Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

1998


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 21574
interpreted = N
texte = > I'm planning to use GoLive CyberStudio 3.0 with WebCatalog. Are there > any known problems or shortcomings related to using CyberStudio 3.0? Does > anyone have any strong recommendations of CyberStudio vs Dreamweaver? > This question is with regard to integration of WebDNA with HTML using > these publishing tools only, not with regard to personal preference of > one tool vs the other, so please keep responses relevant to WebDNA > integration issues. > > Thanks, > BrianWe've been using CyberStudio since version 1.x and have found that it's probably the best (over PageMill, HomePage, Fusion, etc [haven't played much with Dreamweaver]).Layout capabilities are good, it can successfully debug itself, and you can open up little snippets of HTML code that you plan on using as [include]s (although you have to change the prefs on the file extensions to open as HTML vs. TEXT).Like everyone else has mentioned, I do the code and the layout first and then pop it into BBEdit for cleanup and adding DNA. Most DNA can be added in CyberStudio, but [founditems] with tables gets screwed up (CS wants them within the and not outside) and pop-up menus get screwed up. CS handles DNA in URL tags well and doesn't rewrite them, but can get messed up with &, < and > (like using them in a [math] tag).FWIW, the new BBEdit 5.0 has a CyberStudio cleaner/optimizer and generally I run all my pages through BBEdit's HTML syntax checker for
elements and other gaffes. Also, BBEdit can help in balancing [ and ].CS is also good in helping to figure a page's download time/size and is really good at tracking snippets of code and pages as templates. It saves time effort and energy on pages that contain the same code. CS can also do site-wide link checking.Best of luck.Bill-- Bill Heissenbuttel PageHouse, Inc. bill@pagehouse.com Internet Presence Provider http://www.pagehouse.com (509) 892-1973 Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Luke Melia 1998)
  2. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (charles kline 1998)
  3. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (John Hill 1998)
  4. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Robert Ruth 1998)
  5. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Gregory Scott 1998)
  6. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Mike Eberly 1998)
  7. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Pat McCormick 1998)
  8. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Charles Kefauver 1998)
  9. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Thomas Wedderburn-Bisshop 1998)
  10. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Bill Heissenbuttel 1998)
  11. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Michael A. Rosen 1998)
  12. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Will Starck 1998)
  13. Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Martin Gertz Bech 1998)
  14. WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility (Brian T. Wachter 1998)
> I'm planning to use GoLive CyberStudio 3.0 with WebCatalog. Are there > any known problems or shortcomings related to using CyberStudio 3.0? Does > anyone have any strong recommendations of CyberStudio vs Dreamweaver? > This question is with regard to integration of WebDNA with HTML using > these publishing tools only, not with regard to personal preference of > one tool vs the other, so please keep responses relevant to WebDNA > integration issues. > > Thanks, > BrianWe've been using CyberStudio since version 1.x and have found that it's probably the best (over PageMill, HomePage, Fusion, etc [haven't played much with Dreamweaver]).Layout capabilities are good, it can successfully debug itself, and you can open up little snippets of HTML code that you plan on using as [include]s (although you have to change the prefs on the file extensions to open as HTML vs. TEXT).Like everyone else has mentioned, I do the code and the layout first and then pop it into BBEdit for cleanup and adding DNA. Most DNA can be added in CyberStudio, but [founditems] with tables gets screwed up (CS wants them within the and not outside) and pop-up menus get screwed up. CS handles DNA in URL tags well and doesn't rewrite them, but can get messed up with &, < and > (like using them in a [math] tag).FWIW, the new BBEdit 5.0 has a CyberStudio cleaner/optimizer and generally I run all my pages through BBEdit's HTML syntax checker for elements and other gaffes. Also, BBEdit can help in balancing [ and ].CS is also good in helping to figure a page's download time/size and is really good at tracking snippets of code and pages as templates. It saves time effort and energy on pages that contain the same code. CS can also do site-wide link checking.Best of luck.Bill-- Bill Heissenbuttel PageHouse, Inc. bill@pagehouse.com Internet Presence Provider http://www.pagehouse.com (509) 892-1973 Bill Heissenbuttel

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

Mozilla/4. and Browser Info.txt (1997) 3rd party processor question (2003) Limiting user access to .tmpl files (1997) RequiredFields template (1997) WebCat2b15MacPlugin - showing [math] (1997) Installer needed (2004) Help name our technology! (1997) Long/Lat (2002) HELP WITH DATES (1997) Archives not sorting properly (2003) [isfile] ? (1997) Sitebuilder (2004) [WebDNA] Community [function] lib? (2015) Bookmarked URL with cart (1998) WebDNA install on Tiger doesn't work ... (2005) Great product and great job ! (1997) Bug or syntax error on my part? (1997) [ListFiles] & [loop] (1998) A question on sub-categories (1997) [WebDNA] ReturnRaw and binarybody (2013)