Previous Message
Next Message

[css-d] Re: css-discuss digest, Vol 1 #25 - 49 msgs

Sent by Timothy Swan on 29 January 2002 16:04


>> You seem to be confusing the 'visualness' of the tool with the quality of
>> its output. Any tool can produce crappy output, visual or otherwise.
>snip
> 
> However all current software is very weak in this regard. Even the best
> visual tools still output crap, and are marketed at people who won't be
> able to recognise what's wrong with it.

This whole argument is bogus. Fact is, Dreamweaver is an enormously helpful
tool for a knowledgable web designer/coder. It can hugely cut down on the
drudgery, and it outputs pretty clean code (o.k., it's not xhtml compliant
and its javascripts are a mess.)

The fact is, I've seen some pretty lousy sites done by people who pride
themselves on their ability to handcode, and I've seen some pretty lousy
sites done by people using WSYWIG tools. The best sites (meaning both
validating and well-designed) are often done by people who use both.

If you put the best tools into the hands of people who don't know how to use
them, they'll still produce (holding my tongue) less-than-perfect sites. If
you have the best coder in the world without an iota of aesthetic sense,
you'll get the same.

Can we **please** get back to talking about CSS?
Previous Message
Next Message

Message thread: