On 2002.11.08, Peter M. Jansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The only reason I do the other thing is that the method you're using is
> really hostile to Dreamweaver, Mozilla Composer, or GoLive. I can edit my
> HTML in my WYSIWYG editor, and some of the editors include facilities for
> doing thing sitewide that are just as good as ns_adp_include, but don't
> require a runtime execution ("Why Grandma, what a static page you have."
> "The better to cache you with, my dear").
>
> My personal preference is not to force HTML to be edited in a text editor,
> where possible.
All good points. In the end, if the performance difference is
negligible, then again I say it's a matter of personal preference. The
way we work here is the designers build the display templates using
Dreamweaver then we take it and mark it up with code to make the
display templates "do stuff" ... we don't round-trip the stuff, so it
works out just fine this way.
-- Dossy
--
Dossy Shiobara mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/
"He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)
