You really should not use Dreamweaver to write or edit JavaScript. It is not a very good editor and you risk code corruption. The error reporting is unreliable and the code coloring is all wrong. ... View more

.sponsor1 img, .sponsor2 img, sponsor3 img, sponsor4 img {     position: absolute;     z-index: 999;     border: 2px solid #004FFF;     bottom: 62px; } .sponsor2 img {     left: 272px; } .sponsor3 img {     right: 207px;     bottom: 38px;     } .sponsor4 img {     right: 22px;     }    .sponsor1 a:hover img, .sponsor1 a:hover img, .sponsor1 a:hover img, .sponsor1 a:hover img {     border: 2px solid #C00; } ... View more

Good advice. The JavaScript editing is also quite poor... but Brackets is pretty bad, too. Have you actually gotten positive feedback on Brackets? ... View more

Adobe, and most of the people who post on this forum, think that Brackets is actually a good code editor. Sometimes you just have bend with the wind. You can still revert to CS6. In my opinion, there is no reason to even use Dreamweaver CC. ... View more

Restore the good old Insert Toolbar. The method described in this tutorial works perfectly in CC 2017: Dreamweaver CC: Restore the Classic Insert Bar ... View more

Sorry, but Nancy is giving an opinion. Adobe does not portray Dreamweaver as a professional-level tool. If it did, they would be locked in a courtroom defending several thousand lawsuits and a few class actions. Actually, the consensus among truly professional-level web developers is rather condescending when it comes to anyone that uses Dreamweaver. The power of Dreamweaver has always been its community of extension developers. It is through them that people like you can use Dreamweaver to craft a beautiful and functional web site. Spend some time on Google (search for Dreamweaver extensions), and on the Adobe App Store. When you find something that you like, contact the company and test out their tech support. If none of that appeals to you, do not, I repeat DO NOT, use Adobe Muse, unless you like to cry yourself to sleep. Instead, find and hire a competent web designer. ... View more

Hi Tax Site, Dreamweaver would not exist today if not for the third party developers of the late 1990s. Perhaps another class of poster on these forums should be warned? I rarely advertise here. I rarely even pot here. Please count my posts. This forum is virtually worthless to Extension Developers for marketing purposes. I post about my products only  when I think it will help someone. Thank you for your courtesy. ... View more

There actually are a lot of people who like the CSS Designer. I would never hire any of them to write CSS, though . Nancy did provide the best answer, considering Adobe's lack of programming skills. And she is certainly not a spokesperson for Adobe. ... View more

Code View is the best way to edit or write CSS in Dreamweaver. It has been for a very long time. That said, the CSS Designer really sucks in terms of interface design. Actually, most Adobe interfaces tend to suck. There's a lot to be said for OS standard controls and UI elements, but I don't think Adobe gets that. The old CSS panel was a wicked-fast way to make quick changes. The CSS Designer is a leviathan and while David Powers claims it writes standard-based CSS I fear he is very wrong, or perhaps he doesn't care about verbose code 🙂 It sucks. So your answer of using code view is inarguably, the best answer. ... View more

Aegis Kleais wrote: Sorry, Al, but I couldn't disagree more.  Where I respect the fact that, as coders, we're rather ingrained with our workflow processes and, at times, hesitant to change, I've found LESS' benefits to be very worthwhile. No need to apologize. Preprocessing is a topic on which there are differing opinions. You have one. I have one. There are advocates: http://blog.urbaninsight.com/2012/04/12/ten-reasons-you-should-be-using-css-preprocessor There are those who are not sold: http://blog.millermedeiros.com/the-problem-with-css-pre-processors/ http://www.skybondsor.com/blog/css-preprocessors There are those mostly sold: http://css-tricks.com/musings-on-preprocessing/ There are even those who have been converted (but who might reverse at some later point): http://cognition.happycog.com/article/preprocess-this Heck, even I might be converted someday - or not Bottom line for me, right now? I know I can write CSS that is better than most, more efficient than most, and easier to follow than most, and a preprocessor would add unwanted complexity. But that's for me. For someone not able to be organized intutively, or for a large - but carefully coordinated - team, a preprocessor could be a positive. But not for me. There are evolving trends - popular aspects of the technology that may and should find themselves being adapted into CSS. But I've been around this business as long as CSS has. I've seen buzzwords and trends and I've historically been spot-on in predicting the one that will stick. I think preprocessing will stick - but only insofar as it will be a catalyst for features in future versions of CSS. As a separate technology it makes no sense - to me ... View more

Thanks. You gave me a good laugh for the day! ... View more

1. CSS Preprocessing is not a standard. It's one of those buzzword, faddish things that have people on both sides of the issue. 2. Wait a version as Adobe tends to jump on trends 3. Wait a little longer until the process is perfected. If it then is adaopted by the W3C, it will become an actual standard. 4. Learn to write CSS really efficiently and you might find preprocessing a big waste of time and effort, as I do -- Al Sparber - PVII http://www.projectseven.com The Leader in Responsive Dreamweaver Tools Extending Dreamweaver Since 1998 ... View more