Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 970 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2003 16:12:51 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Sep 2003 16:12:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 19858 invoked by uid 500); 17 Sep 2003 16:12:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-users-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 19847 invoked by uid 500); 17 Sep 2003 16:12:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: users@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list users@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 19834 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2003 16:12:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO franklin-belle.com) (65.68.247.73) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Sep 2003 16:12:29 -0000 Received: from sagea (sagea.sage-american [10.0.0.3]) by franklin-belle.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with SMTP id h8HGCVlP048161; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 11:12:31 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from jackstone@sage-one.net) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20030917111238.0141b9b8@sage-one.net> X-Sender: jackstone@sage-one.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 11:12:38 -0500 To: users@httpd.apache.org, From: "Jack L. Stone" In-Reply-To: <200309171554.h8HFs3YM008757@chip.frukt.org> References: <3.0.5.32.20030917085840.01434d20@sage-one.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=4.5 tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.55-fbelle.rules_v1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55-fbelle.rules_v1 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Apache has FrontPage Server Installation X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N At 05:47 PM 9.17.2003 +0200, Jonas Eckerman wrote: >On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 08:58:40 -0500, Jack L. Stone wrote: > >>=A0countries with 60,000 readers. Without FP we would have to add more >>=A0people to do the same enourmous amount of work for the layout of >>=A0text and graphics. > >This is quite a bit off topic, but your making me curious. What is it that would need so much more if you used another similar tool, like DreamWeaver for example, instead of FrontPage? > Nothing. It's just that we have mastered FrontPage and can do it in our sleep. To change would not accomplish anything at this junction. In fact, we have resisted upgrading from FP98 to FP2K, etc because after trying FP2K, we didn't see any more benefits from what we have. >(Of course I realize it could mean a lot of work to change now, but you did check the competition before deciding FrontPage is the only tool that can handle the job, right?) > Absolutely. We looked at them all that was available in 1997 and investigated those since, including Dreamweaver (I have a copy on one workstation, but is unused). We had already been using PageMaker since 1988. Now PageMaker is involved again on some articles where we use strictly PDFs because of all the complicated math symbols that do not work in HTML without a lot of extra work to make them into graphics. We use PageMaker 100% on our book layouts for printers and for PDF versions that make the books also available on CDs and downloads. In fact, we we started, everything was HTML... now about 1/2 - 2/3rds of the articles are PDFs and the rest HTML. But, that change has been gradual and we understand PDFing. Eventually, I suspect that all of the article will be PDFS, but with the "frontends" and intros as html. I foresee HTML as eventually becoming about 10-20% versus 100% at the beginning. I do indeed agree that FP is an admin's pain in the butt on UNIX that we use on all of our servers. But, it does work. So day we probably won't use FP as we continue to evolve in our publishing technology. >This is somewhat releveant here. In my expereience there are tools other thamn FrontPage that offers the same advantages but less of the drawbacks. DreamWeaver is one. It has a WYSIWYG editor but also a code view and IIRC it lets you author with more common dynamic stuff (PHP, standard CGI etc) instead of proprietary solutions. A tool with the same editing/building philosophy as FrontPage but based on common standards would be easier to use with Apache as the chosen server. > >Regards >/Jonas >--=20 >Jonas Eckerman, jonas_lists@frukt.org >http://www.fsdb.org/ > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project. >See for more info. >To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org > " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org > > > Best regards, Jack L. Stone, Administrator SageOne Net http://www.sage-one.net jackstone@sage-one.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project. See for more info. To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org