Thanks everyone for the positive input... This is exactly why I love this group. If you're not clear on something you post it, get your replies and it becomes clear.
K.Pince On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Conrad Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 8:10 AM, Peter De Berdt <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> >> On 27 Nov 2009, at 14:41, Conrad Taylor wrote: >> >> Peter, I tend to use Fireworks CS4 to slice up the PSD to generate HTML, >> CSS, and images. This gives me the initial cut of the design in HTML and >> CSS. Then I'll use both Dreamweaver CS4 and Textmate. Dreamweaver has >> embedded the WebKit engine so that I can see the changes to my site code >> without opening a browser. Thus, I tend to do most of the CSS and HTML in >> it. Next, I use Textmate mostly for the RoR and Ruby specific things >> because Dreamweaver provides the ability to invoke Textmate from DW. >> In short, I use the best tool(s) for the job and I haven't hit any walls >> but leveraged other toolsets. >> >> >> Yes, but even then you are handcoding most of the page in Dreamweaver, >> aren't you? It basically means you have a very expensive handcoding IDE (but >> the price of course justifies itself if it makes you more productive, it >> doesn't for me, even though I had to use Dreamweaver for years, so I know my >> way around). >> >> > No, most of the hand coding is actually happening in Textmate. DW allows > me to use Textmate as the code editor. Next, Web Developer Premium is part > of my development toolbox and it has paid for itself many times over. > Furthermore, CS4 suite of tools > is cheap compared to my license for Autodesk Maya and Mathematica. BTW, I > work as a computer scientist in the areas of AI, Animation, VR, and Web. > > >> Depending on the project, I'm also using Fireworks to slice up the >> graphics. Most projects we do however tend to be about structure first, >> having to keep in mind how the data will flow in it and make sure either >> Rails or Javascript will easily be able to push the data in, i.e. the HTML >> needs to be very straightforward. Doesn't mean the final result isn't >> graphically impressive. >> >> > I have learned how to generate a semantically structured HTML + CSS out of > Firewroks and I can usually have a working prototype up in a short amount of > time. I have learned a lot of tricks and shortcuts from some of the > masters. It's about > knowing how to properly use your tools and to apply the right tool for the > job. Our goal is usually to get it working because > the our clients really do not care what use and how you use it. They > simply want a solution. Some projects I have implemented the in Smalltalk > or Lisp because it was much more productive in those languages to get the > job done. > > >> However, the code that Dreamweaver generates as a pure WYSIWYG editor is >> just horrendous, especially in the hands of a designer who doesn't grasp >> HTML+CSS in the slightest. Yes, the result renders, but having to work with >> the generated code for creating dynamic pages is a real pain. >> >> > Yes, I agree with you 100% because the various Javascript generators within > DW tend to place code in your well formed XHTML instead of a .js file or > both. Thus, I tend to stay away from them most of the time within DW. > However, the HTML + CSS export feature in Fireworks does exactly what you > want it to do because if you slice your PSD in a structured manner, then the > HTML + CSS looks very nice. In short, you should enjoy using the > tools/technologies at your disposal and also try to learn about new ones > when you can. It simply makes for a well rounded software developer in my > opinion. > > -Conrad > > >> Hope this clears things up a bit. >> >> >> Best regards >> >> >> Peter De Berdt >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<rubyonrails-talk%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<rubyonrails-talk%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
