How do you develop content sites (4 options)

[Gex]

I'm just curious how you people generally go about coding graphical content-based sites (which are not too technically complicated, maybe a site search as the only real "feature"). There are two main dichotomies I perceive here:

1. CMS or no CMS

AFAIK, the main advantages of using a CMS would be added security, shorter development time, and the potential to upgrade the site to a more advanced site with greater ease. Disadvantages (pretty major IMO) would be reduced flexibility in terms of site structuring, a potentially complicated initial configuration, and (in line with my past experiences) SEO unfriendliness.

2. WYSIWYG coding or hand coding

I know these aren't mutually exclusive (Dreamweaver obviously supports both design and code views) but I do know some web site gurus who insist on coding entirely by hand. And although Dreamweaver is no doubt a powerful package, I'm not happy with the way it handles CSS, which often seems to turn WYSIWYG into WYSINWYG! I also perceive its template system as somewhat fragile - I haven't actually tried it out in the field yet, but I get the impression that once the template files unhinge from the instance content, all hell is going to break loose!

Hence the four options would be CMS/WYSIWYG, CMS/Hand Code, No CMS/WYSIWYG, and No CMS/Hand Code. Which of these combos do you find yourself using the most often? Right now I'm leaning towards No CMS/Hand Code, but I know there's a threat of this becoming unmanageable once my site grows and/or I require more advanced features to be implemented. Of course, by this stage it's sometimes too late to turn back...

 

[Epic]

I design the layout by hand, then integrate it with Cutenews for easy updates

 

[CreedFeed]

In general I design the layout by hand, piece it together and create an HTML template, then start custom coding what needs to be done by hand. Unless the site is straightforward and doesn't need much customization I generally custom code stuff. Like was stated above, most CMS packages that are free are very limited in terms of options. I prefer to run my personal sites a certain way and not be limited by how a CMS handles certain features.

 

[jeter4982]

I'm not that great of a coder, so I typically will use a WYSIWYG. As for whether or not I use a CMS, it normally depends on the individual sites. Some content news sites lend themselves more towards using more of a blog like CMS interface, whereas something that is only going ot be updated a couple times a month can be updated without the CMS. That being said, I voted for No CMS/WYSIWYG

Tom

 

[Mike Shinoda]

even though it's harder to hand code it's worth it but the website editors are way easier even thoug my host doesn't have it but oh well love to spend time making quality sites

 

[dojo]

If I have to go with a CMS or a normal HTML site I desing the layout in photoshop. I make the mockup design and then code the changes in the CMS or on the layout. For some parts of the template I use dreamweaver to make it faster, but I did code on crimson editor eventualy when I felt like having more time on my hands

 

[Nexbeta]

I Like Cms

 

[sacx13]

No CMS - Just Hand code ...

Regards

 

[snareklutz]

Depends...for sites with around 30 pages, I don't use a CMS. If I plan to have 100 or more pages in a site, I make a CMS for it.

 

[Xyzer]

I usually dont use a cms but what i do is just do the code manually in dreamweaver then check it thorugh.

 

[Gex]

Thanks for all the responses guys. I see that my current preference (#4) has made something of a comeback after an early deficit, so I'll be trying that approach for the foreseeable future to see how it goes!

Incidentally, how many of you use Dreamweaver's template feature and view it as a godsend? And for you guys that don't use a WYSIWYG editor's template feature, isn't it a nightmare when you decide you want to make a minor change to a left panel menu item that appears on scores of existing pages? Are there any special tricks you use to make these mass changes? Only one I can think of is a mass find and replace, but I'd probably need more advanced software to be sure it would be possible when the need arises.

 

[Brian]

Incidentally, how many of you use Dreamweaver's template feature and view it as a godsend? And for you guys that don't use a WYSIWYG editor's template feature, isn't it a nightmare when you decide you want to make a minor change to a left panel menu item that appears on scores of existing pages? Are there any special tricks you use to make these mass changes? Only one I can think of is a mass find and replace, but I'd probably need more advanced software to be sure it would be possible when the need arises.

Thats what includes and css are for . If its just a link that needs to change only have to edit one file and the whole site will reflect the change, if changing the appearance just edit the css file and again the while site will get the change.

Regards
Brian

 

[Chronos]

I developed a php framework that does not require mysql database, just creating a few directories for the menu structure and the dropping into the content which can be a single text file, a html page or a php codiging.

This framework is reused in different sites just changing the appeareance through a template power system and a default configuration file that controls site's title, meta tags and other characteristics.

 

[Gex]

Thats what includes and css are for . If its just a link that needs to change only have to edit one file and the whole site will reflect the change, if changing the appearance just edit the css file and again the while site will get the change.

Regards
Brian

Yeah I've come across includes before but initially was turned off by the fact that they would make it much harder for me to preview under-development pages on my HD (i.e. without an internet connection). Also, I somehow perceived them as not too widely used among web developers. Perhaps a bit rash I know... 8-X

As for CSS, yes I'm trying to use that for all the layout on my under-development sites. Looking at several big/well-respected sites, I'm surprised to see how many of them are large nested-table monstrosities. I presume this is something to do with legacy code and all that!