Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- From: "Rob Giordano [MS MVP]" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 06:08:45 -0700
....and now that browsers are striving for standards compliance you're gonna
see more niggles to deal with when producing html with programs like
Publisher.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression
"DavidF" <Nope@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ed4$M3$bJHA.2132@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You aren't the first person that has said this, but I have to ask why was
it not a good idea?
If you have compiled a lot of statistics, and large database, marketing
materials for your business in one or more of the Office family of
programs, why is it a bad idea to be able to extract a data set, plat a
chart, produce a graph, build a report, produce a newsletter or a business
flyer, etc. and then easily convert those things to html so they can be
seen on the web, or even convert that data/information into a format that
can be incorporated into a web built with "proper" web program? Why is it
a bad idea for a business person, the layperson, hobbyist or anyone who
wants a basic, simple, static website not be able to produce that site
using the software they already own and understand, and instead invest a
lot of money and time to buy and learn how to use "proper" web software,
when they don't need it to achieve their simple goals?
Why is it bad to use these programs to produce proprietary html code, when
it was ok for FrontPage to produce non-standard proprietary code? Should
FP not have been produced?
Once again, please explain why it was a bad idea to build in the ability
to produce html into all the Office family of programs, when there is such
an obvious need for it?
DavidF
"Rob Giordano [MS MVP]" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:u0lGpf7bJHA.4500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Word, Publisher, Excel, PowerPoint were never designed to design websites
with although all will output a proprietary html (of sorts), not sure why
they did this imo it wasn't a good idea.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression
"Doug" <Doug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:CCD0E4D5-274D-436F-84F6-EB9B8502F333@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks for your thoughts, David. Yes, I realized that Word was "pushing
the
envelope" regarding HTML coding -- the resulting pages are generally so
complex that I don't even attempt to manually tweak the coding. But they
worked, for years -- until Firefox came along. I hadn't even bothered
to
install Firefox, until someone mentioned that the links on one of my
sites
weren't working. It was then that I discovered massive
incompatibilities,
incompatibilities which seem to have no solution.
I'm guessing that Microsoft specifically designed IE to be able to
handle
code from its products. And now that Firefox has come along, Microsoft
is
probably reluctant to make changes to accommodate this upstart
competition.
Understandable from their point of view, but from my point of view it's
a
repeat of the disastrous Netscape/IE showdown, where the big losers
were the
Web designers of the world, who were expected to design separate sites
for
Netscape and IE users.
I'm sure eventually Microsoft will get the message -- that Firefox isn't
going to go away. But for now, it seems that they're perhaps still
hoping it
will... ;-)
Doug
"DavidF" wrote:
Doug,
David Bartosik has not been active in this group for more than two
years, so
you will not be getting a response from him.
I don't disagree with much of what David says. He is a true expert and
I am
just a lay person that has chosen to use Publisher to build my site,
and
have worked out most of the problems associated with cross browser
compatibility. I haven't used Word to build a site, but your comment
about
"...Word can do layout tricks that I can't do on any other
program -- stuff that Front Page can't even dream of..." is probably
the key
to your frustration. Word and Publisher are primarily programs for
publications, and FrontPage for web publications. The simple fact is
that
there "layout tricks" in a print publication that simply will not
convert to
html...there is no html equivalent. Print and web media are two
different
things, and require two different mindsets and design approaches. With
Publisher at least, if you design your pages correctly keeping in mind
what
is possible and what is not possible in html, then you can build a site
with
good cross browser compatibility. You can look for an alternative to
Word or
Publisher, but ultimately it will probably not matter what program you
use
to build your site, you will still need to change your design and
layout in
order to convert it into html that is cross browser compatible.
This is not to say that you shouldn't move to Expression Web or some
other
program specifically designed for web building. It all depends on the
goals
and the scope of what you are trying to do with your site. But even if
you
do move to a different program, you will still have to work within the
limits of what you can and cannot do in html.
DavidF
"Doug" <Doug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:BD163646-BBB5-4065-9F93-56CBEB63B8CC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
So true, David. I just spent x hours trying to salvage my web pages
created
in Word after discovering that they don't display properly in
Firefox.
After
reading your post, I'm finally giving up. In my experience, both Word
and
Publisher are endlessly frustrating for creating web pages (even
before
this
Firefox fiasco). But the cross-platform incompatibility is the final
straw.
It's sad, because Word can do layout tricks that I can't do on any
other
program -- stuff that Front Page can't even dream of. I just tried
Word
2007,
hoping that they'd worked out the bugs, but apparently MS has no
intention
of
ever making this into a reliable crossplatform web design program.
Forgive me, but I *am* assuming that this is Microsoft's failing,
because
it
seems very unlikely that Firefox would make non-compliant software.
They
have
no incentive to. Microsoft does.
So now I have to go find a new program and try to import all my
Word-authored web sites into it. And then try to duplicate what I did
in
Word...
As David said, plan ahead. And I'd add, plan on using something
other
that
MS products.
Signed, one very regretful, and thoroughly disgusted ex-Word user,
Doug
"David Bartosik [MSFT MVP]" wrote:
Publisher is a desktop publishing tool that can save to html.
Publisher
does
come with web page wizards. It is important to be clear on the fact
that
Publisher is a DTP tool only with web page output ability, Word also
has
web
page functionality and can be used for a simple site, and also Excel
and
PowerPoint provide html output. While all the above mentioned tools
can
create a web page they are not web design nor html editors nor web
site
management tools. They do not allow for full support of all
browsers, nor
support the wide range of design techniques. That is where FrontPage
fits
into the Office Suite. FrontPage is the web site design tool.
With these facts clear you should be able to make an informed
decision.
Don't use Publisher if the possibility exists that it's limitations
will
be
an issue for you. If you still can't make a decision then I
recommend you
make a sample web page with Publisher ( and even Word as well ) to
find
if
you are comfortable with the results or not, and if you will be
long-term.
Long term planning is important because if you have big plans for
your
site
then you don't want limitations.
David Bartosik - [MSFT MVP]
www.publishermvps.com
www.davidbartosik.com
"RKamm" <RKamm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:07BD49C8-30D4-439F-8772-00FF84F970BC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What additional does FrontPage offer? Is it necessary for
relatively
simple
web pages or will Publisher work ?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- From: Doug
- Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- From: DavidF
- Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- From: Doug
- Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- From: Rob Giordano [MS MVP]
- Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- From: DavidF
- Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- Prev by Date: Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- Next by Date: Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- Previous by thread: Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- Next by thread: Re: Is Publisher 2003 an effective way of creating and managing a
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
