Montemedia wrote:
>>If you think you know what you are talking about, correct the file,
send me a download, I?ll export the HTML and images from within my
f*ck?n? Fireworks app, and see what happens.<<

Upload your own exported code to a server where it can be looked at, if
you wish.

I'm sure someone else will be happy to you.


Montemedia wrote:
> Jim wrote: "... OK I just opened the file and there is NO url in the link box
> for the
> hotspot."
>
> Monte says: "Yes there is, it's '#'." - the traditional, placeholder URL.
>
> Jim wrote: "As far as I can tell, there is no reason to slice up this image in
> the manner shown. You're creating overly complex css."
>
> Monte says: "The server really doesn't care how complex the code is as long as
> it is correct. And slicing images is a method of optimizing the download of a
> high quality JPEG image. And if it isn't, why are there slicing tools, at all?
> And really, that isn't the point of this discussion. I'm asking for a reason
> why Fireworks is not writing any link information in the code.
>
> I've attached URLs to slices - I'VE TRIED EVERYTHING I AM ASKING THE ADOBE
> PROS, WHY ISN'T FIREWORKS WRITING ANY XHTML FOR LINKS? IT IS SUPPOSED
> TO! IT KNOWS WHAT TO WRITE FOR THE FREAK'N' BROWSER PREVIEW. AM I MISSING
> SOMETHING? That?s what I want to know. I don't want Web design lessons.
> Maybe some other time I?ll let you make fun of my Web pages.
>
> And Now, One of My Special Comments ? Because Adobe Has It
> Coming:
>
> I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH ANYTHING LIKE THIS UNTIL ADOBE DECIDES THAT I
> SHOULD START USING FIREWORKS, INSTEAD OF IMAGE READY - AND DREAMWEAVER INSTEAD
> OF GO LIVE. THE INTERFACES ARE NOT THE SAME AS OTHER ADOBE APPLICATIONS. THEY
> ARE LIKE ? DO NOT BEHAVE, OR TREAT TEXT, OR DO ... THEY S*CK. AS LONG AS I'VE
> BEEN DESIGNING COMPUTER MULTIMEDIA (professionally since 1998), IF I EVER
> WANTED TO USE MACROMEDIA APPLICATIONS, I WOULD HAVE PURCHASED THEM WHEN THEY
> WERE PUBLISHED BY MACROMEDIA. I EVEN CHOSE TO USE LIVE MOTION AFTER LEARNING
> FLASH ? THAT IS HOW MUCH AN ADOBE FAN I AM ? I TRUSTED THE COMPANY. THEY HAVE
> ALWAYS KNOWN HOW TO DESIGN AN APPLICATION FOR THOSE OF US COMING FROM OTHER
> DISCIPLINES ? LIKE TRADITIONAL FINE ART & GRAPHICS, THE MUSIC BUSINESS, ETC. ?
>
> ADOBE SHOULD HAVE GIVEN THEIR LOYAL CUSTOMERS A CHOICE, IN PURCHASING THE CS3
> WEB PREMIUM SUITE, GO LIVE or DREAMWEAVER - IMAGE READY or FIREWORKS.
>
> What Adobe has effectively done to me, professionally speaking, has made it
> harder for me to get my work done. My clients are waiting. I'm scratching my
> head as to what's going on. It frustrates me so that I am really angry at
> Adobe for screwing me around.
>
> I was familiar, and fast, and competent using a combination of Photoshop,
> Image Ready, and Go Live to create beautiful, elaborate, complicated,
> brochure-style websites - exclusively for photographers and artists. I trusted
> that when the CS3 suites were released it would, at the very least, be the
> reliable, business as usual ? but a little newer and better ? maybe some new,
> usable features. But the substitution of Dreamweaver for GoLive and Fireworks
> for Image Ready was wrong, on many levels.
>
> Adobe took advantage of my trust, my faith in them but substituting a familiar
> interface, a familiar program, with clunky, unintuitive applications developed
> by their former rival, Macromedia. The very same applications I've avoided -
> for years. I tried those years ago ? I hated them. I tried those applications
> and made the decision to stick with Adobe applications because I'm already
> familiar with the look and feel - and appreciate the solid integration between
> applications. Much of that is out-the-window, now - for me, that is.
>
> So, now I am left with suspicion and doubt of Adobe. I wonder which
> application is Adobe going to keep - Go Live or Dreamweaver? I can?t tell, I
> read between the lines and it is still vague. I used to use Go Live, but Adobe
> tricked me into using Dreamweaver - because that is what was included in the
> CS3 Web Premium Suite. I, typically trusting of Adobe, assumed Go Live went
> belly-up. But no, Adobe tricked me. They waited until I was deeply invested
> in CS3 before they announced the release of Go Live 9 ? but they didn?t call it
> Go Live CS3 ? why? What the f*ck is going on?
>
> Why was Image Ready scratched? I loved it and used it - a lot! Fireworks -
> IS SO UNINTUITIVE and clunky and sticky and I HATE THE WAY IT WORKS WITH TEXT
> and it hangs, and all kinds of sticky, clunky, what-just-happened kind of
> performance. I am so frustrated, I could cry.
>
> So, back to business, NOT ONE PERSON CAN ANSWER MY QUESTION AS TO WHY THERE
> IS NO HREFs IN THE EXPORT HTML.
>
> Jim, I know you to be an expert. But as I read your response, I have no idea
> where you are coming from. URLs being linked as/to background images, I have
> no idea how that can happen - where the switch is, the setting, the menu, the
> preference, the trigger to pull that will just blow my head off.
>
> And really, the size of an image map doesn't matter. A server doesn't
> give a flying-flip - it's just coordinates. To click an image linking the user
> to a new page is very commonplace. And it doesn't matter how big the image is.
>
> So aside from how lousy everyone thinks I am as a Web designer (and I really
> don't care). What is wrong when a preview is right and the exported file is
> wrong? The file I made was for illustration purposes. If you think you know
> what you are talking about, correct the file, send me a download, I?ll export
> the HTML and images from within my f*ck?n? Fireworks app, and see what happens.
>


--
Jim Babbage - .:Community MX:. & .:Adobe Community Expert:.
http://www.communityMX.com/
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm
---
.:Adobe Community Expert for Fireworks:.
Adobe Community Expert
http://tinyurl.com/2a7dyp
---
See my work on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jim_babbage/