I built my website in 2007 using html and css which I learnt from a book. I'm a jeweller and it's used as a portfolio of my work and therefore has lots of photos on it and separate pages with each photo. I have continued to add photos and pages and not made much changes to the overall structure of the website, just copied and pasted the code into each new page and changed the bits I needed to.
But now I want to change the headers and footers of all these pages, and there's hundreds of pages!
After some reading it seems I can use PHP (just finding out about this) to insert headers and footers. Which seems to mean I'd need to edit every page of code anyway, and change all links in the code to .php, which would be the same (or more!) amount of work as just changing the code on every page to be what I want, although will make it easier next time I want to change.... so wondered if there was another way of doing this?
First time asking anything on a web developer forum! As I'm sure you can tell I'm no expert so keep things simple please! My website is www.islayspalding.co.uk. Many thanks :)
I previously had someone build a website for me. It was 90% finished but then ill health got in the way.
I have all the files and I am now asking people to "put the website back together for me". The general consensus is that it's very messy and not clear what was done and some of the protocols are now out of date etc. And it would just be better to start from scratch. I have heard this from multiple people.
So now when I am asking a new guy to build it from scratch, he is asking me for the HTML files. I couldn't see any, so I contacted the previous developer and he said:
There are no HTML files, it all runs through the index.php file and
extracts pages, data etc. from the database.
I told this to the new developer, but he is saying:
But website is not possible without HTML. Ask him provide index HTML.
Pure HTML without php code.
I'm confused, because I saw the website up and running, so it seems it is possible without HTML?
I'm trying to figure out where the misunderstanding is happening.
Thanks.
What your previous developer is saying is that your site was dynamic and all requests were flowing through your index.php file, which in turn does some backend logic to produce HTML data for the browser to interpret. If you ask your previous developer to zip up the root of your old site, your new developer should be able to take it from there.
Can a website exist without HTML?
Without a .html file? Yes. Using only .php, .css and .js is possible.
Without using Hyper Text Mark-up Language? No. There ar no other mark-up language for browsers, afaik. So we're stuck with this.
Old dev used PHP for efficiency. Contents are in your database and fetched using php to show up in browser.
New dev probably only knows HTML and has no clue about php. Or, probably doesn't want to bother reading through the php codes to reverse engineer how your site works.
Suggestion: Get a different dev. A smarter one. You probably have to pay more, but it's more expensive to hire a less smarter dev.
I have a quick question. We are building a site for a shop that has 12 different locations. So there is a Portal page, and then the 12 locations pages.
The design is the same for each location, just different text and rotator images. What I did before for another site was just used PHP and a Database, and had a site.php?shop=city&page=about and just did some rewrites so it would be /city/about/ which works good.
That way when I need to make an overall design change, it will apply to all locations instead of duplicating the site 12 times and if I catch one thing, I need to do it on all 12 sites.
One thing that we don't like about that is if someone in the team needs to make a change to the text, they would need to go in the MySQL Database to make the content changes which they are unfamiliar with. I could create a basic CMS but I would like some suggestions on what else I can do to make this easy on everyone.
If I need to create one of the sites and duplicate it 11 times, I could do that but was just seeing if there were any easier ways you guys know of, where it would still be easy for people to update the content with FTP.
Thanks!
From my point of view you have a few options:
Build a basic update form with a basic WYSIWYG editor, more or less a very basic CMS
Use an include file structure then the user only needs to edit a text file for example for changes to reflect on the site, note they may need to know basic HTML and FTP is likely to be required
Give access to phpMyAdmin, again note they may need to know a little HTML (edit: as already suggested I just noticed, sorry need to load answers while I'm typing)
Install an out of the box CMS in the 'locations' or 'stores' directory and only have it used on these pages
Personally I would just build a simple CMS in this case... then again I have built around 15 CMS' in the past so it only takes me about an hour to code something like this.
Hope that helps you.
It is not ftp, but if you gave them access to phpmyadmin, with a login that only has access to that table then they could edit the data.
I was having a "discussion" with my manager today about the merits of using PHP includes and functions as a template to build websites more quickly and efficiently. He has been using Dreamweaver templates for years and sees it as really the best way to go. I would like to start using some different and more efficient methods for web creation, because we need to get through our projects faster. I would like to know in detail what would make Dreamweaver dwts better than using code to accomplish the same task, or vice versa.
His reasoning is:
When you change links on the dwt file, it changes links for every page made from that dwt.
Even if you move pages around in directories, it maintains links to images
Everyone in the company should do it one way, and this is the way he chose (there are two of us, with someone who's just started who needs to learn web design from the beginning, and he plans to teacher her the dwt method)
If you edit a site made with a dwt, you can't change anything in the template (it's grayed out), making it safer
If he's building sites with dwt, and I'm doing it with PHP includes, we can't edit each others' sites. It gets all over the place. When we have new employees in the future, it will get all crazy and people can't make changes to others' sites if they're out of the office.
I've been studying PHP these days, and am thrilled with how powerful it is for creating dynamic pages. The site in question which sparked this "discussion" is more or less static, so a dwt would work fine. However, I wanted to stretch my wings a bit, and the code was getting REALLY jumbled as the pages grew. So I chopped off the header, footer, and sidebar, and brought them in to all the pages with a php include, as well as dynamically assigned the title, meta data, and description for each page using variables echoed in the header.The reasons I like this better are:
It's cleaner. If every page contains all the data for the header and footer, as well as the extra tags Dreamweaver throws in there, then I have to sift through everything to find where I need to be.
It's safer. It's sort of like the above reason dwts are safe, except I do all my code editing in a text editor like Coda. So on occasion I have accidentally deleted a dwt-protected line of code because those rules only apply within dreamweaver. I can't chop off part of the header if I can't see it. Incidentally, this makes it easier to identify bugs.
It's modern. I look through source when I see great pages made by designers and design firms I admire. I've never seen dwt tags. I believe by using PHP to dynamically grab files and perform other tasks that keeps me from having to go through and change something on every page, life becomes easier, and keeps things streamlined and up-to-date with current web trends and standards.
It's simple. This should be at the top of the list. Like I said we have to train a new person in how to create for the web. Isn't it much better for her to learn a simple line of PHP and get an understanding for how the language works, rather than learn an entire piece of (not exactly user-friendly) software just for the purpose of keeping her work the exact same as everyone else's? On that note, I believe PHP is a powerful tool in a web designer's arsenal, and it would be a sin to prevent her from learning it for the sake of uniformity.
It's fast. Am I mistaken in my thought that a page build with header and footer includes loads faster than one big page with everything in it? Or does that just apply when the body is loaded dynamically with AJAX?
I did extensive searching on Google and Stack Overflow on this topic and this is the most relevant article I could find:
Why would one use Dreamweaver Templates over PHP or Javascript for templating?
The answer is helpful, but I would really like to understand in more detail why exactly we shouldn't switch to a new method if it's simpler and has more potential. My manager insists that "the result is the same, so if there isn't something that makes me say, 'oh wow that's amazing and much better!', then we should just stay how we are now."
(I do apologize for the length of this question, but the guidelines asked that I be as specific as possible.)
Like I said in comments, without knowing what exactly sites you are working with it's hard to tell which PHP features are most important to showcase. However, I can try and describe the most simple kind of sites I was dealing with, and where and how PHP came in handy. If you work with something more complicated, the need of programming language may only increase.
The simple website may have a few different pages with text and images. I'm assuming nothing interactive (i.e. no inquiry form), no large amount of structured data (i.e. no product catalog), only one design template which is used by every page with no differences whatsoever. Here's the typical structure:
One PHP file (index.php) for handling all sorts of php-ish stuff
One design file (template.php for example) for storing everything html-ish (including header, footer and more. Basically all html with placeholders for text and menu)
One CSS file for, well, the site CSS
Most of the texts are stored in database or (worst case) just txt files. Menu (navigation) is stored in database as well
Images folder with all the needed images
The key features here are:
Simplicity. You only have as many files and code as you really need to keep things organized and clear
Reusability. You can basically copy/paste your php code with little to no changes for a new similar website
No duplicates whatsoever.
Data and design separation. Wanna change texts, fix typos? You do it without as much as touching design (html) files. Wanna make a completely brand new design for your website? You can do it without even knowing what those texts are or where they are kept.
like deceze said, no lock-ins. Use whatever software you like. (Including Dreamweaver)
PHP is responsible for taking texts, menus, design and rendering them all into a web page. If website is in more than 1 language, PHP code choose the right texts for the language of visitors choice.
If texts are stored in database, you don't even need notepad and ftp. You just need, i.e., phpMyAdmin (stored in server) so you can connect directly to database and edit any text you like using only web browser; from anywhere in the world. (I am assuming no real CMS). If you need to add one more page, you connect to database using myAdmin and browser, enter the page name (for menu) in 1 or more languages, enter the text for new page (in 1 or more languages), done! new page created, name placed in the menu, all hyperlinks generated for you. If you need to remove a page, you connect to database and click delete. If you need to hide a page for a while (i.e. for proof reading before publishing), you connect to database and uncheck "published" box.
All this doesn't come with just using database ofcourse, you need to program these features with PHP. It may take about 1 - 3 hours depending on experience and the code is fully reusable for every similar website in the future. Basically you just copy/paste php file, copy/paste database tables, enter new text and menu into database, put placeholders into your html file and done! brand new site created.
Which immediately makes most of the reasoning for DWT irrelevant. You don't move files around because you have only one html file and no directories, you don't need grayed out template because texts/images (content) and template are not even in the same file, there's no such thing as changing links in dwt file because it's PHP that generates them on the fly (these are not real links to real html files but rather links with parameters to tell PHP which exactly page must be rendered.. because remember we have just 1 file). The bottom line is, comparing features of the two side by side is like comparing features of a sword vs machinegun. Sharpness and length of the blade concepts are meaningless in a case of machinegun; while lifetime sword user won't really get the meaning of velocity and caliber before he tries and uses machinegun. And yet, while you can't compare their features one by one, no one brings sword to a gunfight for a reason :)
As for #3, currently there are many more people working with PHP than DWT (in a case you will need more employees in the future, or if other people will need to work with your websites later, etc.) As for #5, you can edit PHP websites with Dreamweaver as fine as DWT websites.
That's just off the top of my head. I wrote this in my lunch break so I likely forgot or missed quite a few things. I hope you will get a proper answer with detailed DWT vs PHP comparison too.
You simply can't compare PHP vs. DWT.
PHP is a programming language, where templating is just one of it's numerous features, and DWT is just a silly proprietary system to build simple web pages.
there is actually nothing to compare.
I would say that using DWT templates over PHP do have some advantages.
It does not need any extra server-side process, like PHP to process the files at the server.
You can serve all files to the user as .html files rather than .php files, though I suspect that it is possible to hide the .php extension. Why should any user see anything other than .html?
You don't have to learn PHP syntax/programming. It is true that you can do more with PHP that plain .dwt files but for plain templating the .dwt files can be just as clean.
It is not true that .dwt files are a lock-in technology. The feature is also implemented by other web editors, e.g. Microsoft Expression Web.
I help a friend with some dev on her wordpress powered site - http://fulltwist.net/
We installed a new theme about 3 months ago and since then she gets feedback from less than 5% of visitors saying the site doesn't render properly.
All of them say that, when viewing a single post, only the logo and the comment box show on the page - nothing else. Many say they use their phone to view it because they can't on the desktop.
I've tried load of different computers but I can't replicate the problem. I've asked them to clear their cache (hard refresh) and that hasn't helped.
I want to dig into the code but I just don't know what I'm even looking for. Can different browsers render PHP differently? I thought it was purely server side?
Anyone have any idea what could be causing this to render incorrectly? What diagnostic tools or approaches should I take?
Any points in the right direction would be much appreciated.
Browsers don't render PHP, they render the HTML sent back from the server.
Look for any commonality among those with problems. Browser, browser version, operating system. Does the website require a plugin that some may not have or may block? Does it render correctly with JavaScript disabled (and are complaining users disabling JavaScript / does your JavaScript run error free on their browser versions)?
You can use a service like Gomez to test your page on multiple browsers if you don't see commonality among the users.