<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Do it by hand</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/</link>
	<description>development (tech and personal) thoughts of Alex Hillman</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 07:51:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6-beta1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tim Van Buren</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/#comment-47453</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Van Buren</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:07:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/?p=343#comment-47453</guid>
		<description>I don't understand why Dreamweaver gets such a bad rap. It doesn't mess with your code, at least not that I have ever seen. And it makes so many things just one click easier.

It understands the directory structure of your ftp site. I can be editing a file, I type crtl-s, then ctrl-shift-u and the page/file slides on up to the server. I don't have to switch windows, I don't have to pay attention to the working directory I am in.

It's great for finding my place in a page. I go to design view (ctrl-~), click on the spot I want to edit in the code and ctrl-~ again and I am there. It has buttons for selecting parent tags, code collapse and a good find and replace. 

(one of my complaints about it is that it won't search ALL files, just the ones it thinks it wants to.)

It validates html as you go, so you can see if you have a mistake. I can't tell you how many times I have found nesting and tag closure errors in html that was hand coded in a text editor.

The code completion saves me keystrokes all the time.

It's handy for finding colors. I always need to create a slightly different shade of one of the colors in my color scheme for a particular element of content...say a table row background color...and I can do that easily in DW, trying out a number of different shades til I get the one that's right.

I could work in homesite, notepad++, or komodo edit(my 2nd choice). After 10 years I know the html and css by heart. But it would just be inconvenient.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t understand why Dreamweaver gets such a bad rap. It doesn&#8217;t mess with your code, at least not that I have ever seen. And it makes so many things just one click easier.</p>
<p>It understands the directory structure of your ftp site. I can be editing a file, I type crtl-s, then ctrl-shift-u and the page/file slides on up to the server. I don&#8217;t have to switch windows, I don&#8217;t have to pay attention to the working directory I am in.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s great for finding my place in a page. I go to design view (ctrl-~), click on the spot I want to edit in the code and ctrl-~ again and I am there. It has buttons for selecting parent tags, code collapse and a good find and replace. </p>
<p>(one of my complaints about it is that it won&#8217;t search ALL files, just the ones it thinks it wants to.)</p>
<p>It validates html as you go, so you can see if you have a mistake. I can&#8217;t tell you how many times I have found nesting and tag closure errors in html that was hand coded in a text editor.</p>
<p>The code completion saves me keystrokes all the time.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s handy for finding colors. I always need to create a slightly different shade of one of the colors in my color scheme for a particular element of content&#8230;say a table row background color&#8230;and I can do that easily in DW, trying out a number of different shades til I get the one that&#8217;s right.</p>
<p>I could work in homesite, notepad++, or komodo edit(my 2nd choice). After 10 years I know the html and css by heart. But it would just be inconvenient.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carla Alvarez</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/#comment-44685</link>
		<dc:creator>Carla Alvarez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 00:25:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/?p=343#comment-44685</guid>
		<description>I use Dreamweaver, but just use the code view when I'm building the layouts.  Since most of what I design is a theme or template for a CMS, the design view doesn't get used much unless I'm doing an HTML email.

&#62;&#62;The worst thing I’ve ever seen is exporting to HTML from Microsoft Word. Just ridiculously awful results.

I can do one better, I actually had to fix a site generated in MS PUBLISHER.  And it wasn't created by the owner's relative either, they actually paid a "designer" to do it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I use Dreamweaver, but just use the code view when I&#8217;m building the layouts.  Since most of what I design is a theme or template for a CMS, the design view doesn&#8217;t get used much unless I&#8217;m doing an HTML email.</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;The worst thing I’ve ever seen is exporting to HTML from Microsoft Word. Just ridiculously awful results.</p>
<p>I can do one better, I actually had to fix a site generated in MS PUBLISHER.  And it wasn&#8217;t created by the owner&#8217;s relative either, they actually paid a &#8220;designer&#8221; to do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Cabrera</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/#comment-44459</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Cabrera</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 17:10:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/?p=343#comment-44459</guid>
		<description>I think you need to modify the first one; even IE6 is dead to me.

As web developers, where business rules allow it, we must stop always thinking backwards compatibility is a goal. IE6 is an awful browser and we shouldn't have to jump through hoops unless the 1.5% of people that still use it (or whatever the number is) is critical for the site to be successful. I've even stopped caring in a lot of my projects if 24-bit PNGs with alpha transparency render poorly under IE6.

That all being said, I'm not quite sure how you would develop anything but a trivial site using something like Dreamweaver. I don't even put it on my resume; and when I was recruiting, I would consider touting Dreamweaver proficiency as a negative (probably one of the reasons I wasn't a successful chop-shop recruiter)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you need to modify the first one; even IE6 is dead to me.</p>
<p>As web developers, where business rules allow it, we must stop always thinking backwards compatibility is a goal. IE6 is an awful browser and we shouldn&#8217;t have to jump through hoops unless the 1.5% of people that still use it (or whatever the number is) is critical for the site to be successful. I&#8217;ve even stopped caring in a lot of my projects if 24-bit PNGs with alpha transparency render poorly under IE6.</p>
<p>That all being said, I&#8217;m not quite sure how you would develop anything but a trivial site using something like Dreamweaver. I don&#8217;t even put it on my resume; and when I was recruiting, I would consider touting Dreamweaver proficiency as a negative (probably one of the reasons I wasn&#8217;t a successful chop-shop recruiter)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl Franke</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/#comment-44324</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl Franke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 20:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/?p=343#comment-44324</guid>
		<description>WYSIWYGs are the devil...A lot of them alter your code into ALL CAPS and some of them even remove apostrophes! For example they will turn the following code:

 

into



The worst thing I've ever seen is exporting to HTML from Microsoft Word. Just ridiculously awful results.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WYSIWYGs are the devil&#8230;A lot of them alter your code into ALL CAPS and some of them even remove apostrophes! For example they will turn the following code:</p>
<p>into</p>
<p>The worst thing I&#8217;ve ever seen is exporting to HTML from Microsoft Word. Just ridiculously awful results.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reed Gustow</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/#comment-43790</link>
		<dc:creator>Reed Gustow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 01:41:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/?p=343#comment-43790</guid>
		<description>Here at Delta Angel Design, all coding is by hand and we are just delighted with the results. Makes the staff smarter, too!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here at Delta Angel Design, all coding is by hand and we are just delighted with the results. Makes the staff smarter, too!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lachlan Hardy</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/#comment-43776</link>
		<dc:creator>Lachlan Hardy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:44:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/?p=343#comment-43776</guid>
		<description>It was the same at News. All coders code by hand. We let them use whatever tool they want to do it, but we make sure they can code by hand before we hire them.

I had no idea this was still considered an unusual concept in large scale web publishing/production. I just thought everybody did it these days. It *is* the only way to assure code quality and cross-browser/platform consistency!

But we knew that already, right? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was the same at News. All coders code by hand. We let them use whatever tool they want to do it, but we make sure they can code by hand before we hire them.</p>
<p>I had no idea this was still considered an unusual concept in large scale web publishing/production. I just thought everybody did it these days. It *is* the only way to assure code quality and cross-browser/platform consistency!</p>
<p>But we knew that already, right? :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Hillman</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/#comment-43752</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Hillman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/?p=343#comment-43752</guid>
		<description>Yo Bryan! When are we gonna see you down in the 'Illadelph?

CSSEdit is pretty slick, though for me it just gets in the way more than it helps. But they have created a good product that helps create good code, and I'm into that!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yo Bryan! When are we gonna see you down in the &#8216;Illadelph?</p>
<p>CSSEdit is pretty slick, though for me it just gets in the way more than it helps. But they have created a good product that helps create good code, and I&#8217;m into that!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryan Thatcher</title>
		<link>http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/2008/04/30/do-it-by-hand/#comment-43751</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryan Thatcher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:38:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dangerouslyawesome.com/?p=343#comment-43751</guid>
		<description>All coding at Fusebox/Empressr gets done by hand, CSS creation and editing is aided by the very awesome tool, CSSEdit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All coding at Fusebox/Empressr gets done by hand, CSS creation and editing is aided by the very awesome tool, CSSEdit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
