HTML Editors
Jeff Williamson
Northern Virginia Community College
www.nvcc.edu/home/nvwillj/html-editors/
nvwillj@nvcc.edu
Introduction to FrontPage
Microsoft's FrontPage generates a lot of opinions; some folks like it, while some loathe it. Part of this is the old Microsoft-just-wants-to-dominate-the-world argument, but there are some real diferences in the program that need to be explained.
I should add that all things considered, I don't like the program that much myself, so this is a somewhat biased opinion.
| 1. Background | 2. Program overview | 3. The mysterious fifth component |
| 4. FrontPage strengths | 5. FrontPage weaknesses | 6. Is FrontPage right for you? |
Background: FrontPage is intended to be part of the MS-Office suite, which has always had a bit of an identity crisis. MS-Office applications are supposed to be
easy to use - there are lots of wizards and smart features and other stuff designed to make life easy for new users (but not as easy as, say, ClarisWorks)
powerful - (or at least "heavily-featured") the programs are also supposed to do all sorts of things that others can't (some MS-Office programs like PowerPoint are industry leaders; some like Access are mid-range products).
"Easy to use" and "powerful" are not necessarily opposites, but they're close. It's hard for an easy to use program to be powerful and vice versa. Enter FrontPage, which also tries to cover both ends of the market, with about the same results as the Office products - some people find it intuitive, while some find it cumbersome.
[return to top]--------------------------------------------------Program overview - FrontPage 98 has at least five components:
Explorer - the Gorgon; part file manager, part FTP client, part web server, part batchfile auto-coding thingie.
Editor - an HTML code editor
Image Composer - a full graphics suite
GIF Animator - a small program for making animated GIFs
A mystery component - ???(note: freeware FrontPage Express has only the Editor)
More on the mystery fifth component in the next section.
The GIF Animator and Image Composer are fairly non-controversial. They have some strengths and weaknesses and a few distinctions, but they're pretty much in line with similar programs.
The Editor is a pro-quality HTML editor with some strengths and weaknesses. It also is pretty much in line with similar programs.
The Explorer is one distinctive part of FrontPage, and it's one thing people fight about. Some buy the program for it. Some hate the program for it. It has a number of features, but the main one is this:
You can drag and drop page icons onto a workspace, create relationships among them (and therefore make a site map or diagram), and have FP generate a site to match your map - with pages, links, and page links auto-coded onto every page.
Figure 1: Explorer view 1
Did you follow that? You create the chart by dragging and dropping. You set a few boxes for page attributes (e.g. headers, footers, icons, etc.) FP creates the site for you.
[return to top]--------------------------------------------------
The mysterious fifth component: the FrontPage Server Extensions
The one part of FrontPage that you can't really get out of the box is the FrontPage Server Extensions. Actually they're on the CD, but unless you run your own server, you won't be able to install them - you can only ask, like so:
Page author: "Do we have the FrontPage extensions on our server?"
Network administrator: "Nope."
Page author: "Can you put them on?"
Network administrator: "Technically, in the same way I could insert a slice of bread into a disk drive and wait for toast. However I choose not to. I don't make 5 times your salary for risking our entire network operations for dingbat insecure proprietary features that will change every year.
But thank you for asking."
Network administrators - particularly for institutions with mission-critical data on or connected to their web servers - don't like the FrontPage server extensions very much. They (apparently) have security flaws, they increase server load, they do things that can be done by other means, and they encourage newbie page authors to set up stuff beyond their skills and call more for help. They are a headache most easily avoided by just saying no. (Commercial ISPs, on the other hand, just about have to offer FP extensions to stay competitive)
FP users like the server extensions, however, because they are necessary for many components of FP, like the Explorer to work properly. They also (apparently) allow users to set up mouseovers, forms and chat rooms and other interactive stuff pretty easily.
Or at least that's the way I understand it. I've never had access to a server with FP extensions.
[return to top]--------------------------------------------------
These are subjective, of course, and from a guy who doesn't use FP that much.
1. Nice tools. The web bots, graphics applications, and FrontPage components make building complex applications relatively easy, if you're willing to let FrontPage have its way with your site.
2. Works well with MS-Office. I get better results opening Office docs in FrontPage than in saving them to .html in Office. Maybe this is just because I have Office 95.
3. Nice handling of templates. They have some included templates, but more useful for me was a feature which allowed you to set up your own templates. Then, when you order up a new page, you are given a template dialog box that lets you choose a template.
4. Nice code view. Code view in FP is well-organized and colored; it's very easy to read and edit.
5. An o.k. visual editor. If you don't use Javascript, the FP visual editor has all of the nice features of HTML 4, and works as well as anyone else's. Problem is, it has a reputation for chewing up Javascript. If you get past that potentially fatal problem, the editor's good - mixed strengths and weaknesses, but a competitive HTML 4 product.
maybe - FP Explorer. I've heard and had more horror stories than good experiences with FP Explorer, but I suspect that someone trained from the beginning in FP could master the thing and make a good site. For that person, the Explorer would be an invaluable asset - no other editor has anything remotely similar to it.
[return to top]--------------------------------------------------
1. Lousy installation - Everyone has headaches getting FP installed; network installations seem particularly difficult.
2. Server extensions - Many of FP's touted features just don't work without the FP server extensions, which as mentioned above, many network administrators are reluctant to install. So how much of FP works without the extensions? There is no handy list of what works without server extensions; you just have to read and figure stuff out.
3. Poor documentation/labelling - Related to #2, it is not well shown in the program or the documentation which FP features require server extensions or are proprietary to Internet Explorer. There are also some misleading dialog boxes, such as the one that allows you to choose headers, footers, and left/right gutters for the site:
Figure 2: Explorer view 2The four options look equal, but they are quite different. Top and left borders are frames for your entire site. Bottom and right gutters take every page of your site, shove it into one cell of a table, and add gutter contents into another cell.
4. Code revision - All visual HTML editors have to evaluate your code and make judgements to be able to display it. All will, for example, add tag closings if you have forgotten them. Many editors add a comment at the top to show code-snoops that you wrote your page with their editor.
Every editor does this sort of thing some; FrontPage does it more than most. In addition to the sort of revisions mentioned in #3 above, you'll also find a lot of comments and unnecessary closing tags added
5. Where's my $%^$#! file! - FP Explorer needs or at least wants to go over your whole site before you publish anything. It checks to see if you've made changes to borders, themes, and other common elements, and checks which files you've worked on, so that you don't have to reload a whole site just to get the right files up.
To do this, it buries your site deep in a C drive folder, and although you can work with it there, things seem to go more smoothly if you publish the buried site on C to your more normal C folder like C:\HOMEPAGE.
6. Disk full: Insert new disk - Because FrontPage adds lots of its own folders and files and inserts duplicates of your own folders (the _vti_cnf folders), it at least doubles the size of your site. More importantly, it just makes more schmutz to upload; you really can't just tinker with a couple of files and upload them.
7. All or nothing - The more I use FrontPage the more I understand that you really can't share a site with FrontPage and another editor; FrontPage needs to revise too many things to get reliable results with another editor.
[return to top]--------------------------------------------------
There's an easy one-step process for determining this:
Ask your sever administrator if your sever has the FrontPage extensions loaded.
If yes, you really should consider getting FrontPage, even if it won't be your main editor. The features the extensions offer are a really nice set of tools for your web-builder's toolbox.
If no, there's a less compelling case for FrontPage. Many folks still like it for the site management features of Explorer. And many folks like me dislike it for reasons mentioned above.