[thelist] Front Page - does it suck?

[Dulcie Meatheringham]

Janet wrote:

> >>>I would probably refuse a project where I had to develop for
> FP from scratch.<<<
>
> I think we should *all* go out and build a three-page site using
> FP2000, and report back here in a week to compile the "offical
> Front Page suck quotient." Might give us all some ammunition to
> share with clients who are considering it as a tool.
>
> ;) only partially kidding.

How about 300 or 500 page sites:

http://www.albertaheritage.net

http://collections.ic.gc.ca/alberta

http://collections.ic.gc.ca/pasttopresent

http://collections.ic.gc.ca/abnature

These were all built with Front Page 2000, the last 3 in the list by
interns.  Front Page gives you easy access to the source code, and is
excellent for site management and provides lots of information on your site
(reports, etc.) and a wicked Search and Replace function. If people are
familiar with MS Word, then FP won't be too intimidating. Even our research
interns are able to edit and update with Front Page.

I like it.  I only used Dreamweaver once, and found myself feeling blind
because I couldn't see what was happening, and the source code was only
available in a tiny window.  I'd like to try it (and Homesite) some more.

Downsides: can't customize it to use <em> instead of <i>, etc.
Upsides: can customize it to whatever level of browser support you like,
page load times and connection speed, etc., can configure editors for .css
files, and for image files.

I imagine it won't seem very impressive if you're used to the way you build
sites with another tool, but it's completely suitable for our purposes.

Dulcie.
--
Dulcie Meatheringham, Web Projects Coordinator
dulcie at heritagecommunityfdn.org (780) 424-6512, x227
http://www.heritagecommunityfdn.org
Heritage Community Foundation