HTML vs WYSIWYG is always a hot button issue, but why?
I just find it interesting how hot it can get. In one comment we were told that "Not everyone’s an anal retentive coding geek" and that designers are visual. While in another comment on the same thread, someone wrote "...anyone who says that they need a WYSIWYG editor because they can’t type in angle brackets is admitting they’re dumber than a twelve-year old."
Now I'm not saying I approve of the name calling, but it is interesting to me how upset people get about it.
Personally, I learned HTML before there were WYSIWYG editors, and I tend to write it by hand when I need to. But I also use Dreamweaver to help design pages. I don't consider myself either an anal retentive coding geek or dumber than a 12-year-old (although, that would probably depend upon the 12-year-old...)
Is it that, in general, Web designers have nothing to argue about? Bwahahahahahaha! Sorry, started to choke there.... Why does it matter that some people like to know the code and others like to use tools? "Can't we all just get along?" :-)
Comments
I agree - let’s all get along. I use whatever tool will get the job done in the best fashion. Sometimes that’s hard-coding, sometimes that’s an editor that allows faster design flow, sometimes it’s a script that brings needed features. Like all things in life - everything has it’s good and bad. Choose the best tool for the job at hand.
The problem with WYSIWYG editors is their tendency to assume specific tags. I know that you can go into Dreamweaver and change the default settings, but many people who use Dreamweaver, strictly for it’s visual design editor, typically don’t know much about HTML. They are also likely to test their work in one browser (IE). Then, when people like me come into the picture, I have to go through all the code and clean it up. It creates quite a mess! In some situations I’ve seen two open body tags on one page. The use of deprecated font tages. Nested table tags with nothing in them. Break tags, Image tags, and List tags that have no closing tag. The use of Paragraph tags instead of Divs. Not to mention improper use of CSS, and what it looks like in Firefox.
I use Dreamweaver and HTML. I agree that Dreamweaver does some stupid things, but I use HTML to set the page just the way I want it and go back in and clean things up. Isn’t that a mark of a professional? I’ve seen some sites that are done by pro’s and show just how lazy some of us can be.
Take pride in your work and everything else will fall into place.
I agree with Jason. The WYSIWYG tools I’ve worked with produce some of the most backwards, ill-formed, incomplete (albeit functional) code I can imagine. The problem is that a lot of browsers (IE in particular) are far too forgiving, and a lot of designers go for years unaware of the mistakes in their code.
For myself, I use Notepad for all my coding, and if I ever open Frontpage it’s to utilize its spell checker. If they could invent a spell checker for Notepad, I’d be set.
only problem is when you use dreamweaver or (ack!) frontpage, it creates ugly and invalid code which making a developer who codes by hand 100% of the time much more difficult. it also makes it hard to optimize because its so garbled and spiders cant read through it. also, i think it makes hard code developers mad when people use dreamweaver just like if a person figures out how to invest in stocks without using a broker. it feels like we went through all that school and all that work for nothing.
What version of Dreamweaver?
My team was using Dreamweaver 8 and MX 2004 and it wasn’t generating any invalid code.
Instead, what it generated was code that worked, was valid, but sometimes didn’t meet our code style guidelines, and sometimes it goes insane adding div tags. But none of it was invalid…
I was just talking about this with one of my sisters. When I do graphics for the web vs. for print, I realize there’s a difference in the way my brain works, in a way. With web design, I have this aversion to knowing that my work will be seen differently on different browsers and machines, mainly I think because I am a print person first, and web second. I also have this fight between WYSIWYG and code, because again, with WYSIWYG it may be visually easier, but I invariably become frustrated because it ends up being anything but WYSIWYG. So, I then think of code as being the purest and most stable way to generate an accurate representation of what I want people to see.
So what do I do? A combination. I think it’s actually good for my brain. I don’t think it’s about smarts or laziness, I think it’s about the best match for the way each individual person’s brain works.
I’ll admit that I started out writing code (way back in the day…). But, when WYSIWYG tools were developed, I got lazy and started using them exclusively. Why bother coding if you could drag and drop! Oh, the humanity! Flash forward 3 years later and I’ve learned the error in my ways. Hand coding is the only way to go if you want clear and consistent results. As the old saying goes… measure twice, cut once.
Like Jennifer, I learned HTML before WYSIWYG editors and although it would be nice to use one to review changes as I make them, I am happy making changes and reviewing them from my server. What I need is a WYSIWYD editor (what you see is what you did).
The biggest problem I have with wysiwyg editors is letting them decide how they want to code something. So you see, I am not an anal retentive coding geek; I’m an anal retentive control freak!
I started out learning HTML in a class, and my brother told me I was wasting his money, because it was becoming invalid, so I switched to Dreamweaver. Now I am learning how to do things with web standards, and finding that all that HTML I learned was not useless. WYSIWYG may be good when everyone is on the same page about CSS and web standards–when you can just push a button and it works. Until that time, you still have to check your work–so it’s a little of both, but WYSIWYG is not enough.
What kills me is when people are so dependent on WYSIWYG that they CAN’T hand code a thing. I understand the idea of using it for basic placement, and then fine-tuning and cleaning up later IF YOU HAVE TO - however I prefer hand coding above and beyond. Especially in situations where using a WYSIWYG editor will screw up the end results.
Case in point: I had a client whose site I built completely with a php-driven CMS. The client went in with a WYSIWYG and borked the entire site in a matter of seconds. Then called me up to fix the mess. Fortunately I had a backup of all the old files (the job was almost a year old - they’re LUCKY!) and was able to restore things.
It also grates my nerves when a client comes in with a site they want me to do SEO on, but they don’t want to pay extra money once I get in there and see that I have to clean up 50 pages worth of borked code due to their last designer using FP or DW (without cleaning it up).
People will find anything to argue over though - I’ve witnessed (or been part of) debates over tables vs. CSS, WYSIWYG vs. hand coding, FFA linking and structured, selective link campaigns.
My opinion? If you’re going to be closed minded out of laziness, you’ll never get anywhere. The world changes, things progress, and so do standards in business. Especially in THIS business. Refusing to learn WHY things work by getting down to the nitty gritty is only going to hold you back (or worse, destroy you) in the future. I can’t tell you how many people I know personally that started a business like this on FrontPage because they didn’t know and didn’t want to know, and within a year were out of business because the people who viewed their career as a progressive learning curve STOLE it from them!
I have never used Dreamweaver so I cannot comment on that but I use Coffee Cup HTML editor. I guess that could be considered a WYSIWYG editor but before that I started learning the basics of coding. I feel that anyone creating a website should know the basics and some programs just don’t permit that. I have never liked templates. They are never of the correct design and you really can’t change them. If you try, they don’t work. So I say either learn how to code or hire someone who does know how to do it.
Jennifer,
I agree with you. Whenever I use Dreamweaver, my code comes out valid and fine.
The problem is when people start using JUST the design mode alone. I like the Split Screen set up a lot better. It allows me to correct anything that I may have done wrong. Either in the code or in the Design window.
The people having problems with the code Dreamweaver creates just don’t know how to use Dreamweaver correctly.
Not trying to be mean, but that has to be the case since both your team and myself get consistent valid code durring the use of Dreamweaver.
Knowing code is not an option for professional web designers, it is a necessity. If you do not have at least an intermediate level of HTML, you can not troubleshoot in detail effectively. If you don’t know code, you might as well just call yourself a GRAPHIC designer or Typesetter, because that’s all the function of your job is at that point.
Coding sets us apart from the Typesetters and Business Form Designers of the world.
I started out with the simplest HTML coding. I could put out the info I wanted to share in a not-very-fancy way. Early on I discovered that I could also save my MS-Word documents as html and post them. But when I wanted to change them, I was apalled at the redundant and virtually unmanageble code. I soon abandoned that approach.
Then I got Adobe GoLive 5.0 as part of a bundle. I spent several days learning it; only to discover that when I wanted to tweak something the code was too complex for me to get there. Some pieces of what I developed with GoLive are still in my web pages, but I’ve never used the program since that first try.
I’ve used a couple of old freebie html editors and feel comfortable writing my own code - learning CSS and other new developments as I have time and need.
I can’t afford Dreamweaver, which may be a good WYSIWYG editor, but even if it were free I would be in no hurry to learn to use it; I am, at this point, quite happy with coding my pages directly.
Phil Sidel, Pittsburgh PA USA
I don’t know if anyone else does this but after I learned how to type in HTML I started to use frontpage to do the easy stuff and add content. I already know how to add a table or a list why spend so much time on the easy stuff. When I add styles and other things that need to be just right I do it myself by hand. I do agree that everyone should learn the basics before using a WYSIWYG editor though.
I still have not read a true business case regarding WYSIWYG vs Hand Code. I think it comes down to preference. Some people can care less about code. Others may find code to be very important. I first started out with Notepad, then switched to Dreamweaver. At times, I will check the code in split or code view. I am a visual person, but do enjoy code from time to time. I say just use what works best for you.
>> Actually, now that I type I can think of one business reason to use a WYSIWYG editor - content contributors.
We are website design company, (www.wspgweb.com) and we prefer hand-coding for the following reasons:
1) Accessibility for users with visual disability. Such users may need alternate browsers or screen readers to navigate sites.
2) Less control if styles are not locked down. Also, many tags are not easilty accessible in WYSIWYG editors. HTML editors make the insertion of tags and attributres fairly easy.
3) WYSIWYG markup/code lacks context. The more our programmers know what exactly they are doing, the more efficient they become.
4) Some of our fluent programmers code faster than does WYSIWYG. It is also easier to fix and modify hand-coding than fixing WYSIWYG generated ones.
5) Authoring tools tend to favor formatting over the structure of the document. Remember HTML is intended to be used an information structure language. The prominent or evident tools of editors are similar to those of work processing packages. You can read a little more on this page w3.org/TR/REC-html40/intro/intro.html#h-2.3.5
6) Finally, the reality is that no WYSIWYG editor creates efficient and valid mark-up. May be there will be a time…..we can revisit this when WYSIWYG really learns to jump thru hoops..