My Web site
I can see why you guys are a little miffed, some clown comes along and asks for your help and then appears to ignore you.
I assure you it's not like that at all, never the less I think I owe you and apology.
Maybe if I explain what I'm about you will not feel so aggrieved.
I got my first PC when I was 73 and it was used mainly to send & receive photos from my grand kids who live a distance away.
After a while I fancied trying my hand at building a web site, I didn't have front page but found a free application called TopDawg. I learned by trial and error and trying to understand(and occasionally crip) other peoples coding.
I thought a good site would be for folk who have left our village and who would like to see pictures of the old place, also I would add new pics as 200 year old cottages where demolished and redeveloped so they could keep up with the changes.
When I was finished I THOUGHT it was superb, until recently most of the messages in my guestbook were complementary.
Then I found this site and asked you guys for advice.
The first to reply was KDLA, I implented a couple of his suggestions and e-mailed him to thank him personally and say I thought it was an improvement already.That's presumably what you guys look at and still think it's crap.
Then I went down south to see some of my family for a few days and came back to find twenty or so replies, most of the advice went way above my head I'm not that clued up yet, the rest all said what a useless idiot I am and didn't deserve help.
At 74 I would like to develop my skill a little and have a hobby( though unlike you people sometimes it would be 3 or 4 days when the PC is not even turned on.)
Perhaps this site is for pros or semi-pros and I should seek advice elsewhere.
Those that have tried....thank you for your time.
I will personally apologise for any disrespectful comments you have received. At 74, and with one year computing experience, even understanding how to send and receive photos online is a huge achievement.
Because of the unprofessional nature of this review forum, reviewers are often biased and expect that you are in the same position as them. Its also easy to take things the wrong way when communicating via the web.
I have created a sticky thread in light of this (and other similar) incidences warning people about disrespectful posting.
Last edited by buntine; 07-08-2005 at 11:24 AM.
Yeah. I have always had a pretty warm welcome here, but then again I'm a fairly deent web designer (moreso artist, but eh). Sorry to hear things weren't as good for you Just keep in mind that not everybody here is like that
Yes, I would also like to apologise on their behalf. There's no excuse for being rude. But as long as you can also understand their/our point of view as well. Lets say that you were a plumber, and someone hooked up a kitchen sink using a garden hose and a fish tank and got paid for it whereas you would do a descent job using marble and gold taps. You would obviously be annoyed. I know its a bit of a funny metaphor, but it's just what I thought of on the spot
I'm personally guilty of this sort of treatment to some developers. When I first started developing in 1993, there was no real help or forums on developing sites. As well, web technology has drastically changed. It used to be just HTML and tables for layouts.
What I am trying to say is that where programs like Frontpage and Dreamweaver used to run the web industry, it's just not that simple anymore and it's easy for a person like me to get frusterated with those people who have just put their foot in the door and think that they are good developers. It's actually the threatening truth that "web developers and designers are a dime-a-dozen, good ones are priceless", and I like to fall in the "priceless" range. Novice developers that try to claim fame to their minimal skillset pose a direct threat to more experienced developers becuase the reality is, really poor developers work somewhere and get paid for putting out crap.
MikeG, this is in no way directed at you. These are just my rambling thoughts.
Bitter web veteran
Discovering a thing
Like I said I have been using an editor "TopDawg" and always used Internet explorer where things seemed to work(even if not very good).
Taking onboard a comment from this site I downloaded Netscape and accessed my site from there, all I could see was the coding. It appears IE is quite happy without file extensions but not NS. That's another lesson learned,what seem OK on one browser may not be OK on another.I am adding file extensions now...http://www.pgsc20025.pwp.blueyonder....mainspics.html
Hope you guys are going to humour an old man and steer me along the correct line using words of one syllable.
Theres that free textbased html editor i just cant remember the name i saw the website and it looked good any body can help?
EditPlus is also very good
Bitter web veteran
I think TSW Web Coder 5 is great - and a good transition if you're just starting out. It's free - so just do a search. [Would recommend avoiding Quick Edit feature and close all panels and toolbars that you don't need...] Bonuses: easy to add images w/ dimensions and file paths, plus you can check your code via w3c through the program & even upload if you don't have another ftp program.
p.s. - My gram. is 95 and I'll be visiting this weekend - hoping to get her e-mailing and will leave a laptop if she's willing! ;-)
i just installed editplus, it encodes with an incredibly old doc type, it should be freeware.
You create your own templates dera. Edit the template.html file with whatever DOCTYPE you want to be the default. I use this is amy default HTML template and just remove what I don't need :
Learn a little more about the program before jumping to conclusions. Oh, it should be Freeware huh??? You create a full blown editor on your time and then give it out for free!
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Frameset//EN"
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Frameset//EN"
<html><!--xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"//-->
<title> new document </title>
<meta name="keywords" content="">
<meta name="description" content="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta http-equiv="Expires" content="Mon, 26 Jul 1997 05:00:00 GMT">
<meta http-equiv="Cache-Control" content="no-store, no-cache, must-revalidate">
<meta http-equiv="Cache-Control" content="post-check=0, pre-check=0">
<meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache">
<style type="text/css" media="screen,print">
Last edited by Webnerd; 07-12-2005 at 08:02 AM.
Bitter web veteran
i know but things like meta it doesn't close the tag eg > instead of />, hmm most people will just crack this anyway...
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)