WYSIWIGs vs. Manual Coding

[Xav]

I don't know how many of you have been following the following thread:

Dreamweaver CS4

It was closed when jord4nn started getting a bit "profanic", so this thread is going to be free of swearing or insulting language.

I was arguing that WYSIWIG environments such as the Designer view in Dreamweaver give you far less control over the working of the layout than a code editor such as Notepad++, whereas jord4nn was arguing that WYSIWIGs are easier to use.

Let's see what everyone else has to say on the matter!

[amrosama]

i voted manual coding
its true that WYSIWYG is easier and faster for creating small pages that have no dynamic content, like "about me" page or "downloads"
BUT, for pages that handles complex JS (dynamic forms and validation), database content, or a page that changes over time i would definitely go for manual.
and writing pages manually will teach you alot

[Xav]

I agree, although it is not just for dynamic content. Even with static pages, if you are using PHP to create a front-end interface you will still need to do it in code, regardless of whether the content dynamically updates or not.

Also, it is much easier to make changes in future, because you know exactly how the code was made, and hence how to edit it.

[amrosama]

for the first time i agree with you
IMO WYSIWYG is for:
1 people who have no time to write static HTML
2 people who are just lazy to write HTML
3 people who care about visual feedback over performance
4 people who cant do HTML

[Xav]

I agree with 1, 2 and 4. However, what do you mean by "visual feedback" and "performance"?

[Jordan]

I've seen a lot of very nice webpages come out of the WYSIWYG^Wiki (note the proper spelling of the acronym, Xav) and people that know it can use it well. I know of one guy that knows HTML well but uses the WYSIWYG and his webpages turn out fantastic. Having said all of that, I prefer manual as my favorite HTML editor is vim^Wiki.

[WingedPanther]

Manual coding. I tend to write database driven reports with a variable number of columns and rows. I can't imagine writing the necessary code for it in a WYSIWYG. For simple stuff, I'll occasionally use something like Kompozer, but for anything vaguely tricky, it has to be manual.

[Xav]

I've seen a lot of very nice webpages come out of the WYSIWYG^Wiki (note the proper spelling of the acronym, Xav)

Whoops, sorry guys.

@Jordan: How does that guy make his webpages fantastic? Surely he must use manual access to CSS and such, no?

[Jordan]

Of course. The majority of the work is done with the wysiwyg though.

[Xav]

But the majority of the work in building a layout is always CSS (if done properly, of course). The only HTML needed is the div sections, which are then styled with CSS. So how is most of the work done in the WYSIWYG?