Pop`
Sun Sep 03 10:37:21 CDT 2006
Not to be a PIA, but rather to add some relevant information here:
Daiya Mitchell wrote:
> Hi James,
>
...
>
> One of the main problems with using Word for web pages is that it's
> near impossible to troubleshoot, since Word doesn't actually build
> web pages, but instead stores all the information it would need to
> reconstruct a Word document from the HTML format.
Not quite: You're splitting hairs with "doesn't actually build web pages"
because it in fact does, and it saves them to disk in perfectly readable AND
edittable format by Word or any other text editor. In Word, you can even
work directly in Source View to edit and manipulate the code. Word will
display what you wrote, complete with warts and all.
The REAL drawback to Word is:
-- It was not intended for Web pages; it was intended for intranet usages.
-- In versions past Word97, it places a huge amount of PERSONAL information
into the file which should NOT be placed on a web site! That's because it's
intended to be used on the intranet, not the web or internet, whatever you
wish to call it yourself. There, it makes sense, but not on a web site.
Most people don't
> understand, or care to understand, the arcane process by which that
> is done. Word offers many features that browsers simply won't
> understand/replicate.
You are misunderstanding. In HTML design mode, Word writes very capable
code, including xml, albeit pretty bloated, but again it's not intended for
the web. That said however, ALL of the major browsers read Word's code very
well, especially IE of course. In fact, the whole Office suite can write
pretty good and usable by browsers, code. There are a very few things that
the latest version of Word cannot do. What you said is just plain
inaccurate.
>
> Re creating webpages:
>
> I'd go with Nvu, at least for now--I've looked at it briefly and it's
> certainly no worse than Word, free, and it will help you get a basic
> understanding of HTML to transfer into a more sophisticated app, as
> *any* WYWIWYG program is easier to use if you can switch into code
> view and understand what is going on.
I could agree with that, as long as the bugs are understood: e.g. incorrect
centering, re-write/re-positioning of code, odd code structure, intermittant
browser calls, unreliable ftp abilities, incorrect line numbering for
troubleshooting, and so on. As I said before, it would be OK if one reads
and understands the bug list first. And keep in mind it's dormant and maybe
even dead w/r to further development. Yes, I used NVU; until it went
dormant.
Regards,
Pop`
>
> There are a bunch of Mac web apps--many people recommend RapidWeaver,
> I think. Ask over on the MacWord group. I'm pretty happy with
> Dreamweaver on my Mac, but I get education discounts (and I'm not
> sanguine about what Adobe will do to the next version of Dreamweaver).
>
> PS. There are Mac Office dedicated newsgroups, which are probably a
> better place to post your question.
>
> See here for Google/Entourage gateway to newsgroups for MacWord,
> MacExcel, and other MS programs for the Mac:
> <
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/community/community.aspx?pid=newsgroups>
>
> More info on using Newsgroups:
> <
http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/AccessNewsgroups.htm>
> (hit refresh a few times in Safari, or use a different browser)
>
> Hope that helps,
>
>
>> I'm a Mac user - I have Office 2004, I guess that means nothing to PC
>> users, but I use Word to create web pages, and will do so until I can
>> get something good and proper. I would use FrontPage except there is
>> no Mac version.
>>
>> This may just be a Mac thing, but no matter what font I choose, some
>> letters appear screwed up ....I 've tried a number of fonts. I would
>> like to use Arial or Veranda but no success. Nor any luck with Comic
>> Sans or Helvetica ( I think thats a Mac font). Can nayone suggest a
>> web/Word/Mac friendly font?
>>
>> Ideas? Suggestions? And yes, I am saving up for Dreamwaver
>>
>> thanks!