Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Knowledge Base
Documentation
Terry's Tips
Darren's Tips

Table Editor

Just upgraded to 2.0. Many small nice improvements, and it was very nice that it was free. It was also nice to get rid of the file limit in Home Edition.

However the more I use it, the more I am feeling like its really a 1.1. There are no major new features that I can see. Just bug fixes (and a few new bugs. :) ), polishing etc.

And most of all, a table editor is still missing.

Chad Hower
Sunday, September 07, 2003

Well I like the additions to scripting: Before, After, Odd, Even, Else, Thisfolder, Thisarticle, and others.  I also appreciate the additon of the Include command. Makes things easier...

David Watts
Sunday, September 07, 2003

Yes nice additions, but it still feels more like a 1.1 than a 2.0.

And still no table editor. :(

Chad Z. Hower
Monday, September 08, 2003

Chad :re "And most of all, a table editor is still missing."

Why do you need a table editor?

If you learn how to use CSS you can do away with tables.

http://www.sitepoint.com/books/css1/

David Mozer
Monday, September 08, 2003

Another CSS site that has good info

http://www.glish.com/css/home.asp

David Mozer
Monday, September 08, 2003

I just found this site.  Lots and lots of ways to make interesting menus with very little css

http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/listamatic/index.htm

Joel Goldstick
Monday, September 08, 2003

Joel, Thanks ... very nice List site.

David Mozer
Monday, September 08, 2003

>>Why do you need a table editor?

If you learn how to use CSS you can do away with tables.<<


I don't see how CSS can be of help to a "User" requiring to insert and maintain tabular data (ahem, CONTENT) within an article. 

Unless I'm missing something here??

Vic
Monday, September 08, 2003

I'm with Vic. I love the css stuff but I just want a soccer mom or dad to be able to do a sports schedule or, a contact list, of something. Actually, I'd like to be able to do that too without getting into the HTML.

http://tk-jk.net/GTsoccer/blog/20032004/Fall2003Roster.html

tk
Monday, September 08, 2003

Vic, do it in Microsoft Excel then paste the table into the Article editor in Normal View and "that" table will look great.

That's how! :-) if you absolutely need to do it .

CD seems to work just great with Excel tables ... cannot say the same for stuff that copied from MS Word.

David Mozer
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

Something else I noticed about the CSS no tables pages was the text could not be resized on them, they contain div id's.

Ron Lane
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

CSS cannot replace tables.

And CD doesnt support CSS either.

I should not have to resort to editing HTML to make tables. Ever tried to insert a column in a many rowed table?

I dont write my programs in assembly - I shouldnt have to do basic fundamental things in HTML view.

Chad Z. Hower
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

David,


I know there are more or less industrious ways around CD's lack of native table support. Pasting from Excel is one of them.  However once in CD, you can't properly maintain the table.

So, guess what, you end up managing your content in - Excel! Or, worse yet, in a combination of CD and Excel. Hardly the holy grail of CM...

Vic
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

Vic, IMO CD is a very good if not excellent CMS TOOL [for the price] and as long as one understands the benefits as well as the limitations this tool does what the architects had designed.

If its the "holy grail" you're after then perhaps CD is the wrong tool. :-)

Microsoft have done a superb job providing enabling technology – better than anyone else bar none -- and it’s my opinion that CD exploits Microsoft technology extremely well -- not perfectly -- but extremely well. The ability to use Excel within CD is one example and I do believe that end-users would have zero problems leaning how very simple it is to exploit both properly. Tools are made to be exploited.

David Mozer
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

I think CityDesk will support table editing one day. It's been a feature request from day one of the very first beta and probably on Fog's feature list before they started coding. If it's not in release 3, we'll have more chances to carp about it; and carp we will.

I do thank the forum folks: In these table conversations I've learned a lot about css. That hasn't helped my tables much but it has sure helped me elsewhere.

tk
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

David, to clarify, I like CD, and I bought it. That's why I care to see it improved where it lacks most, especially given it's intended focus on "usability". 

My point is pasting tables from Excel doesn't fit the bill of content management.

It is a workaround, one can make do with it for a while.

Yet, if Fog Creek advertised this to be the "permanent solution", with no intention to create this feature in CD I'd be seriously disappointed. 

Vic
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

I just looked at TK's link to the soccer site (see above).

I'm not sure how you edit that page, but the way I would do it would be to create a template that did a foreach loop on each entry in the table.  These entries would be very simple for a non-techie to edit.  Just use a different field for each bit of info you want in the row.

Then, the loop can build the html for the row and td stuff.

I guess I am biased against wysiwyg methods because they usually make weird code.  They also get the content person involved in design issues without the necessary understanding of the consequences. 

I like the content management aspects of CD, but I don't really want it to have a frontpage style user interface.  I realize that "table" proponents are legion, but there are lots of other ways of doing things that don't create the problems that tables often do.  I'm reminded of the old adage that to a hammer, every problem is a nail. 

In this article: http://diveintomark.org/archives/2003/08/29/semantics

Mark Pilgrim says this about table layouts: 

...But it sucks, because table-based layouts and FONT tags and spacer GIFs are an ongoing nightmare, while CSS is only an up-front nightmare.

Ain't the web grand -- so many ways of doing things!

Joel Goldstick
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

The Excel solution is as good as it gets for table maintenance. I use it for a rolodex type site at work, I keep a copy of the site in Excel (each page is a tab) and when I need to add a row, all I have to do is add it to the bottom and sort on the column or columns I want. It also works well from Access.

The biggest problem is every row gets font and color tags, but I've not noticed any real slowdown, it's just code bloat (Frontpage switches between html and normal view instantly, CD takes a few seconds).

I've been doing this using Frontpage for 4 years and now converting to CD, it's about a 100 page site, all tables.

Ron Lane
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

>>I like the content management aspects of CD, but I don't really want it to have a frontpage style user interface.  I realize that "table" proponents are legion, but there are lots of other ways of doing things that don't create the problems that tables often do. <<


I think we need to separate two issues:

(1) How do we allow a user to maintain tabular data in a user-friendly way

(2) what type of code does CD generate to display that tabular data in a tabular-looking fashion

CD doesn't support (1) which is a real drawback for me.  Sorry, maintaining "Extra" and "Sidebar" fields to simulate table columns, and different articles to simulate rows is just another workaround, neither userfriendly nor inflexible.

On (2), it seems people get emotional about whether or not to generate "table code" as such. I don't in particular care about that [nor does the average user] but I'm confident the gurus can find the best approach.

Vic (wants a feature for tabluar data)
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

That should read "nor flexible" of course ;-)

Vic (wants a feature for tabular data)
Tuesday, September 09, 2003

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home