Now: GUI vs Hand, Was: estimating the cost of building a web site

[Bruce Byfield <bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com>]

John Posada <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:

>"In light of the capabilities of some GUI web-authoring
>programs, it is no longer fiscally responsible to code web pages
>by hand anymore."

All that really matters is the results. Who cares if a GUI or a
text editor is used, so long as you get the results you want and
meet the deadlines?


>2) At $100 per hour or more for a developer, would a customer or
>employer rather have 1 or 2 pages in an hour of sloppy code or 1
>page in several hours (or days) of tight clean code?  Would a
>customer know what clean code was if it hit them between the
>eyes?

They might if anyone tries to edit the code in a different GUI
from the one originally used. I came across this problem in my
(mercifully brief) stint as a part-time web master last year.
Most GUI HTML editors throw in their own little quirks, and
running the code through a couple of different ones can create
massive display problems.

A possible compromise are the editors for HTML code, like
Bluefish. In these editors, you are always working with raw code,
but you can use menus to automatically insert start and end tags,
and dialogs to quickly define tables and forms. Personally, I'm
starting to prefer HTML editors to both hand coding and GUI
editors.

-- 
Bruce Byfield, Outlaw Communications
"The Open Road" column, Maximum Linux
3015 Aries Place, Burnaby, BC V3J 7E8, Canada
bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com 604.421.7189

"Well, ah fare you well, and it's Ushant slams the door on us,
whirling like a windmill through the dirty scud to lee,
Till the last, last flicker goes from the tumbling water rows.
We're off to Mother Carey (walk her round to Mother Carey),
We're bound for Mother Carey where she feeds her chicks at sea!"
-Rudyard Kipling, "Anchor Song"