Dreamweaver servers behavior and data base binding

[jesusb36699135]

Tengo problemas al instalar esta extensión en Dreamweaver CC 2018, ya intente hacerlo por medio del Creative Cloud e incluso usando el Adobe Extensión Manager, nada funciona

[Nancy OShea]

Are you asking about the old & outdated server-behaviors that were formerly in Dreamweaver?

Don't bother using them.

Or are you asking about a 3rd party commercial extension?

[BenPleysier]

Adding to Nancy's reply, have a look at this for more info https://www.dmxzone.com/go/21842/enable-server-behaviors-and-data-bindings-panel-support-for-dreamwe...

The warning is also applicable to CC2018, it will not work.

[Preran]

I have reported this issue to the team and they have logged a bug for investigation. Meanwhile, can you check if the extension from DMXzone works/

Thanks,

Preran

[BenPleysier]

@Preran This has been an issue since CC2017 where the extensions that rely on the SB panels, have not worked. This has not been of a great concern to DMXZone, they have gone off on a tangent which reduces their reliance on Dreamweaver (read: Wappler). It has been of a great concern to WebAssist due to their lack of resources.

Many of WebAssist's customers are pleading with Ray Borduin to forget Dreamweaver and start writing extensions for another IDE.

While you are talking to the DW development team, you may make mention of the fact that extensions make Dreamweaver, they add to Dreamweaver what Adobe does not. In the past 5 years or so, Dreamweaver has made it increasingly impossible for third party developers to add their extensions, paricularly the removal of Adobe's Extension Manger to name one.

Have a look at Substitute for Dreamweaver to see what your users are saying.

[Preran]

Hi Ben,

I have already shared the forum post in question with the team and underlined the importance of making it easy for extension developers to create extensions for Dreamweaver.

From their reply, I believe that the team is aware of this situation, and they are working with related teams to address this issue. Like all of you, I am keeping my fingers crossed.

Thanks,Preran

[Brad Lawryk]

Dreamweaver is such a disaster right now. Long known issues that 'the team is aware of' still not even remotely looked at. They have known about the difficulties they are creating for extension developers, and as a result Dreamweaver users, for years. This isn't something new to them like as if they didn't know.

Dreamweaver has totally lost focus on who the target users are or if there even is a target user. Muse is headed down that same path unfortunately while still remaining very limited in it's use.

Worst thing is, I doubt that Adobe even cares.

I wouldn't be surprised to see new products coming out such as Wappler crush Dreamweaver. I have stopped keeping my fingers crossed for Adobe's web tools long ago.

I can only keep my fingers crossed that Wappler is released before Dreamweaver inevitably fully blows up.

[pziecina]

It is not that Adobe does not care, more that they have no idea.

Unlike most Adobe products, Dw is not for a closed environment that Adobe can control, and extensions put that environment, (or could) even further beyond Adobes control. There is no profit for Adobe beyond the initial subscription to Dw, as anyone using it or extensions would not necessarily have any use for any other Adobe product beyond Dw itself.

I'm probably going to offend you with my next statement, but none is intended.

Maybe more CAB and Dw team members should say openly in this forum what they think the Dw intended user requires, and what they think is right or wrong with Dw now.

[-Michele]

In the "Prerelease Dreamweaver" forum, Adobe has claimed:

------

Thanks for your inputs. Although, there is no active development going on in Server Behavior and Databases panels, but i will still raise this with the team and reply back on this thread if there are any updates.

------

So, if you need to use server behaviours with Dreamweaver, you have only an option, downgrade to CS6.

Adobe has decided in the last versions to remove everything that Macromedia had developed after the acquisition of Drumbeat (and InterAKT) and discouraged the activity of extensions development.

I don't know the reasons but Wappler's success shows us that the users still want tools to generate dynamic content from databases without in-depth programming knowledge.

[B i r n o u]

perhaps that as Paula recommand, that would be interesting to really have a seat around a table, where could be present:

• the DW user community
• the Extension developper community
• some developer that are ready to be involved in using DW for their project
• PM of transversal products (Animate (I mean the edge one... not Flash), Illustrator, PS, Fw, Bridge)
• a mediator guarantees standards HTML, CSS, APIs

then make a real flat draw from scratch to avoid to carry all the old pans

[-Michele]

Adobe presenting the 2018 roadmap for Dreamweaver CC on Tuesday, 5th December 2018 at 7AM Pacific Time.

See the "Prerelease Dreamweaver" forum for more details.

Perhaps it could be a good opportunity to make Adobe aware of our requests.

[B i r n o u]

yes we should do that... I agree

[pziecina]

I'm not certain if Animate should be included in the list, (Edge or CC) as both export in the most stupid way that could be thought of for use on the web, (oem file). Plus the way both create code is probably one of the most unfriendly and bloated methods that anyone can choose.

As for the other suggestions, everyone knows that 'it is never going to happen'. Dw is going in a direction that no one involved in web development beyond beginner level can even understand. I once jockingly suggested that Dw should be renamed to 'Brackets Pro', now I think that would be an insult to Brackets.

[B i r n o u]

I wasn't naming Animate Edge to be include, but to open a door on the animation handling in CSS animation, nor jQuery, nor Canvas, nor anything else than pure standard...  but being handle in a third part software and not fully integrated in DW

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/B+i+r+n+o+u  wrote

I wasn't naming Animate Edge to be include, but to open a door on the animation handling in CSS animation, nor jQuery, nor Canvas, nor anything else than pure standard...

No Adobe program at present supports the creation of css animations, except Dw which does so in code view only for css. Not even Dw supports the animations api.

I have been asking for the feature, (along with many others) since CS6. I will get personal to the Dw and Adobe team, plus quite a few CAB and pre-release members here. Except for a few people, (in my experiance with those teams/members) most have little or no idea that Animate, (both versions) does not produce css animations, and if Dw did try to introduce a feature to help in css animation creation, I think they would get it wrong, due to that lack of knowledge by many.

That lack of knowledge shows in many other areas as well.

[B i r n o u]

so the only answer, if one doesn't let any chance to go in the right way... will be that DW should stop.

do before goind down there, and to be sure that we speak in the same goal... DW shouldn't integrate any animation tool, but Adobe should propose a specific tool like Animate Edge, not relying on JS, nor on Canvas... only on CSS (transform, transition and animation) to be on round trip with DW

[pziecina]

I think Google called their tool for creating css animation - css designer, which only supports the webkit prefixing.

Also don't forget the Blend program that comes with Visual Studio Pro, also contains a tool for the creation of css animations. So examples are available, but i don't think it necessarily requires a complete stand-alone program outside of Dw.

[B i r n o u]

perhaps I'm wrong but in most app that I'm involved in... I really like to split features in modules being external and added to the main core... so then it is just question of making a realy cool interface integration

so bad that Al is not around this time, he should enjoy this policy... arf arf !

[pziecina]

It does not matter if anything is a seperate module from Dw itself, or if it is an extension. What does matter is that one can make changes and still go between Dw, module, extension, to make other changes without problems, (inter-operability).

[B i r n o u]

completly agree, that bring us back to the macromedia age... we used to call that round trip... fireworks for image editing/croping/including rollover (we talk about almost 20 years ago)... top style (from nick) for css, homesite (from the same nick) for HTML...

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/B+i+r+n+o+u  wrote

so the only answer, if one doesn't let any chance to go in the right way... will be that DW should stop.

Dw should stop, and have a complete rebuild from new. It should also concentrate on the web, and not try to be a code editor that covers languages that are not used on the web, or have such a small user base as to be irrelevant.

First though it must decide just what it wants to be, 'development or drag and drop', tool or ide, for beginner or professional?

[B i r n o u]

believe me or not... but I removed the phrase in between the previous paragraph before sending it... and this phrase was

"dreaweaver should stop and be completly rebuild from scratch... and focusing only on standard (html, css and API) "

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/B+i+r+n+o+u  wrote

"dreaweaver should stop and be completly rebuild from scratch... and focusing only on standard (html, css and API) "

O/k, now we have decided that Dw should start again from scratch, the question is what type of person should be involved, as that also would decide the target user?

None coders, coders who have no idea about w3c specs, framework users, sales and marketing, anyone, (add your own ...)

or should it be people who understand the latest w3c specs, users of 3rd party utilities, (such as gulp, git, pre/post-processors).

Then comes the problem of what involvment those who develop small sites, compareded to those developing corporate/commercial sites should have, as the first has little idea about the requirerments of the second.

And the list goes on and on.

[Nancy OShea]

I'll make this short & sweet.  First, I don't want to come off as a Debbie Downer.  I am a longtime DW user and I continue to use it daily in my creative workflow.  But it's not the only tool I use. 

From where I sit, Adobe has sufficiently catered to non-coders  with their other products and services:

• Adobe Muse,
• Adobe Portfolio/Behance,
• Adobe Spark
• Adobe Business Catalyst.
• Adobe XD
• Adobe Animate...

The last thing we need is another APP aimed at non-coders.

Dreamweaver is the last opportunity Adobe has to re-capture the serious coder with tools to support client-side, server-side and everything in between.  Failing that, I don't see much future for Dreamweaver.

That's all I have to say.

[pziecina]

The big problem with all the posts so far, is that no one from Adobe or Dw's senior managment will read it, or ask anyone who participated why they think as they do.

Just about everyone so far are long time Dw users, and are looking for something to replace Dw.