https://forums.adobe.com/people/Brad+Lawryk  wrote It's the beginning of the end for Dreamweaver. Glad I have moved on over a year ago. 😞 As I discovered in the pre-release, some well thought of advisors to the Dw team, (and a few of the team) don't think none Dw users should have a say in Dw's future. I'd have thought that those who gave up on Dw are the people to ask what is wrong. ... View more

My reply - I was pleased to read that code hinting would be for ALL html5, css and js, but I would be interested to know what is ment by 'ALL'. As html5 contains much more than most people think, and in my experiance, much more than the Dw team think. Plus css and the js api's, at what stage in the recomendation process will a spec be included in code hints, as many specs are WD's but stable and well supported by browsers. Dw's code editor could use a lot of work, but the little information provided does not allow me to make any judgement. I see no mention of a stand alone css prefixer though, which as I have said previously makes Dw a 'do not use' for many. As for the pre-release, and testing. As I have said previously 'why should I bother'. I found some members of the CAB and prerelease insulting, and lacking in knowledge, (though not all). Anyone thinking they can influence anything, forget it. Replys or discussions with any Dw team member are now none existant. And lastly, whats in it for me? I don't use CC, so any 'here is a years CC subscription' is worthless. ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/B+i+r+n+o+u  wrote I couldn't agree less with you...;) It was this comment that confused me Birnou, I did think of asking for clarification, but as I wanted to make the statement regarding quality anyway . ... View more

I didn't say that the look of the sites created with these site builders is good, (though if an ex Muse user is building it, it may well be good) but the additional plug-ins and what they can do, do add many features that once required a developer. A good web designer/developer could try and compete on quality, but that is a questionable selling point, especially when a comparison of costs is made between the self build, and the developers offering. ... View more

The trouble is, these site builders offer ways of including much of what most small sites require. They even have plug-ins for on-line bookings that can easily be adapted, and the ecommerce offerings are easily on a par with wordpress. The basic functionality offers all that most static sites require, but once one looks into the plug-ins the features become much more impressive. It is the ease of use and the ease with which many additional features can be included, that may make site builders so attractive to the small buisness. Also don't forget the initial cost is small, (less than a monthly cheap phone rental) so there is no large outlay for someone just staring up a buisness for themselves. ... View more

yshivaprasad​ Thank you for the blog post, but can I suggest that yourself, (or prerank28948274​) start a new discussion, specifically for discussing the blog post. ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Nancy+OShea  wrote Incidentally for anyone interested, the W3C is offering a  5 course certificate training program  for Front End Web Developers.  Cost: US $500.   According to their site, the average salary for front-end web developers in the US is $104,745. https://www.edx.org/professional-certificate/front-end-web-developer-9 Just to put that salary in perspective, the w3c also says a small web site costs under $250,000.00. But yes the $104,745 is possible, (mine was more). What they do not say is at what employment level one must be, and what other skills on must have. ... View more

I actually posted a discussion a couple of years ago with the title of 'why are we here', but I digress. Going back to the original intent of this discussion, I think that when it comes to building the small commercial sites, participation in forums which in general say 'web design/development' is easy, and we are here to help just to prove it, actually makes people think it is easy. Devaluing the profession. I have spent the last few days thinking about what a small site web developer could conceivably offer a client, that would not within a short time be offered by 'do it yourself' web site builders, and to be honest I came up with the answer of NOTHING. I can think of features that a D.I.Y. cannot do, simply, due to the time required and the knowledge required, but it would be a never ending cycle of learning, experimenting, then implementing. All of which I get the impression small site developers, neither have the time or inclination to invest in. So long as those who cannot move into application development, (and by that I am not talking about just CMS's) promote or look for 'quick and easy ways/fixes', they are in a 'no win' situation. Simply because whatever they do, and then possibly post in web dev forums about how easy it is to do, clients will naturally think that they are wasting money paying fot their services, if it is so easy to do. Maybe we also require a discussion on what is required for 'enterprise' applications, and how a small 'web shop' could offer such services, or slowly expand into that branch of web development. As I'm sure it must be possible, but I don't think it can be the 'point and click' workflow, that many think is possible, simply because every project has different requirements, that are not a 'one size fits all', or possible via automation, (no matter what it can do). ... View more

Thank you Birnou, You have just confirmed what I thought was happening. It does bring another question/thought to mind though, in that web dev forums and questions posted on them, are not really representitive of those actually working in the profession. So would it not be better if we replaced much of the forum with more extensive tutorials, and simply answer questions/problems relating to those tutorials? I don't want to get into a Dw specific discussion, but I'm still trying to think of who uses Dw. As Dw is a no go for applications. ... View more

osgood_  wrote All of the websites l've build have been under 10K though, between 2 - 7k in most cases. The client generally has a successful  small business to run and cant afford 2 months to build a website themselves and then 5 complete days four times a year to update it regardless of if l provide them with a CMS, its too dull to contemplate for the client so they employ me to do it for them at reasonably good money and its repeat business, where most money is made. Then you are not building the site just for the 2-7k are you. You are doing it for the repeat buisness, which is a long term commitment between yourself and the client. One question though. How often are the sites rebuilt? ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/B+i+r+n+o+u  wrote why pay for a web development?..... uh.... no (apparent) reason So where are all these people taking degrees, learning the trade, (so to speek) being employed. Yes, I know everyone knows my view, in that it is in the development of large commercial applications, with the company/organisations 'landing pages' being no more than a 'side show'. But what does everyone else think, and is it possible to move from developing small sites, (better done by wix, etc) to large applications? ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Brad+Lawryk  wrote Yes, there will be some people that successfully build their own sites. My wife for example with no web design experience has successfully built a couple sites in Weebly. Probably took her five times as long as it would have taken me but she was able to meet the goals of those websites. So I think if you can do it yourself these days, why not? That's the point of the post. In this and 'other' forums designers/developers are saying that they are loosing clients to those doing it themselves, (with or without a web site builder such as wix, webflow, etc). But with forums like this helping, and site builder programs like wix, (etc) doing the work for them, (and offering very good templates) I cannot see the design/development of small sites, (commercial, e-com or not) being profitable to web designers/developers anymore. The argument that it is difficult, is nullified by the videos that are available, (even from the products themselves) showing and saying it is easy. ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Brad+Lawryk  wrote I'll generally try and help people on forums such as the Wappler community or even people in real life as it often creates a learning opportunity for myself as well. But you have not mentioned the underlying question. Why should people pay you to design/develop a web site, after all, all they require is a template, then forums will answer any questions they may have, show them how to do anything, or even do the work for them. ... View more

What is did show to me, is that css is 'getting there', but like everything else that is not css2.1/2, it is the slow adoption by browsers that holds everthing back. I remember asking for a css vendor prefixing tool in Dw back in 2010, with many pointing out that it was not required, as browsers would stop using them. It's now 2019 and they are still being used. ... View more

BTW - Just in case anyone is interested, all the above css once level 4 selectors are correctly implemented, (and not behind a flag) would only require - [href"link path name"] is(:hover) the id of link to be highlighted { css for highlighted link here } It would have to be done for every set of link/highlights, but it does give css an if/then type of structure. In that the css says - if link1 is hovered, (or any other state) then link2, (or anything else) should have this css applied. To read more see - https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/:is ... View more

Hi Os, This is an example, but after a few minutes I decided that for more than 1 or 2 items it would rapidly get complicated, (so js is probably easier). The first section is for click, the second for hover, (after which I looked at the code and stopped work) css selectors level 4 does have a way of combining reference selectors, but as it is behind a flag, or not implemented = unusable, but maybe in a few years time - <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <meta charset="utf-8"> <title>:target demo</title> <style>     p[id*=tab] {     width: auto;     height: auto;     padding: auto;     margin: 1rem 1rem 0 1rem;     background: #fff; } p {     display: inline; } p a {     background-color: #afa;     display: inline-block;     width: auto;     text-align: center;     text-decoration: none; } a {     text-decoration: none; } p a:hover {     background-color: #fff; } p[id*=tab]:target {     background-color: #faf; } /*for hover example*/ [href="#item1"]:hover ~#item2, [href="#item2"]:hover ~#item1{     background-color: #faf; } </style> </head> <body>   <p>     <a href="#tab2">1st item</a>    </p>   <p id="tab1">     Page 1: This is the first item in the :target example   </p>     <p><a href="#tab1">2nd item</a></p>   <p id="tab2">     Page 2: This is the 2nd item   </p>   <p> </p>   <h3>2nd attempt for hover</h3> <a href="#item1">this is link content 1 - </a> <a href="#item2">this is link content 2 - </a> <p>some other content</p> <p id="item1"><b>it highlights content 1...</b></p> <p>Some other content.</p> <p id="item2"><b>it highlights content 2...</b></p> </body> </html> ... View more

Os. You could do this using the css psuedo class 'target', along with css animations. But I think that would be way beyond the OPs current skill level, and if you want an example from me you will have to wait until tomorrow, as I'm off for my evening drink . ... View more

All browsers use a slightly different way of working out the base font size when using em or rem, (IE and edge is normally a couple of pixels for body text) which is measured in pixels. Using the em value it takes its base measurement from the base font size, unless you set a base font in your css, (target the body element). Try setting a font-size, that way only slight variations should occure. ... View more

Don't worry Preran. I for one, was not really expecting the Dw team to tell us anything new, or join in a discussion. ... View more

I take it you are testing on windows desktop with firefox, and on iOS mobile devices, (safari, chrome). First position absolute will not work correctly as the position will appear to move depending on screen size, (50% of 10 inch screen is smaller than 50% of 20 inch screen). Also on iOS devices, it does not matter which browser you use, they all use safari webkit rendering engine, (the only difference being, is that you may get newer features in browser updates from Chrome, but you have to wait for a iOS update for safari). ... View more