites, then yes, they can do their job without knowing HTML. It doesn't mean that they can necessarily do their job WELL, but these people only class themselves as 'designers'. (that doesn't mean they SHOULDN'T know how to code HTML, it just means it is possible for them to do the job without knowing it) Now there is no way a proper web 'developer' can do their job without knowing the code. It depends on how you define a web designer… if it’s someone who JUST designs basic websites, then yes, they can do their job without knowing HTML. It doesn’t mean that they can necessarily do their job WELL, but these people only class themselves as ‘designers’.

(that doesn’t mean they SHOULDN’T know how to code HTML, it just means it is possible for them to do the job without knowing it)

Now there is no way a proper web ‘developer’ can do their job without knowing the code.

]]> By: Fredrik Rubensson http://meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/comment-page-1/#comment-4934 Fredrik Rubensson Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:41:17 +0000 http://www.meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/#comment-4934 I've been using Dreamweaver for years to get sites to look the way I want. Especially when CSS appeared (and I didn't bothered to learn it) it was great to have a WYSIWYG editor to get things going. I never really apreciated the handicraft of making web pages compared to writing decent code in a decent language like Java. Recently, however, I decided to do it the hard way in order to actually learn something about CSS, Javascript and the like. Ok - it is time consuming, but I suspect that the time is invested in shorter debugging and development times in the future. I will most certainly return to Dreamweaver or something similar later on. Now I am using TextMate which is a brilliant code editor and really makes code easier to edit. I was also a bit confused by the PostScript part of the Sierra post. What was the point with that? There has been attempts of making things more WYSIWYG for a long time in many programming languages. 4GL was one of the first and it has been completely abandoned. VB and .NET I guess still is pretty succesful. Sun had ideas about this with the Java Beans thing but it didn't turn out well. A recent trend (5 years or so) is integration platforms where web services, Java calls, XML transformations and who knows what is easily integrated in a nice GUI. It is not WYSIWYG for the end user but it is an abstraction on top of the code level. Some things are suited well for WYSIWYG, some things are not. I just try to avoid tools that reduces the quality and fell happy about tools that enables my creativity! I’ve been using Dreamweaver for years to get sites to look the way I want. Especially when CSS appeared (and I didn’t bothered to learn it) it was great to have a WYSIWYG editor to get things going. I never really apreciated the handicraft of making web pages compared to writing decent code in a decent language like Java. Recently, however, I decided to do it the hard way in order to actually learn something about CSS, Javascript and the like. Ok – it is time consuming, but I suspect that the time is invested in shorter debugging and development times in the future. I will most certainly return to Dreamweaver or something similar later on. Now I am using TextMate which is a brilliant code editor and really makes code easier to edit.

I was also a bit confused by the PostScript part of the Sierra post. What was the point with that? There has been attempts of making things more WYSIWYG for a long time in many programming languages. 4GL was one of the first and it has been completely abandoned. VB and .NET I guess still is pretty succesful. Sun had ideas about this with the Java Beans thing but it didn’t turn out well. A recent trend (5 years or so) is integration platforms where web services, Java calls, XML transformations and who knows what is easily integrated in a nice GUI. It is not WYSIWYG for the end user but it is an abstraction on top of the code level. Some things are suited well for WYSIWYG, some things are not. I just try to avoid tools that reduces the quality and fell happy about tools that enables my creativity!

]]> By: Megan http://meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/comment-page-1/#comment-4925 Megan Fri, 23 Feb 2007 13:54:46 +0000 http://www.meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/#comment-4925 Dreamweaver can though. I wouldn't use it if I didn't think it could code (at least simple things) just as well as I can. I *wouldn't* do it for layout but I don't hesitate for simple text structure. As CSS is becoming more capable we are able to simplify HTML a lot. I'm trying to think of non-standards compliant stuff that it does but nothing is coming to mind. Whenever I've found validation errors it's because of human error not Dreamweaver. I used to have obsessive control over code too - even down to indenting and where line breaks are, but since then I've decided I've got <a href="http://www.meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/16/is-validation-really-that-important-what-about-standards/" rel="nofollow">too many other things to worry about</a> ;) Dreamweaver can though. I wouldn’t use it if I didn’t think it could code (at least simple things) just as well as I can. I *wouldn’t* do it for layout but I don’t hesitate for simple text structure. As CSS is becoming more capable we are able to simplify HTML a lot.

I’m trying to think of non-standards compliant stuff that it does but nothing is coming to mind. Whenever I’ve found validation errors it’s because of human error not Dreamweaver.

I used to have obsessive control over code too – even down to indenting and where line breaks are, but since then I’ve decided I’ve got too many other things to worry about ;)

]]> By: Adam H http://meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/comment-page-1/#comment-4922 Adam H Fri, 23 Feb 2007 04:35:17 +0000 http://www.meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/#comment-4922 I hand code *everything* from HTML to ASP.Net. My tool set includes NotePad++, Visual Studio, TextMate and CSSEdit. The only time I ever open DreamWeaver is when I need to update the standard web template for work but I use it in code mode. My "passion" is due to an obsessive compulsive need to control how my code looks. I am a code control freak and have been since the first time I looked at the code FrontPage generated *shudder*. Until WYSIWYG editors can make perfectly standards compliant HTML that utilizes CSS layout techniques (ya right!) I won't change my methods. I hand code *everything* from HTML to ASP.Net. My tool set includes NotePad++, Visual Studio, TextMate and CSSEdit.

The only time I ever open DreamWeaver is when I need to update the standard web template for work but I use it in code mode. My “passion” is due to an obsessive compulsive need to control how my code looks. I am a code control freak and have been since the first time I looked at the code FrontPage generated *shudder*. Until WYSIWYG editors can make perfectly standards compliant HTML that utilizes CSS layout techniques (ya right!) I won’t change my methods.

]]> By: jeevesbond http://meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/comment-page-1/#comment-4921 jeevesbond Fri, 23 Feb 2007 01:57:28 +0000 http://www.meganmcdermott.com/2007/02/22/are-tools-making-us-dumber-to-hand-code-or-not-to-hand-code/#comment-4921 <blockquote>In desktop publishing, for example, you will never hear, “Oh, you can’t just use Quark or Adobe InDesign… you really need to tweak the Postscript by hand to do it right.”</blockquote> Has she ever seen Postscript? Here's an excerpt from a postscript file I just created: <code>(StandardSymL) cvn findfont dup length dict begin {1 index /FID ne {def} {pop pop} ifelse} forall /Encoding [ /.notdef /exclam /universal /numbersign /existential /percent /ampersand /suchthat /parenleft /parenright /asteriskmath /plus /comma /minus /period /slash /zero /one /two /three /four /five /six /seven /eight /nine /colon /semicolon /less /equal /greater /question /congruent /Alpha /Beta /Chi /Delta /Epsilon /Phi /Gamma /Eta /Iota /theta1 /Kappa /Lambda /Mu /Nu /Omicron /Pi /Theta /Rho /Sigma /Tau /Upsilon /sigma1 /Omega /Xi /Psi /Zeta /bracketleft /therefore /bracketright /perpendicular /underscore /radicalex /alpha /beta /chi /delta /epsilon /phi /gamma /eta /iota /phi1 /kappa /lambda /mu /nu /omicron /pi /theta /rho /sigma /tau /upsilon /omega1 /omega /xi /psi /zeta /braceleft /bar /braceright /similar /Upsilon1 /Euro /minute /lessequal /fraction /infinity /florin /club /diamond /heart /spade /arrowboth /arrowleft /arrowup /arrowright /arrowdown /degree /plusminus /second /greaterequal /multiply /proportional /partialdiff /bullet /divide /notequal /equivalence /approxequal /ellipsis /arrowvertex /arrowhorizex /carriagereturn /aleph /Ifraktur /Rfraktur /weierstrass /circlemultiply /circleplus /emptyset /intersection /union /propersuperset /reflexsuperset /notsubset /propersubset /reflexsubset /element /notelement /angle /gradient /registerserif /copyrightserif /trademarkserif /product /radical /dotmath /logicalnot /logicaland /logicalor /arrowdblboth /arrowdblleft /arrowdblup /arrowdblright /arrowdbldown /lozenge /angleleft /registersans /copyrightsans /trademarksans /summation /parenlefttp /parenleftex /parenleftbt /bracketlefttp /bracketleftex /bracketleftbt /bracelefttp /braceleftmid /braceleftbt /braceex /angleright /integral /integraltp /integralex /integralbt /parenrighttp /parenrightex /parenrightbt /bracketrighttp /bracketrightex /bracketrightbt /bracerighttp /bracerightmid /bracerightbt /space /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef ] def currentdict end </code> That's not easy to understand, HTML was designed to be human readable, Postscript was not. So the comparison between postscript and HTML lacks merit. There isn't much need to use a WYSIWYG editor for HTML, it's not difficult to understand. A good editor will make the tedious bits easier though: auto-completion, lists of standards-compliant tags from menu bars, automatically creating data tables etc. Also, whether an author requires assistance with coding depends upon their experience and the project. If the project is an authors first, and it's just a simple home site there's nothing wrong with using a WYSIWYG editor. If the project is a dynamic web shop and the author is a professional they should know how to code. It's doubtful WYSIWYG would work well for their purposes anyway (because of dynamic content).

In desktop publishing, for example, you will never hear, “Oh, you can’t just use Quark or Adobe InDesign… you really need to tweak the Postscript by hand to do it right.”

Has she ever seen Postscript? Here’s an excerpt from a postscript file I just created:
(StandardSymL) cvn findfont dup length dict begin
{1 index /FID ne {def} {pop pop} ifelse} forall
/Encoding [
/.notdef /exclam /universal /numbersign /existential /percent /ampersand /suchthat /parenleft /parenright /asteriskmath /plus /comma /minus /period /slash
/zero /one /two /three /four /five /six /seven /eight /nine /colon /semicolon /less /equal /greater /question
/congruent /Alpha /Beta /Chi /Delta /Epsilon /Phi /Gamma /Eta /Iota /theta1 /Kappa /Lambda /Mu /Nu /Omicron
/Pi /Theta /Rho /Sigma /Tau /Upsilon /sigma1 /Omega /Xi /Psi /Zeta /bracketleft /therefore /bracketright /perpendicular /underscore
/radicalex /alpha /beta /chi /delta /epsilon /phi /gamma /eta /iota /phi1 /kappa /lambda /mu /nu /omicron
/pi /theta /rho /sigma /tau /upsilon /omega1 /omega /xi /psi /zeta /braceleft /bar /braceright /similar /Upsilon1
/Euro /minute /lessequal /fraction /infinity /florin /club /diamond /heart /spade /arrowboth /arrowleft /arrowup /arrowright /arrowdown /degree
/plusminus /second /greaterequal /multiply /proportional /partialdiff /bullet /divide /notequal /equivalence /approxequal /ellipsis /arrowvertex /arrowhorizex /carriagereturn /aleph
/Ifraktur /Rfraktur /weierstrass /circlemultiply /circleplus /emptyset /intersection /union /propersuperset /reflexsuperset /notsubset /propersubset /reflexsubset /element /notelement /angle
/gradient /registerserif /copyrightserif /trademarkserif /product /radical /dotmath /logicalnot /logicaland /logicalor /arrowdblboth /arrowdblleft /arrowdblup /arrowdblright /arrowdbldown /lozenge
/angleleft /registersans /copyrightsans /trademarksans /summation /parenlefttp /parenleftex /parenleftbt /bracketlefttp /bracketleftex /bracketleftbt /bracelefttp /braceleftmid /braceleftbt /braceex /angleright
/integral /integraltp /integralex /integralbt /parenrighttp /parenrightex /parenrightbt /bracketrighttp /bracketrightex /bracketrightbt /bracerighttp /bracerightmid /bracerightbt /space /.notdef /.notdef
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
] def currentdict end

That’s not easy to understand, HTML was designed to be human readable, Postscript was not. So the comparison between postscript and HTML lacks merit.

There isn’t much need to use a WYSIWYG editor for HTML, it’s not difficult to understand. A good editor will make the tedious bits easier though: auto-completion, lists of standards-compliant tags from menu bars, automatically creating data tables etc.

Also, whether an author requires assistance with coding depends upon their experience and the project. If the project is an authors first, and it’s just a simple home site there’s nothing wrong with using a WYSIWYG editor. If the project is a dynamic web shop and the author is a professional they should know how to code. It’s doubtful WYSIWYG would work well for their purposes anyway (because of dynamic content).

]]>