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.
Related
Ive been using wordpress for awhile now and wanted to try something different. Enter in my discovery of the world of static website generates. Now I have my eyes on Octopress which I know to be built on jekyll. Before I start getting dirty in ruby I want to know if its relatively possible to translate my current wordpress theme to a static site.
That's exactly what I did recently:
http://eduncan911.com/blog
I copied a friend's Wordpress theme (with permission) of almost the same design:
http://forgetfoo.com
"I want to know if its relatively possible"
To answer your first concern, the answer is a big ol' YES. That's what make Jekyll so good for these kind of things: it's just raw HTML and css and js in a few directories. Place them anywhere you like, and start cutting away at chunks in includes, wrap some plugins, etc and before you know it, you are rake generate and rake deploy.
Octopress makes it even sweeter by having a large number of plugins, a blog-like template system already structured*** (see below), and bunch of defaults all setup for blogging.
The issue with Octopress' theme is as I said above, it is purely setup as a blogging platform. You'd need to highly modify, or in my case just completely ignore, the template they have and just piggy back on the nice Github Pages, SCSS, and plugins it comes with and roll your own html templates. It's really really really easy.
Where do you start?
/source/index.html
You start here with this YAML file. At the top is a definition of layout, which is used to pick what "wrapper" or layout you want to surround this index.html content with. To make a new template, one like yours, I'd call it layout: fuse_homepage. Then go into source/_layouts/ and create a new `fuse_homepage.html'.
Start with your own theme and format as you want
But see, you don't even have to do that. Hell, just paste your entire homepage HTML right
into that source/index.html to start with (make sure to keep the --- YAML markers at the top, but get rid of the layout). Start there and break things out later when you get tired of coping and pasting the header/footers. Heck, just start there - make a fuse_header.html and fuse_footer.html and just share those for now.
Ignore Octopress' theme layout - it's just for hackers that don't do UX and just want to tweak things. Designers or people that like to control their code will want to roll your own.
It really is that flexible. However you want to break it up, you can. Want a new page, just call rake new_page["title"], which all this does is create either an /title.html, or /title/index.html, depending on your settings in the config file. But see, you don't even have to do that. Just create the file yourself - BAM, it is copied on deployment.
Regrets with Octopress
Trying to force the themes to do my bidding, chasing rabbits
I only regret trying to follow the Octopress' author's format - wasted so much time and got so turned off at Octopress. In the end, I just ignored it and did my own. Much easier, and I know where everything is. I also wanted nice and cleanly formatted HTML - a show that I care about my code. The default Octorpess theme and structure invites so many mis-placed tabs and spaces that it's just ugly. Doing your own, you are in full control, space by little space insert.
Importing posts
There's a huge amount of Google links to help you export your WRX from Wordpress, and to generate a the post files automagically. Be prepared to try several different ones as they aren't all perfect.
import comments into Disqus
Unless you are already using Disqus on Wordpress, you are going to have a horrible time with this one.
I can now claim myself to be an WRX/BlogML expert after my nearly 100 tries of importing and exporting and fixing and so on. There is no documentation on either importer (Disqus nor Wordpress) to tell you of the individual required fields. For example, Wordpress requires wp:comment_id to be set, and unique for each and every post you import whereas Disqus requires an wp:comment_email field, even though say it is optional (it's BS, argh).
Be prepared to hack code. It is a hacker's framework after all
Do note though: it is a lot of work to hack around the static site. Doing your own template will save you so much time. You'll also may want to write your own custom plugins, which I did, to get around the bugs in peoples github repos - it's pretty easy, but does require coding.
I spent about a month off and on until I got my new blog/static site to where I liked it for launch. A lot more than I wanted, but it was "fun" learning new languages (Ruby, Python, installed Debian linux in a VM cause Windows just sucks at that stuff).
If you aren't prepared to write that much, there are a couple more static site generators out there as I blogged about (hey, got to show off my Octopress and custom theme!):
http://eduncan911.com/software/the-static-blog-boom.html
Btw, nice site...
I'm writing a basic CMS for one of my sites and have run into an issue where some pages need to dynamically serve PHP and JS, where as others are plain HTMl. I want there to be a setting which will allow this for the pages that need it and will load ACE editor instead of a different wysiwyg editor. I want to reject any inputs that code on non-code enable pages. How do I ensure that all JS and PHP included from the database will not execute?
You don't really want to do this. Beyond the security concerns if you do things wrong, it becomes an absolute maintenance nightmare - there's no good way to put CMS pages into version control. Testing and migrating code between development environments and live sites becomes brittle, at best. In one of my other posts, I detailed the problems that come along with running a Drupal site & you're starting down a similar road.
With that said, if you insist on following through with this plan, the way to go is to use a proper template engine (I've been using h2o lately) & leave the worry of escaping content to it. The other thing I'd do would be to separate the PHP and the displayable part of the code by putting them in completely separate fields. This not only gives you cleaner code (remember, mixing display and logic is bad) but you can always treat what you display as 'dumb' text and only allow it access, via the templates, to the output of your PHP.
I have a website that I've developed, which includes hand-written php, html, css, and js. I also created the MySQL database.
I've recently brought someone on who is going to make the website look better, but his experience is limitted to working with Wordpress. I'm wondering if it makes sense for him to the the front-end "skin" work with Wordpress and for me to edit the files as needed so they submit data to my php files and connect to my database. If the php generated by Wordpress is reasonable, this seems doable in theory.
The other way would be to take the html genrated by his php and use that as my starting point for hooking into my php processing files and database.
He sent me a dump of the files created after he created a simple webpage and there seemed to be a lot of extra stuff in there.
Can anyone with experience in this comment? I'm hoping there's an easy way to do this.
Thanks.
The default procedure for me that always worked well:
You provide outlines/simple sketchups/your old layout, so the "designer" knows vaguely how you want it to be
You define what the site should do ("there should be a button to...", "there should be a list of..., when you click on it..."). So he knows what happens and what site follows another. That's important! He must understand the site.
The better you do the above, the better the results you get from the designer will be
The designer generates layouts in pure HTML with CSS: Example sites with example data, where everything you said before is integrated.
You cut up the HTML-code and integrate it yourself in your php-code
This procedure has also the benefit, that an external designer does not get in contact with your application's internal php-code (and cannot "steal" it). And you can dry up your internal code when you integrate the HTML you get.
I am building a web application in which the user may add a page, edit the layout, drag drop element, resize element, format the text, edit the element attribute etc.
In the page the user may include (retrieve) dynamic data, like maybe data from database, data generated by php code, etc.
I have played around with cakephp and jquery lately and tried to build this app. But I stumbled upon on how to appropriately display the php code. I tried to look into the cakephp core code and find about output buffering and tried to utilize output buffering to parse the php code and use regex to display it but it is more likely to reinvent the wheel if I write the parser my self
What I am asking is:
Ok, to be more simple and specific I just want to ask, how to save and load the page that was created by the user especially if the page contains php code. I just want to know is there any other method than write my own parser or maybe a library to parse a php code?
Ok that's all for now, does anyone have any idea how to implement it? Or maybe any page / website that could be useful to take some reference from? Maybe a sample code from which I can take some reference
Thanks
I'm not sure you'll find any good answer here about that.
Whoa I don't know where to start. I'll start by the number 3. You want widgets. Then that means you have to create widget class or objects that possesses a template or something that makes them drawable "well, kinda". If I were you it would be loaded from javascript and not really from php. Each widget would be in some way individual applications loaded in a div using javascript.
Point 2, You wanted widgets. When you add widgets to your page, you have to save some informations, like Position, Title, dimensions and so on. You may even save creation parameters. For exemple a ListWidget may be started with different ItemProvider. That way you don't have to write 1000 widgets but only one that shows different content. That said you have widgets, dimension and position. Now that lead us to point 1.
Point 1. Once you have your widgets, position and dimensions, you send the data you used to create them associated with the page to the server. That lead us two point 2 again.
Once you have saved a page. You can see it by retrieving all widgets with parameters and so on. That leaves you 2 options.
Generate Javascript that will recreate the saved widgets.
Generate Html will all the widgets.
Option 1 is simpler since option 2 won't bind html to javascript by itself. Solution 2 on the other hand is better since there is only 1 request to the server.
Oh and a last thing, You should set yourself some limits. That kind of thing can get very complicated and unfortunately not that great. See drupal for example. It does lots of cool stuff but as soon as you install lots of module. Drupal transform itself in some sort of memory eating monster. And almost all the time you don't really need that much of dynamic content. Fixed layouts will do work nice almost 99% of the time.
I'm also forced to say that but if you try to create an application that give users as much power as a scientist that could raise a 7 legged cat. I think you're going to play with really obscure forces!
So, currently I'm organizing my blog based on filename: To create a post I enter the name of the file. As opposed to storing the post in the database, I store them in PHP files. So each time I create a post, A new row in the table is created with the filename and a unique ID. To reference the post (e.g. for comments) I get the name of the current file, then search the entries table for a matching file name. The post ID of the comment matches the ID of that post.
Obviously this isn't the standard way of organizing a blog, but I do it this way for a few reasons:
Clean URL's (even cleaner than mod_rewrite can provide from what I've read)
I always have a hard copy of the post on my machine
Easier to remember the URL of a specific post (kind of a part of clean URL's)
Now I know that the standard way would be storing each post in the database. I know how to do this, but the clean URL's is the main problem. So now to my questions:
Is there anything WRONG with the way I'm doing it now, or could any problems arise from it in the future?
Can the same level of clean URL's that I can get now be achieved with mod_rewrite? If so, links are appreciated
I will be hosting this on a web host. Do only certain web-hosts provide access to the necessary files for mod_rewrite, or is it generally standard on all web-hosts?
Thanks so much guys!
P.S. To be clear, I don't plan on using a blogging engine.
As cletus said, this is similar to Movable Type. There's nothing inherently wrong with storing your data in files.
One thing that comes to mind is: how much are you storing in the files? Just the post content, or does each PHP file contain a copy of the entire design of the page as opposed to using a base template? How difficult would it be to change the design later on? This may or may not be a problem.
What exactly are you looking for in terms of clean URLs? Rewrite rules are quite powerful and flexible. By using mod_rewrite in conjunction with a main PHP file that answers all requests, you can pretty much have any URL format you want, including user-friendly URLs without obscure ID numbers or even file extensions.
Edit:
Here is how it would work with mod_rewrite and a main PHP file that processes requests:
Web server passes all requests (e.g., /my-post-title) to, say, index.php
index.php parses the request path ("my-post-title")
Look up "my-post-title" in the database's "slug" or "friendly name" (whatever you want to call it) column and locates the appropriate row that way
Retrieve the post from the database
Apply a template to the post data
Return the completed page to the client
This is essentially how systems like Drupal and WordPress work.
Also, regarding how Movable Type works, it's been a while since I've used it so I might be wrong, but I believe it stores all posts in the database. When you hit the publish button, it generates plain HTML files by pulling post data from the database and inserting it into a template. This is incredibly efficient when your site is under heavy load - there are no scripts running when a visitor opens up your website, and the server can keep up with heavy visitation when it only needs to serve up static files.
So obviously you've got a lot of options when figuring out how your solution should work. The one you proposed sounds fine, though you might want to give careful consideration to how you'll maintain a large number of posts in individual files, particularly if you want to change the design of the entire site later on. You might want to consider a templating engine like Smarty, and just store post data (no layout tags) in your individual files, for instance. Or just use some basic include() statements in your post files to suck in headers, footers, nav menus, etc.
What you're describing is kind of like how Movable Type works. The issues you'll need to cover are:
Syndication: RSS/Atom;
Sitemap: for Google;
Commenting; and
Tagging and filtering content.
It's not unreasonable not to use a database. If I were to do that I'd be using a templating engine like Smarty that does a better job of caching the results than PHP will out of the box.