Internet and the Web are more and more accessible. So there are more and more home sites. Even a bad one may be interesting, because it may contain a link toward a rich site So any contribution is interesting.
But does anybody can do a site ? If you only know how to click from a Web page toward another, ir should need an important effort. If you are used with a text editor or an office software, or some games, if you know how to organize your files, do copy-paste, manipulate some images, it would be easy, but you have to know that it spends many time. Happily it is a pleasant thing to do !
Three different approaches are possible. It is a good thing to know the advantages and disadvantages of each one, before to begin.
The publication approach
Some softwares of text edition, as Word, or publication, as Pagemaker, know how to do Web pages
The advantage, if you use some of them, is that you know the environment. So you are quickly operational. It is still more interesting when you work from existing documentations (in format txt, rtf, doc...).
The disadvantages are not always obvious, but they may have many consequences. The main are those :
It is impossible to do frames, as for example in this site, where the left frame is a menu. When there are few pages, it is however easy to repeat menus on each page.
It is impossible to personalise the pages, for essential things (titles, keywords...) an for perhaps secondary points, as animated images, forms, java applets etc.
Here you are the prisoner of the software. For instance you may do pretty pages for Internet Explorer, in resolution 800x600. But with Netscape, or in 640x480 resolution, you have bad surprises ! And there are numerous visitors with these configurations, and you do your site for them...
The pure Html approach
Here you work directly with a simple text editor, the Windows notepad for example, because html is also a pure text format. You have to know the Html language, to know that when you type <B>Yes !</B>, the browser will show the characters chain Yes ! written in bold (see the source of this page to verify...).
It means that you learn how to manipulate Html tags (<B>and </B> is one that put in bold the characters). They are not very numerous, chiefly if you use them simply.
The more important advantage is that you can use all the Html functions. However, it is a good care to not use specific functions of Netscape and Microsoft (hope they will disappear !).
Another advantage is to construct more flexible pages, understood in all screen resolutions and all frame width (or almost).
A disadvantage is to have a learning period.
Also there are some difficulties for sophisticated pages (where the others approaches bring more help).
This approach is good for somebody who is able to learn a language (and this one is to be considered as simple), and for a site with a simple and efficient ergonomy. For these reasons, it is my main approach.
The Html editor approach
Here, you use an Html editor, as Web Edit, Web Expert, Arachnophilia or Microsoft FrontPage. Some of them are still very near the precedent text approach. Some others bring more sophisticated process.
An advantage is that you less need to know the Html language.
Another is to have, often, process of control, or visualisation of the pages hierarchy.
Another is to have helps to do sophisticated pages.
But the use of an Html editor is sometimes complex.
Some editors as Microsoft Frontpage impose their methods, and you loose the self-control of the code
And I don't see the interest to select a text, then take the mouse to push on a bold format button. It is finaly more simple to directly write the tag
<B></B>...
And there are the mixed approachs...
Mixing these methods allows to keep the advantages of each one. It may also be interested to use some others little tools. It is what I did, in two times, and I explain how in the next pages.
Page written by Alain Beyrand 1997, on august, the 22th.